Inspired by snoopy . . . terrorism and the elections

[Deb in IA]

Remembering the train bombings of Madrid just days before their general elections, how likely do you think there will be a major terrorist attack on US soil around the time of the Presidential elections this November?

And will this possiblility affect your likelihood (or not) of voting?

 

[Eeyore1954]

No and no (I'll be voting by absentee ballot).

 

[AirForceRocks]

I think there is a better than 50-50 chance that there will be an attack right before the election. As to how it will affect me voting, it won't, unless my precinct is attacked and my absentee ballot is destroyed.

As for people in general, I don't really know. I would guess that you'll have a group that will say "It's more important now than ever before to vote" and another group that will be afraid to go out and vote.

 

[CEDmom]

I think something will be attempted around the time of the election. Whether it is successful is anyones guess. Unless my tiny voting place is affected it won't stop me from voting or change who I'm voting for.

 

[gina2000]

I think there's a good possibility that something may be attempted.

I also think (and this is purely conjecture) that any attempt will bring voters out in droves just to express their outrage....on both sides of the fence.

I always vote. It's a right and privilege our troops have died for.

 

[wvrevy]

I'm curious about something....

First, let me say that no, I don't think there will be an attack before the elections, and it certainly won't affect my vote either way.

That said, how can those of you supporting Bush say that an attack would not affect your vote ? I've seen any number of people saying that the fact that he's doing such a good job in the war on terror is the main reason they're voting for him. So, if he completely fails in that and a major attack is carried out, how could you then ignore that and continue to vote for him ?

Obviously, this is just a hypothetical, so please don't accuse me of hoping that an attack occurs. I just don't understand how you can say "it won't affect my vote" when that is supposedly the whole reason your voting for him in the first place.

 

[gina2000]

I'll take a crack at that one, wvrevy.

As of right now, I'm on the fence about my vote. I do believe, however, that an attack prior to the election means that the terrorists are hoping that Bush will be voted out based on fear and outrage. With that thought in mind, I'd vote for Bush in a heartbeat. If they want him out.....I want him in.

 

[lulugirl]

Originally posted by gina2000
I think there's a good possibility that something may be attempted.

I also think (and this is purely conjecture) that any attempt will bring voters out in droves just to express their outrage....on both sides of the fence.

I always vote. It's a right and privilege our troops have died for.

I absolutely agree! It always amazes me how many people don't care enough or are too lazy to vote.

 

[Laz]

Originally posted by gina2000
I'll take a crack at that one, wvrevy.

As of right now, I'm on the fence about my vote. I do believe, however, that an attack prior to the election means that the terrorists are hoping that Bush will be voted out based on fear and outrage. With that thought in mind, I'd vote for Bush in a heartbeat. If they want him out.....I want him in.

Absolutely! This nation would put Bush back in a heartbeat just to defy their wishes. Big mistake on their part.

 

[jrydberg]

Well, first, I'd say no single issue commands my vote. I'm not a supporter of Bush solely because of the terrorism issue. Would it change things? Certainly. Enough to change my vote? Unlikely.

I do think Bush will do a better job against terrorism than Kerry. That said, anyone who expects any president to make the country 100 percent terrorist proof isn't grounded in reality, IMO. One terrorist attack doesn't necessarily make Kerry any better at dealing with terrorism.

As for the issues at hand, I think there will certainly be plans to carry out a terrorist attack before the election. I don't think it will come to fruition though. And if it does, I'll be heading to the polls regardless.

 

[Eeyore1954]

Originally posted by wvrevy
That said, how can those of you supporting Bush say that an attack would not affect your vote ? I've seen any number of people saying that the fact that he's doing such a good job in the war on terror is the main reason they're voting for him. So, if he completely fails in that and a major attack is carried out, how could you then ignore that and continue to vote for him ?

Obviously, this is just a hypothetical, so please don't accuse me of hoping that an attack occurs. I just don't understand how you can say "it won't affect my vote" when that is supposedly the whole reason your voting for him in the first place.

I would vote for President Bush even if an attack occurred because I do not cast my vote based on a single issue (i.e., a "good job" on the war on terror). I don't believe it is feasible to expect the POTUS to stop all terrorist attacks anymore than I believe it's feasible for the POTUS to manage the economy. Such things are managed by huge groups of people, some elected, some not, who hopefully will work together to achieve a positive outcome (protecting us, revving up the economy, etc.).

I believe many people cast votes for many elected offices for a number of reasons, not just one or two issues.

 

[AirForceRocks]

That said, how can those of you supporting Bush say that an attack would not affect your vote ? I've seen any number of people saying that the fact that he's doing such a good job in the war on terror is the main reason they're voting for him. So, if he completely fails in that and a major attack is carried out, how could you then ignore that and continue to vote for him ?

Because I wouldn't consider another major attack to be a complete failure. I have no doubt whatsoever that there will be another major attack, it's just a matter of when, where and how. I think it's unrealistic to think that ANY President of ANY party is going to be 100% successful in stopping all major attacks against the U.S. To me, success is minimizing the attacks, and making them as few and far between as possible.

I consider it a major success that we haven't a major attack in the almost 3 years since 9/11. If you are going to judge success on whether or not there is ever another major attack, then I think you going to be disappointed in the outcome.

And it wouldn't change my vote at all. I don't believe that Senator Kerry has the right approach to defeating terrorism, and I can't vote for a Presidential candidate that I consider to be soft on terrorism and national defense.

 

[Chicago526]

Unless the actually blow up the high school that serves as my polling place, I'm still voteing! And if there was some kind of attack, it would not change my vote.

Will there be an attack? I'm sure one is planned, but weather or not it's attepted or successfull is anyone's guess.

I'm not voting for Bush. I didn't the first time and nothing has changed to make me want him another 4 years, and an attack (or lack of one) would not sway my vote towards him. But that said, if there is an attack, I'm not blaming him for it. There will be another attack or attempt no matter who is in office. It's like blaming Bush (or Clinton) for the downturn in the economy. Neither had anything to do with it (I also think Bush had nothing to do with the recovery. The Economy is what it is, there is little the government can do to effect it one way or the other in a major way, the most influance is the raising or lowering of the interest rate).

 

[goudaman40]

AirForce,

I agree one hundred precent with you.

I am also suprised that there haven't been more atempts and I wouldn't be suprised if more attacks are to come.

If you look at the data - when a republican is in office, troops are up and military morale is up. The last party that held office, dropped the troops that were defending the country and made us more vulnarable to attacks.

That being said, when the attacks on 9/11 happened, we had more people finally showing pride in their country and the troops that were/are serving in the armed forces.

It's sad that we didn't show our support of our troops during the Vietnam era, but that is a different story all together.

Like what was said earlier, the attacks don't influence my vote. The support for military, education, medicare, retirement, etc. influence my vote. There are many things that I take into consideriation and I will not allow Bin Laden or anyone to influence my vote.

 

[gometros]

Re: the terrorist attacks having an opposite affect. Please don't give the Republicans any ideas.

Actually who's to say we didn't suffer a terrorist attack four years ago? Maybe those chads didn't hang by accident.

 

[cati]

xx

 

[AirForceRocks]

Originally posted by gometros
Re: the terrorist attacks having an opposite affect. Please don't give the Republicans any ideas.

Actually who's to say we didn't suffer a terrorist attack four years ago? Maybe those chads didn't hang by accident.

If you are implying that the Republicans (or any American, for that matter) would hope for a terrorist attack in order to influence the election, I think that is beyond ridiculous.

As to your terrorism/chad comment,

I would hardly consider people unable to follow simple directions to be a terrorist attack. A stupidity attack perhaps, but not a terrorist attack.

 

[katerkat]

I'l still be voting, so long as the hypothetical attack doesn't prevent me from leaving base. (I think I vote off base. Maybe not. Heck, if I'm at work, the hypothetical attack could prevent me from getting on base to vote. Maybe I should just go for absentee voting!)

And no, it doesn't change my vote.

 

[Trish Bessette]

I will vote and nothing will stop me.

Do I think another attack will happen: most definately.

With that said, I must say I've never felt more protected than I do right now in our country. None of us will ever know how many attacks have been prevented or detected by our people. Will we stop them all, I doubt it. But with all that is happening right now in the world I am leaning towards the man who puts a lot of his effort into fighting and protecting us. That's just my opinion

 

[piglet too]

I fear that something may happen, but no it won't change how I vote.

To the poster who said that they would vote for Bush so the terrorists don't win, how would we know that "they" don't want Bush to stay in? Maybe they think he is a "good guy" for them and are afraid Kerry would be stronger against them? Again this is all just random thoughts.