How Common Ground of 9/11 Gave Way to Partisan Split

Thomas H. Kean, the former Republican governor of New Jersey, who led the 9/11 commission along with Hamilton, said in a separate interview that Iraq "shattered the coalition" of support for the war on terrorism -- a conclusion that is challenged by surveys taken within months of the attacks that even then revealed deep divisions between the parties on the use of force that dated perhaps as far back as Vietnam.

A Washington Post-ABC News Poll in November 2001 asked, "Would you support or oppose sending a significant number of U.S. ground troops into Afghanistan if it meant getting into a long war with large numbers of U.S. troops killed or injured?" Among Republicans, 72 percent answered yes; among Democrats, 57 percent said no.

The war in Iraq further divided the two parties, even before the invasion in March 2003. A Post-ABC News poll taken in early 2003 found that 57 percent of Democrats opposed going to war with Iraq, while 78 percent of Republicans supported it.

When U.S. forces entered Baghdad, two-thirds of the Democrats moved to support of the war, but once the conventional fighting ended and the occupation began, they reverted to opposition. By July 2003, only 34 percent of Democrats said the war was worth fighting, while 84 percent of Republicans supported it. The latest Post-ABC News poll shows an even wider split between the parties.

Bush insisted that Iraq was the new front in the war on terrorism, and when he asked Congress in 2002 to authorize the use of force, 29 of 51 Democrats in the Senate voted with him, but 126 of 207 House Democrats disagreed. That November, Democrats were assailed by the president and other Republicans for their supposed reluctance to combat terrorism abroad or at home.

Many Democrats cite the political attacks on then-Sen. Max Cleland (D-Ga.), a wounded Vietnam veteran, whose votes for several union-protection amendments helped delay passage of the bill creating the Department of Homeland Security. His opponent ran ads saying that Cleland "pretends to support President Bush, but he voted against homeland security 11 times." That campaign signaled to many Democrats that Republicans would not hesitate to use the terrorism issue as a partisan club.

The argument was repeated in the 2004 campaign, as Bush and Vice President Cheney painted Kerry and Edwards as naive or wavering in their approach to combating terrorism.

For Electorate, the Future

---

After campaigns in 2002 and 2004, the Democrats are on notice that they must try to persuade voters they have the backbone for the fight against terrorism.

As Hamilton said, "The Republicans have made national security the paramount issue for both the presidency and Congress. The Democrats have had a very difficult time responding. They have been accused of being weak on national security, and they still haven't figured out how to answer."

In a late June Post-ABC News poll, when voters were asked which party they trust to handle certain issues, Republicans led on only one topic: the campaign against terrorism. Their 46 percent to 39 percent lead over the Democrats was modest, compared with the 2 to 1 advantage they enjoyed earlier, but it stands out at a time when Republicans are trailing on the economy, immigration, corruption and Iraq.

The continued public perception that their party is weaker on defense explains why Kerry endorsed giving the Army more troops, and why congressional Democratic leaders pulled out all the stops this spring to promote their proposals for national security, before unveiling their domestic priorities.

At the same time, that war has become a major burden for the GOP. The Post-ABC News poll showed Iraq was rated the most important issue by 24 percent of the voters, leading seven topics, along with the economy. Terrorism was in sixth place, with 8 percent.

By 56 percent to 43 percent, respondents said they think the Iraq war is part of the war on terrorism, as the president maintains. But the percentage seeing them as separate has doubled since the spring of 2003.

Only 40 percent of Americans now say that, considering the costs and the benefits, they think it was worth fighting. Almost twice as many feel strongly that it was not worth it as believe strongly that it was. Three out of five say it has not contributed to long-term peace and stability in the region, and three out of four say it has damaged the United States' image in the world.

Iraq appears destined to define Bush's legacy. A Post-ABC News poll last month asked Americans whether Bush will be remembered most for Iraq or efforts to combat terrorism: 79 percent picked Iraq, while 15 percent said terrorism.

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove signaled earlier this year that Republicans will continue to use terrorism and national security to put the Democrats on the defensive, this fall and likely in 2008, by invoking the president's resolve to defeat terrorists no matter how long it takes.

But Democratic pollster Geoffrey Garin said the GOP strategy has been compromised by Iraq, which he said has profoundly affected the way Americans think about what it takes to keep them safe.

"In some ways, the war in Iraq has become an object lesson of what not to do," he said, adding that Democrats now may have an opportunity to go toe-to-toe with Republicans on national security. "You can't think about the political consequences of 9/11 separate from this intervening event of the war in Iraq."

Bush's reelection campaign taught Edwards that character and leadership and integrity mean more to voters than particular positions on issues. But five years after Sept. 11, he said the contours of those attributes continue to change. "I think they're [voters] looking for different leaders than they were right after 9/11 or even in the 2004 election," Edwards said.

Against this backdrop, the Republican House voted recently to endorse a continuation of the Bush policy toward Iraq and the Republican Senate defeated two alternative Democratic resolutions calling for immediate or phased withdrawal of U.S. troops.

That sets up a debate in which the lingering effects of 9/11 are, in effect, pitted against the more recent news and pictures from Iraq.

Both parties nervously await the voters' answers.

Polling director Richard Morin, assistant polling director Claudia Deane and researcher Zachary A. Goldfarb contributed to this report.