Terrorist attack on United States soil?

[Yakk]

So, I was just thinking.

If there is no Terrorist attack on United States soil before the election, Bush can claim "I have defended the homeland. Vote for me, I have kept us safe."

And, really, that is a pretty fair thing to say. He claimed to be defending the USA against attacks on civilians, and he succeeded.

If there is a Terrorist attack on United States soil before the election, Bush can claim "A vote for Kerry is a coward's vote! If you vote for Kerry, the terrorists have won!" (See: people calling spainyards quislings/cowards for voting for the opposition)

I love politics. =)

So, here is a question: would no Terrorist attack on American soil make you change your vote from Kerry to Bush or vice versa?

Would a terrorist attack on American soil make you change your vote from Kerry to Bush or vice versa?

I doubt anyone could answer that question accurately until it happened, but it is something to think about.

[filtherton]

I can't really concieve of anything that would make me change my vote to bush.

[Kadath]

Originally posted by Yakk
If there is no Terrorist attack on United States soil before the election, Bush can claim "I have defended the homeland. Vote for me, I have kept us safe."

And, really, that is a pretty fair thing to say. He claimed to be defending the USA against attacks on civilians, and he succeeded.

I suppose you could say that. They did thwart the shoe bomber.

[MSD]

I think that any president who's worth electing will do his best to protect us. I also understand that the president himself has very little personal involvement in the actual defense. I don't think that every attack can be stopped. I wouldn't change my vote based on an attack that would have a near-100% chance of happening regardless of who's in power.

[Annabella]

I think that people in US are in pretty good safe..!