I agree, I think there’d be disruption and many people wouldn’t even bother to go to the polls.
However, think about Madrid. That was just before a presidential election which Aznar’s successor was expected to win and it was not only the Muslims but the left that rallied. They broke windows in PP (Spanish Conservative party) headquarters in Madrid, terrorized voters at polling places in traditionally conservative areas such as Castilla, and basically used the terrorist attack to give Spain to the odious Zapatero.
I don’t think this was coordinated in advance. I think the Muslims thought that they were going to terrify the Spanish enough to make them leave Iraq, but the rest of the success of the Madrid bombing was basically the result of a radical left that knew how to use it and seized their opportunity.
So we must ask ourselves the basic question, qui bono [who profits]?. Our situation is different because we already have a radical leftist (and probably a Muslim) in the White House. So what is it the Muslims think they would gain with this attack? What does the left think it would gain?
The reason why the PP lost the 2004 elections, aside from the fact that they are an awful excuse for wannabe RINOs, is because Aznar quite stupidly tried to pin 11-M on ETA, the Basque separatist group. It was blatantly obvious they were not behind it, as ETA tends to avoid collateral damage and call beforehand.
It really was a case of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.