Okay, so the conventional wisdom was that if al-Qaeda, or somebody, attacked the US before the election, it would benefit Bush/Cheney on a kind of "don't change horses in the middle of a war" theory. Accordingly, I fretted about such an attack, and I'm sure the Bushies longed for it.
But now that the Bushies have spouted that the recent spate of terrorist arrests have defused the threat against the US, an attack now might play into the Democrats' hands on the theory that once again the Bush administration has failed to assess intelligence and threat correctly. So suddenly I'm rooting for an attack, to spark a turn toward Kerry/Edwards. If such an attack should occur, Kerry/Edwards might just be elected by near-acclamation.
Sensing this, the Bushies have been quick to downplay the significance of the recent arrests, insisting that the danger remains. They don't want for a moment to lose the leverage that continuing fear of terror gives them, even at the expense of our sanity, our serenity, or the truth. And, to combat this cynicism, I assert my own.
For a synopsis of the pundits' ruminations on the subject, and related subjects, check out this Christian Science Monitor article.