So, on Sunday, the verdict in Saddam Hussein trial in Iraq will come down. 48 hours before the US election. Strangest coincidence, that.
Its been speculated that the timing of this verdict was planned to affect the US elections. I’m not sure I see what effect (beneficial or otherwise) a verdict, of any sort, could have.
If the Monday headlines scream, “Saddam Guilty! Sentenced to DEATH!”, my reaction would be a) “good”, b) “what took so goddam long, and what a monkey-court that trial was”, and c) “I bet the Sunni’s go apeshit”. Maybe I’m not all warm and cuddly with the current US administration, but my reaction would not be one of swift admiration for a competant job. If the violence crescendos shortly after, with no plan to curb it, my admiration would certainly not be forthcoming.
So, is there some scenario I’m missing where this verdict helps the GOP? Because I’m just not seeing it.
A little. The Sunni have already* gone * “apeshit”, as has pretty much everybody else. However, it permits the interpretation much beloved by the Bushiviks, i.e., that the native contingent of the insurgency is made up of “Baathist dead-enders” who hope to restore Saddam to power.
Personally, I’d love to see him found not guilty, and forcibly released. Shoved out the front door to face the, ah, adoring crowd. Alone.
Yeah, Sunday is too late. Most people have made up their mind. Even the so-called undecideds. If they’re still undecided, they’ll probably stay home. I’m also thinking that early voting is probably more influential in a mid term election. They’ll be the elderly who enjoy getting out to go vote and talking to their friends who are poll workers. For the rest of us, Tuesday is another work day…and hopefully the good guys winning one for a change!
In the urban front-range counties of Colorado, between 35-50% of active voters are expected to have already voted (early voting and absentee) by Election Day.
If any affect, it will be negative. Iraq is the cement shoes on a drowning Republican Congress. The verdict might be judt what some undecideds need to toss them an anchor.
It was probably intended to sway the election but I don’t see it having any effect. If you were against the war before, having a guilty verdict and execution is not going to suddenly make you think it was worthwhile. If you were all for the war, this will reinforce that but you were going to vote Republican anyway.
Is Saddam being senteced tomorrow as well as being found guilty or will there be a seperate sentencing phase? Are they going to wait to execute him until after more trials or just get it out of the way after his appeal?
Offical Republican Talking Point (to be repeated on Fox News 24-7 until election day)
“With the conviction and death sentence of Saddam Hussein, we have achieved our primary goal when we set out to liberate the people of Iraq. Those Democrats who long for the good old days of Saddam will now need to face reality, that a new Iraq is dawning, one in which the rule of law is paramount, and in which no person is above the law. Clearly, this is the turning point on our long road to victory. Stay the course.”
I’m still not convinced, John. Recall the 2004 Osama tape that helped tip the scales to the right just a few days prior to voting. Perhaps Bush was banking on a similar effect and pressured the Iraqis to announce the verdict now.
It was supposed to have been announced October 16th, but got delayed by the Iraqis. There may have been a perfectly good reason for the delay, or perhaps Maliki decided to fuck with Bush’s election plans. I hear that the terrorists have been playing with our electorate, so why not the government too?
But John’s right, I think, at least in its affect on the electorate. It’s too close to the election. Those of us who are not news nuts will only find out Monday, and that’s too late to do a lot of swaying. Now, if we want to think that it was planned to do just a little swaying, on the assumption that the Republicans would need just a bit of a bump, that’s a different story.
With all due respect, Bob, you’re the one who has to convince us. You’ve offered zero evidence to back up your conjecture, and I just pointed out that it doesn’t make a lot of sense. You’re entitled to your opinion, of course, but let’s just be clear that that’s what it is-- your opinion.
It’s not going to sway anything. If it pushes Iraq back into the headlines, is that really a good thing for the Republicans? There’s also the chance that the verdict will result in a lot of violence, which definitely wouldn’t help the GOP.
I agree, anything that puts the word “Iraq” in the headlines between now and election day is bad news for the Republicans. How many people are going to think that shuffling Sadam off this mortal coil was worth the war and its aftermath?
As far as the OP goes, I agree. However, an that’s event demoralizing to some group of voters, such as the recent Haggard issue, even when it occurs this close to the election, can have great/grave effect on turnout for that group.
So the barn may have room for some bales, given the right issue.
