Bush Weathers Clarke, Rice Storm

By David Paul Kuhn,
CBSNews.com Chief Political Writer

The drop in how Americans view Mr. Bush's conduct of the war on terror is likely due to harsh public criticism by his former top terrorism adviser and the controversy surrounding Condoleezza Rice's initial refusal to offer public testimony before the commission investigating Sept. 11.

In an about-face Tuesday, the White House bowed to political pressure and authorized Rice – Mr. Bush's national security adviser – to appear before the Sept. 11 panel. However, the Washington fixation on the hearings over the past two weeks has apparently had a negligible affect on the president's overall approval rating. A CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll conducted March 26-28, found that Mr. Bush's support actually increased to 53 percent.

The improvement occurred notwithstanding the buzz over the Rice controversy and former counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke's accusations that the president focused on the war in Iraq to the detriment of the war on terror.

The president's overall approval is now comparable to where it stood in December, prior to the onslaught of Democratic criticism that peaked in January and February, at the height of the primary race.

At the time, Democrats had spent about $50 million on advertising, near par with Republicans. Of that, 75 percent of Kerry's advertising budget was allocated to ads critical of Mr. Bush, while 50 percent of Democratic ads overall focused on the president as well, according to the Wisconsin Advertising Project, a nonpartisan group that tracks political advertising.

This, combined with a lack of inter-party squabbling among Democrats, led to Sen. John Kerry leaving the primary process unscathed.

"Bush was also having a tough time. Not a well-received State of the Union, not a well-received visit on 'Meet the Press,' and when issues are covered its problems in Iraq and jobs," said Ken Goldstein, head of the Wisconsin Project. "The Bush advertising then stopped the hemorrhaging and created doubts about John Kerry."

At the same time, public opinion of Mr. Bush's handling on the war on terror is at 58 percent, the lowest level since Gallup began tracking the sentiment following the Sept. 11 attacks.

The Clarke book and flurry surrounding the Sept. 11 hearings on Capitol Hill have damaged the president where he has been strongest, in his role as commander in chief. The foundation of the Republican presidential campaign is portraying Mr. Bush as a wartime president, exhibiting steady leadership during trying times.

Republicans joined Democrats in pressing the White House to let Rice testify and although she will likely do so as soon as next week, the concern is that the delay – complete with claims of executive privilege – may still create the impression that the Bush administration was stonewalling the commission.

"You knew that was where they were going end up," said Christie Whitman, a former member of the Bush administration as head of the Environmental Protection Agency. "There was nothing to hide and now it looks like a cave-in and they'll get no credit for it."

But with the worst of the commission's findings likely behind it, the Bush administration should continue to benefit from political advertising more than the Kerry campaign, at least for the time being, especially since critical public opinion of the president's approach to the war on terror has not harmed his overall approval rating.

"Everyone said why is George Bush going so early. I think it was a good decision to go early and go strong on Kerry," Goldstein said. "The Bush advertising is telling people things you don't know, and that's regarding Kerry. Advertising is more likely to make a difference when you are telling people things they don't know about people they don't know."

A CBS News poll conducted in mid-March found that more than 40 percent of Americans still had a vague view of Kerry. While the public has their minds firmly made up on the incumbent, it is the challenger's burden to define himself to the American public, before the president does it for him.

"With all else held constant you would expect the Bush advertising to matter more because people know George Bush, people don't know John Kerry," Goldstein said. "So advertising is more likely to make a difference when you have people with less strong predispositions and less knowledge in the first place."

By David Paul Kuhn