Point #1: Ill served by advisors. Correct in part. Rummy would not accept the abundant professional advice offered regarding the number of troops necessary to occupy and pacify Iraq. I suspect that he knew that IF he accepted an enlarged US Army with an extended multi-division expeditionary commitment in Iraq that any chance of "transformation" would disappear into the Pentagon miasma. He was right about this, but wrong to let his desire for transformation to govern his Iraq plan. If we fail in Iraq, the only transformation will be Kerry or, more likely Hillary gutting our armed forces. In short, Rummy won his bureaucratic battle but did not interpret the battlezone information correctly. How much responsibility Bush bears for this is uncertain-but it could be a lot. By allowing the advice of Wilsonians like Powell to play a role, Bush may have allowed Rummy to believe there really was a chance of a "free Iraq" coming into existence which could help us out and repress the bad guys side-by-side with us, eventually replacing us in this role. If we fail, this fantsay will be what does us in.
Point #2: Will cost him the election. Bush needs victory in Iraq to be reelected. There is no question about this. He does not need all matters settled, just like Lincoln did not need Lee's surrender to win in 1864-but until Sherman burned Atlanta, Lincoln was seen as likely to lose. Bush needs a similar, bold, simple-to-understand step that tells the booboisie that victory is in hand. Without it, he is going home in January. He does have six months to pull it off, and while his listening to bad advice about postwar Iraq and his neo-Wilsonian tendencies are both reasons to be concerned, he's not finished yet.
If he nukes Najaf, I'm fairly sure he'll be upwards of 400 electoral votes come November. If he's negotiating with camel-humping barbarians while we lose 60 guys a week come November, anybody-even John 'effin Kerry-can and will beat him easily.
No question? Oh, Lord have mercy. If this were true - which it is not - since Iraq is still such a mess then President Bush should be trailing by 15-20 points in the polls.
He is statistically tied nationally, and is leading electorally.
Next silly assertion.