I’m guessing it might be. It seems like there’s almost always a bit of a lag between an event and a change in the polls. It’s hard to imagine what could change most people’s minds at this point, regardless
It seems like for an October surprise to work now, it’d have to be BIG: bigger than catching OBL, maybe. Something on the scale of 9/11 itself that really captures everyone’s attention almost instantly. I’m not sure that an OBL capture will make much difference at this point.
It’s too late to show up in polls, but that’s because polls take a few days to do. It would still show up in the election, if people believed whatever hypothetical thingie it was.
I think the big ‘October Surprise’ is going to be this bomb the UN dropped about the missing explosives. Too little time to really look into it, its already being played up by the Democrats as a ball dropped by Bush et al. I just saw a Kerry ad about it in fact. However, its still unclear if the weapons were there or not when the US invasion started. We probably won’t know until well after the election, so its a net gain for the Democrats reguardless of what eventually is discovered about it. ‘October Surprise’ indeed IMO.
Oh, you meant the hand wringing by the Democrats that Bush would spring ObL out of his hat or some such non-sense? If it were going to happen, it would have.
Well if Bush does have ObL locked up… he will have to wait a day or two before showing off the capture… otherwise it might be “seen” as politically motivated
No, it’s not too late for an ‘October Surprise’. Historically, these ‘late hits’ come the weekend before the election - early enough that the word gets out about them, late enough that the campaign doesn’t have time to respond.
That’s what CBS planned to do with ‘explosives’ story. They were going to run it on Oct. 31, but got upstaged by the NYT.
Of course, if CBS had managed to run it then, we wouldn’t have had time to find out whether or not the charges were true - which is why they wait that long.
Last time around, the ‘late hit’ was Bush’s DUI, and it hit the presses on the Thursday before the election.
A variety of sources state that the explosives were still there after early April 2003, including a Pentagon spokesman and the White House press secretary. Details are in the messy GD thread on this topic.
If you’re referring to the NBC story that suggested a US unit (with embedded NBC reporters) went to the site in early April 2003 and found no weapons (subsequently picked up by Drudge and CNN), this story has been dropped. Turns out the unit in question was only in the area for a “pit stop” of a few hours on their way to Baghdad, and did no investigating / searching.
Simply put, its too early to tell…which is why this is an ‘October Surprise’…i.e. there isn’t going to be time to check out all the facts and come to any kind of reasonable conclusion. Unless you are ready to go out on the slim evidence showed so far (yes, I’ve seen the other thread) and categorically state that you know all the facts and your conclusions are 100% accurate. And if you makes such a statement that you KNOW the things were there when the US took control of the area and you KNOW that they are now in the hands of terrorists…well, then you know a lot more than any credible source I’ve seen so far.
Oh…And, another point, since the White House apparently learned about this a week or more ago, they could have let it out earlier if they thought in their best interests to do so. (And, aren’t there even some claims that they knew about these missing explosives for much longer than that…although that seems to be somewhat conflicting.)
I think I saw an NYT article online that there was no real evidence of a plot to disrupt the election. I’d expect some disputes if they make a warning in the next few days.
Are we playing word games here? Ok, the UN is the one that let the story out the week before the election, and while a lot of questions still remain unanswered. Perhaps it was innocent, perhaps not. Looks suspicious to me, but I’m such a partisan that I’m sure I’m just over reacting.
So, the UN leaked the story, afaict anyway. Certainly it was the Iraqi Ministry of Science and Technology that informed the UN…on the 10th of October. True enough, the administration knew about it before hand…but their story seems to be that the stuff was missing before they took control of the facility. I’ve seen conflicting stories about whether or not this is true…could be true, might not be. We simply don’t know…and we WON’T know until well after the fact. Thus, I think this qualifies as an ‘October Surprise’, whether it was intentional (which I think it WAS) or not (which you obviously think it wasn’t).
Why didn’t the White House let it out? Well, if their story is true and the stuff really wasn’t there, why would they? I can’t think of any reason they would have tried to keep a lid on this knowing that the UN and others knew about this. I conceed though that its possible they were tring to cover it all up until after the election…but if thats the case they were pretty stupid.
I never made the two categorical statements you ascribe to me. That said, all the evidence we have so far points to the stuff still being there when the US forces arrived, except for the withdrawn NBC report. It’s not a gold-plated certainty, sure, but that’s what all the reports are saying.
Similarly, the evidence points to these tons of terrorist-handy explosives being in the hands of a well-organized group, like a major terrorist / insurgent group, or Chalabi’s militia. Noone else had the ability to cart out many truckloads of the stuff.
I was asking you, not ascribing to you Atticus. I disagree that all the evidence points to the stuff either being there or not being there…the evidence I’ve seen so far is thin either way. Certainly too thin to come out and say that the case is closed on it.
There are literally millions of artillary shells scattered throughout Iraq. Ask the Vietcong what can be made from old munitions. I’ve seen no evidence that most of the road side bombs are using symtex (or whatever this plastique explosive is…I forget and I’m too tired to look it up right now)…and I’ve seen no evidence that its not as well. Simply put I’ve seen no REAL evidence either way.
However, its a moot point (right now)…as we don’t know if the stuff was still there or not when US troops arived. I find it hard to believe that such a mass of explosives was carted off in a war zone…it would have taken days/weeks and a hell of a lot of lifting capability. To me, the most likely early explaination is that Saddam et al moved the stuff out or at least disbursed it so that it wouldn’t be destroyed by our airforce. I understand that some of the buildings in fact WERE hit by airstrikes. As more evidence comes out I’ll certainly revise this opinion one way or the other.
Perhaps the October Surprise is the developing voter registration fraud, or possibly the tinfoil hat threat Bush will call for a terrorist threat level red on the West Coast on election day to scare voters away from voting in California, Oregon and Washington.
