Will Iraq Determine November's Election Results?

WASHINGTON, June 14, 2006 — -- The Iraq war will almost certainly determine how history views George W. Bush's presidency. But will it determine the outcome of the midterm elections in 2006?

In the midst of a week in which news from and about Iraq is dominating discussions at the White House and in Congress, it does seem the war is the major issue on the minds both parties' leaders in Washington. And polls show that the issue is very much on the minds of voters as well.

But Republican and Democratic strategists, as well as independent analysts, say there are two looming questions. First, which party will be able to unify enough internally on the issue of Iraq to gain political advantage? And, second, will other issues, such as gas prices, the economy, or government ethics, compete with Iraq in determining if the Republicans can maintain majority control of the House and Senate?

Both parties are divided internally on Iraq, with Republicans trying to determine how much to support Bush, and Democrats deeply split over whether to press for a timetable to withdraw large numbers of American troops from Iraq.

Perhaps the greatest short-term political benefit coming from the spate of good news -- the filling out of the new Iraqi government's cabinet, the death of the terror leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, and Bush's successful visit to the region -- is to unite the Republican Party behind the "stay the course" policy that effectively bets the party's majority on the same outcome on which the Bush presidency will now be judged, the outcome in Iraq. A planned debate in the House of Representatives this week will give the Republicans a chance to highlight this posture.

But Bush will be judged by history in the long term, not the short term. His congressional colleagues are more concerned with November's elections. That matters to the White House as well, of course, since maintaining control of both chambers on Capitol Hill is the only way the president can move forward with the kind of conservative agenda that he sought the office to achieve.

Bush's political adviser Karl Rove -- cleared this week by a special prosecutor of any indictment in the Valerie Plame leak investigation -- is focused on helping Republican candidates not by running from Iraq, but using the issue to highlight what Republicans say is a real difference between the parties. Rove made an aggressive speech Monday night in New Hampshire suggesting that Democrats could not be trusted to successfully complete the mission in Iraq and, perhaps, not effectively fight the war on terrorism.

At his Wednesday press conference, Bush criticized Democratic rhetoric about troop withdrawals, and stressed what he has long described as Iraq's central role in the war on terror. Although Bush said it was too early for him to become fully engaged in midterm politicking, he laid the groundwork to take Iraq as an issue to the opposition in the fall (along with the issue of taxes).

Meanwhile, Democrats remain divided over how to express criticism of the Bush administration's policies in Iraq and over how to balance an emphasis on that criticism with promoting their own domestic policy agenda.

Without a doubt, neither side can run from the Iraq issue. But it is also clear neither party has fully figured out how to approach an unpopular war in the Middle East whose outcome remains very much in question.