As handy an analogy as Munich is, it doesnt really apply (if indeed it ever did). As Krauthammer points out, no one could seriously believe that ejecting Aznars party would reduce Spains risk of attack from Al Qaeda. The corrolary of this principle is that no one should seriously believe that re-electing the Popular Party would increase Al Qaedas desire to attack Spain; everything we know about Al Qaeda suggests that we are simply props in their internal fantasy, and modifying our policies in the hope that we can deter or discomfit Al Qaeda is to engage in psychological shadow boxing with an invisible shadow. Might it then be more plausible to assume that the Spanish voters were motivated by factors other than how their nation figures in the dramatic narratives of either Osama bin Laden or George W. Bush? Particularly when you consider the reports the Socialists were gaining on the PP prior to 11-M, and that Spaniards themselves stated that a chief motive for their rejection of the PP was that they didnt appreciate being deceived on the eve of an election. This is what really alarms Bushs supporters: the refusal by an elecorate to see everything through the lens of the "war on terror."
Kevin Drum asks: how does it serve Bush-supporters interests to breezily generalize this single electoral result into a trend threatening to alienate all of Bushs European allies? Perhaps the recent Wonkette-driven Punking of the Bush re-election site unintentionally (?) handed Rove the campaigns new theme: "Bush-Cheney '04: Thrown Out of More European Countries Than the Visigoths."