When the new winning strategy was instituted in Iraq last year it had many effects. Primarily it turned al-Qaeda in Iraq on its heels and helped to foster a growing relationship between the Sunnis and the Shia. It quieted that country down to allow moving forward on infrastructure improvements and the political landscape. That quieting of the country also forced the MSM to stop drumming up support for the Cut n Run crowd because there is only so many ways to spin a story when there is nothing to report. When the MSM stopped spinning, miraculously the public started to get some confidence that yes, we can win this thing:
American public support for the military effort in Iraq has reached a high point unseen since the summer of 2006, a development that promises to reshape the political landscape.
According to late February polling conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, 53 percent of Americans — a slim majority — now believe “the U.S. will ultimately succeed in achieving its goals” in Iraq. That figure is up from 42 percent in September 2007.
The percentage of those who believe the war in Iraq is going “very well” or “fairly well” is also up, from 30 percent in February 2007 to 48 percent today.
The Politico believes this new development could help the Republicans:
The uptick in public support is a promising sign for Republican candidates who have been bludgeoned over the Bush administration’s war policies. But no candidate stands to gain more than McCain.
“How could Democrats possibly hand McCain a better issue than to let him run on his record of advocating a robust U.S. presence in Iraq with all the positive battlefield news that is filtering out of that country?” asked Michael O’Hanlon, a national security adviser at the Brookings Institution who has been at the center of the Iraq debate since the war’s outset.
“Thinking about where we were at the time of the congressional elections, it’s ironic that the Iraq issue could actually be the one that most favors the Republican and most other issues — including most foreign policy issues — could most favor the Democrats,” O’Hanlon added. “Yet Democrats keep wanting to fight the Iraq debate.”
Ed Morrissey noticed that the Democrats already have this figured out as evidenced by their passing of the recent Iraq appropriations bill with nary a peep of protest.
It’s no coincidence that it’s the first time in two years they haven’t tried to hold it hostage for a retreat.
It’s amazing what can happen when the constant negative drumbeat is turned down huh? Outlooks improve and support goes up.
Here is the rub tho. The MSM loves themselves some Obama. Obama wants to run from Iraq. So does anyone really believe the volume level of negativity will not be forced onto the front pages as the general approaches? As Jules Crittenden describes it, it’s the “yeah but” syndrome:
What Kuhn doesn’t note is that over the past week, with several violent incidents, the “Yeah, But” narrative is being fired up again. Yeah, violence is still way down. But despite the military’s insistence of dramatic progress, some bombs just went off. High successful military campaigns and the turning of the Sunni tribes against al-Qaeda took months to gain any recognition. Al-Qaeda, by all accounts still very much on the ropes, gets off a handful of attacks, and the terrorism amplifier kicks in:
AP: Iraqis Fear Return to Violent Days. If you’ve been following the AP, you know that each bomb blast in recent weeks has been accompanied by lengthy listings of incidents and several paragraphs of military insistence that violence remains anywhere from 60 percent or more below last year
I predict we will see more of the “yeah buts” in the months ahead as the general gets closer. Obama supporters want us out of Iraq…consequences be damned. He can’t use that talking point if Iraq is going swimmingly so something has to give.
The latest yeah but is this one from WaPo upset that people don’t know exactly how many soldiers have died.
I’m telling ya, they have to find something to spin….and they will find something.
See author page