The spin keeps going.

Let's stick with objective reality: Party A supports policy X. Party B supports policy Y. Party A is ahead in the polls. Terrorists attack demanding that nation switch from policy X to policy Y. Electorate changes vote from Party A to Party B.

..and yet some of you don't see the obvious conclusion one can draw from this?

Brad, while I still cannot honestly draw a conclusion in the Spanish situation, I have to point out that your argument is fallacious in a number of ways.
First, your premises that the attack occurred with concurrent specific demands and that there were only either policy X or policy Y are both either untrue or dubious, and even if we agree to assume your "poll" statement true (poll data being rather dubious in and of itself), your argument is already broken.
Next, it's clear you entered the discussion presupposing your conclusion to be true and providing links to articles supporting that conslusion, and, I have not seen any evidence from you supporting any of the propositions within your later argument (which also seems to flip-flop between inductive and deductive reasoning), therefore, failure by (post hoc, ergo propter hoc), aka "false cause".
In other words, your conclusion is far from obvious to anyone other than those that already believe it. That of course does not prove your entirely wrong on the subject, however, the patronization is a bit insulting.
I see a number of people here expressing considered opinions and some even supplying facts, but argument by reduction is a classic spin tactic. See: your last post

Brad
you can of course draw that conclusion. Of course there are links. The Spanish new government has been promising for months that they would withdraw their troops if elected. Just what Al Qaeda wants! But you are ignoring any information and facts you are not interested in. Why for example were nearly 1 million Spanairds protesting on the Saturday about the truth? Why were they chanting 'tell us the truth'? Could it be that the Spanish givernment tried to hoodwink them for political gain and they were angry?

How about this scenario.

Party A supports X and Y. Party B supports Y only. People support Y only but Party A has done good job so is ahead in polls. Terrorist attack. Party A says it's nothing to do with X. Police prove Party A is lying. Party B wins.

X=war in Iraq
Y=war on terror

You just don't see X and Y as different, do you?

Paul.

Okay, who has killed the most civilians since World War 2? The Terrorists? The Commies? Let me think..... Apeasing Terrorists is bad, causing Terrorism is worse. There are no "always" and "nevers". No government has divine rights or constant moral superiority and neither do individuals. Lets face it, people will be people no matter what country they represent and in that case you must be willing to entertain the fact that you are wrong. All this bully talk about Terrorists or America polarises the debate. Look at the facts: How many years has America NOT been fighting in some war somewhere since WW2? And who have they been fighting? Not superpowers thats for sure.

d, while I still cannot honestly draw a conclusion in the Spanish situation, I have to point out that your argument is fallacious in a number of ways. First, your premises that the attack occurred with concurrent specific demands and that there were only either policy X or policy Y are both either untrue or dubious, and even if we agree to assume your "poll" statement true (poll data being rather dubious in and of itself), your argument is already broken.

Care to try again? This was in the news 6 days before the bombing courtesy of CBS.
Here's the link: Link

CBS/AP) An Islamic group that claims responsibility for the Madrid bombings says it will turn Spain "into an inferno" unless the country halts its support for the United States and withdraws its troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. The threat came in a letter faxed to the Spanish daily newspaper ABC over the weekend, the paper said Monday. ABC said the letter was handwritten in Arabic and signed "Abu Dujana Al Afgani, Ansar Group, al Qaeda in Europe."