Also, impressions of presidential incompetence are not necessarily set in stone. They can be altered by visibly good performance or just by the turn of events -- such as, perhaps, the successful targeting of Zarqawi or the standup of the Iraqi government brought to our screens by Bush's trip to Iraq. These show what generally goes unseen in Mainstream Media coverage, the competence of U.S. troops and the growth of a capable Iraqi government and army.

The process takes time, however. The news that U.S. and Iraqi forces are hunting down the terrorists listed in Zarqawi's documents provides a narrative of continuing successes. But that narrative needs to be sustained and extended to produce a turnaround in American public opinion. So the scoffers are probably right when they say not to expect an immediate jump in Bush's job ratings.

But the impression, conveyed over time by visible events, that things are under control and moving ahead could produce such a change.

In the meantime, Republicans are trying to make this a comparative election between Republicans and Democrats, not just an up-or-down vote on Bush. Senate and House Republicans last week staged debates over whether to pull out of Iraq now or stay on. Democrats complained that these were meaningless debates aimed (as they said the debates on the constitutional amendment to ban same sex marriages were) at dividing voters. But on these issues it is the Democrats -- their officeholders and their voters -- who are divided, while the Republicans, with a few exceptions, are all on one side.

The Democrats have profited politically from bad news in Iraq. Good news puts things in a different light and raises the question of just what Democrats would do if in power. For the moment, they are, as ranking House Armed Services Democrat Ike Skelton said, "absolutely" divided. That's not a good posture from which to face the voters.