I think Charlie Black is absolutely right. He didn't actually say that McCain would be better at national security matters than his opponent, he merely stated that an attack would serve as an advantage to McCain's campaign. There is, I think without question, a perception that Republicans are considerably better at national security issues than Democrats. Whether the statement is true or not is actually irrelevant regarding elections. If people think a statement is true, then they'll vote a certain way under the assumption that it actually is true.

However, if there actually was a terrorist attack, I wonder if people would continue to perceive that the GOP is better at protecting the American people? We haven't been attacked for ~7 years, but an attack before the election could actually work to the advantage of either party, depending on how it is handled.

__________________
"The nice part about being a pessimist is that you are constantly being either proven right or pleasantly surprised.”
- George Will