US: Some 71 per cent of Republicans believe the United States would be more vulnerable to terrorist attack under a Kerry administration, writes Conor O'Clery in New York.
The third anniversary of the September 11th, 2001 attacks on the United States was marked on Saturday with solemn cermemonies that brought a pause in the bitter argument at the heart of this year's presidential election - who is best equipped to protect the United States from further attacks.
Defending America has become the central theme of the Bush campaign, highlighted by vice-president Dick Cheney's much-criticised allegation last week that if Americans did not re-elect Mr Bush, the prospect of another attack would be increased.
Democratic challenger John Kerry yesterday called this a "shameful and outrageous effort" to distract attention from America's economic and social problems.
"I think the president's unwillingness to walk away from those comments makes it clear that he and the vice-president will say anything and do anything to get elected and to hold on to power," he told Time magazine. "America is not as safe as we ought to be after 9/11. We can do a better job at homeland security. I can fight a more effective war on terror."
What Mr Cheney asserted was that if Americans made "the wrong choice" the danger was "that we'll get hit again" and only Mr Bush could be relied on to stay on the military offensive.
A Newsweek poll to be published today shows how much ground Mr Kerry has to make up to counter the impression that he would be weaker in defending America.
Four in ten voters agree with Mr Cheney, with 71 per cent of Republicans believing the United States would be more vulnerable under a Kerry administration, and 43 per cent of Democrats thinking the country would be less vulnerable.
A CBS poll shows that seven in 10 Americans believe there is a continuing terrorist threat, and nearly two-thirds of voters think protecting the country is more important than creating jobs.
Only two in five agree with President Bush's statement at the Republican National Convention that the US strategy in the war against terror is succeeding, but the convention cast Mr Bush as a decisive commander-in-chief and rallied supporters with frequent references to 9/11, which helped erase pre-summer gains made by Democrats.
One of Mr Kerry's most serious problems is shown in a new Associated Press poll.
This shows that three in four Americans see Mr Bush as decisive compared to just over a third who see Mr Kerry as decisive, and a huge majority of 23 per cent favour Mr Bush over Mr Kerry as the candidate most likely to keep the United States safe.
Some strategists say this could mark a fundamental shift in the race in Mr Bush's favour.
With only 50 days left before the election, both the AP and Newsweek polls show Mr Bush holding on to an overall six point lead over Mr Kerry, half the 12 point bounce he got from the Republican Convention, but still enough for a landslide victory in November.
Mr Kerry acknowledged that it bothered him that security had distracted voters from the "real issues" that mattered.
"The standard of living for the average American has gone down," he said. "People's incomes have dropped.
"Five million Americans have lost their health insurance. The deficit is the largest it's been in the history of this country. They're taking money from Social Security and transferring it to the wealthiest people in America to drive us into debt.
"They're shredding alliances around the world with people we have traditionally been able to rely on." Mr Kerry has struggled to differentiate himself from Mr Bush over Iraq since he said recently he would have voted for a war resolution in the Senate even knowing what he now knows.
Democratic strategists tried this weekend to help Mr Kerry off the hook. Mr James Carville said that the mistake was not the decision to give the authority, but the decision to go to war.
Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said Kerry's vote was intended to give the President more leverage with the United Nations to get inspectors back into Iraq.
She also accused Mr Cheney of using the tactics of the anti-communist demagoguery of the 1950s, saying she had not seen a national security issue so politicised since the days of Senator Joseph McCarthy.
Mr Kerry evidently plans to step up his attacks on Mr Bush over national security to regain the initiative. "We've gone backward in Iraq, and we've gone backward on the war on terror," he told Time.
"I will pursue a far more aggressive, proactive statesmanship role to bring countries to our side in an effort in which they have an interest.
"Ninety per cent of the casualties and costs are being borne by Americans. That's inexcusable. I believe very deeply that it takes a new president, a new credibility, a fresh start, to change the whole equation in Iraq."
The Bush administration is mounting a damage-control exercise as the perception gains ground that it has no exit strategy for Iraq.
US Secretary of State Colin Powell conceded yesterday that an insurgency was "raging" in Iraq but said it would be put down. US military commanders had plans to bring insurgent-held cities back under control, he told NBC. He rejected a suggestion that the US was holding back until December so as to minimise American casualties in the run-up to the election.