What Will Iraq Cost Bush?

Even administration insiders are starting to worry about
how the war will affect the president’s re-election
chances. In New Hampshire, the omens aren’t reassuring

By Howard Fineman
NEWSWEEK
<http://www.msnbc.com/news/985284.asp?>

Nov. 3 issue — Hilary Cleveland of New London, N.H.,
goes way back with the Bush family. Her late husband,
James Colgate (Jimmy) Cleveland, was a Republican in
Congress, where his paddle-ball partner in the House gym
was George H.W. Bush. Hilary served on the Andover board
with Barbara Bush and was finance chair of Bush’s
primary campaign in New Hampshire in 1980. She organized
locally for George W. in 2000. But the other day, upset
over the war in Iraq, she left the Republican Party,
changing her registration to "undeclared" so she could
vote for Dr. Howard Dean in the Democratic primary in
January. "You don’t go to war without valid reason," she
said, "or international support." Bush’s call for $87
billion in new spending on Iraq offended her Yankee
sense of thrift: "I believe in fiscal integrity and
balanced budgets, and spending so much doesn’t seem
sound."

IF PRESIDENCIES are destined to crumble, the cracks tend
to appear first in the Granite State, where independents
flock to one party’s primary or another to presage the
attitude—and anger—that centrist "swing voters" will
express nationwide months later. Bush remains personally
well liked in New Hampshire—and nationally. According
to the newest NEWSWEEK Poll, his job-approval rating is
holding at 51 percent. But the human and financial costs
of the war—symbolized by death-a-day news reports and
the $87 billion funding request—have made Dean a power
in the state, and are beginning to worry administration
insiders. "If we don’t get Iraq right in time," fretted
one National Security Council official, "we could lose
the election."

In New Hampshire, George Bush can survive the loss of
Mrs. Cleveland. But he probably can’t afford to lose
Sen. John McCain, the avatar of independents who
defeated Bush in the 2000 Republican primary there.
Bush’s campaign operatives, knowing he beat Al Gore by a
mere 7,000 votes in New Hampshire, are expecting to send
McCain to campaign. Though there is no love lost between
Bush and McCain—the residue of the brutal nomination
race—the senator has been a dutiful soldier.

Until now. In a NEWSWEEK interview, McCain for the first
time compared the situation in Iraq to Vietnam, where he
survived six years of wartime imprisonment, and began
openly distancing himself from Bush’s war strategy.
McCain, aides say, was rankled by what he saw as a
useless, Panglossian classified briefing, especially
after reading Donald Rumsfeld’s now infamous internal
memo. In it, the secretary of Defense said that Iraq
would be a "long slog," and admitted the government had
no "metric" for knowing if it was making net progress in
ridding the world of terrorists.

"This is the first time that I have seen a parallel to
Vietnam," McCain declared, "in terms of information that
the administration is putting out versus the actual
situation on the ground. I’m not saying the situation in
Iraq now is as bad as Vietnam. But we have a problem in
the Sunni Triangle and we should face up to it and tell
the American people about it." Also reminiscent of
Vietnam, McCain said, was the administration’s
reluctance to deploy forces with the urgency required
for the quickest victory. "I think we can be OK, but
time is not on our side... If we don’t succeed more
rapidly, the challenges grow greater."

For Bush, the political challenges are growing just as
rapidly. Having made one of the most fateful decisions
in the modern presidency—to try to remake the Middle
East, starting with Iraq—he has no choice but to press
ahead with his request for the $87 billion, even if it
is unpopular. Democrats, meanwhile, see a chance to link
the lethargy of the economy and an increasingly
controversial war—and use the two together to unseat
Bush. "The president has handed Democrats a huge issue
called ’87 billion’," said polltaker John Zogby, whose
latest poll shows Dean surging in New Hampshire. "That
much money crystallizes everyone’s concerns about the
war."

To distance themselves from it, Democrats—and some
Republicans—are fighting to turn $10 billion of grants
into loans. Republican senators still fume about a
confrontational session they had with the president
about the matter before he left on a trip to Asia. Bush
all but demanded that they agree with him. "I’m not here
to debate with you," he declared. Sen. Lindsey Graham of
South Carolina grew upset. "That didn’t set well with
me," he recalled. "I told him I wasn’t there to debate
him, either." American voters, he told the president,
see Iraq as an oil-rich nation that will use U.S.
taxpayers’ cash to repay outstanding Iraqi loans owed
the French, Germans and Russians. "I told the president
that his domestic political support could be in jeopardy
if taxpayers decide they’re being treated unfairly,"
Graham said.

As for the president, he remains firm. Hill insiders say
he’ll get the money without conditions. And if his aides
fret, he doesn’t seem to. Aboard Air Force One last
week, he spoke of his admiration for leaders like the
prime minister of Australia (a "man of steel," Bush
said) who pursue unpopular policies. "Just do what you
think is right," he said, as if reciting a mantra.
"Stand your ground in the face of public criticism. The
people will judge you correctly." In the meantime
they’re watching carefully—among other places, up in
New Hampshire.

With Tamara Lipper with Bush and Richard Wolffe in
Washington