Seems that some Democrats not from the leadership or safe districts are hemming and hawing about the cut-and-run timetable. From the Boston Globe:
While Republicans have largely stood by Bush in opposing a timetable for troop withdrawal, congressional Democratic leaders earlier this month coalesced around calls to begin drawing down troop levels by December, with no specified pace or completion date. But rank-and-file Democrats are far from unified.
Among the 46 House races that nonpartisan political handicapper Charles Cook lists as the most competitive, 29 Democratic House candidates oppose setting a date to begin withdrawing troops. The dynamic is different among Senate candidates, however, with a larger percentage of Democrats willing to call for a timetable for troop withdrawal.
Seven of the Democrats running in the 13 Senate races deemed the most competitive by Cook have endorsed some version of a timetable. That would suggest that Bush could face heavy pressure to bring an end to US involvement in the conflict if Democrats pick up seats or win control of the Senate in November. Senate Republicans currently hold a 55-to-45 majority.
Every single vote in every Senate or House contest will be a vote for victory or a vote for vulnerability. Each is a party vote, and the Democratic leadership is united and on record demanding withdrawal regardless of conditions in Iraq. The attempt by some Democrats to blend in with the serious party when it comes to national defense is understandable, but fundamentally dishonest as the party is committed to retreat.
The story illustrates again why Republican candidates have to put the war against Islamic fascism at the center of their camapign, and show how the London bombers, the Turkey attacks, the assaults in Baghdad, the missiles aimed at Israel are all the same war, and that the Democratic Party’s leadership isn’t serious about fighting it. Consequences to follow.