Jonah Goldberg picks up on the point I made the other day about success of the surge in Iraq being a good thing for Obama and a bad thing for McCain:

But the tragic Catch-22 for the Arizona senator is that the more the surge succeeds, the more politically advantageous it is for Obama.

Voters don't care about the surge; they care about the war. Americans want it to be over -- and in a way they can be proud of. [snip]

If it [the war] were going worse, McCain's Churchillian rhetoric would match reality more. But with sectarian violence nearly gone, Al Qaeda in Iraq almost totally routed and even Shiite Sadrist militias seemingly neutralized, the stakes of withdrawal seem low enough for Americans to feel comfortable voting for Obama. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki's support for an American troop drawdown undoubtedly pushes the perceived stakes even lower.

The success in Iraq has already pushed the war much lower in the minds of voters around the country, who are now more focused on the economy by more than two to one margins. Here are the numbers from the most recent round of state polls by Quinnipiac:

MI: Economy 56, Iraq 18
CO: Economy 47, Iraq 19
MN: Economy 51, Iraq 21
WI Economy 50, Iraq 20

The UNH's most recent poll in New Hampshire, released yesterday, showed voters' focus on the economy rising 10 points since the last survey in late April (to 41% from 31%), while Iraq declined in importance to voters by 9 points (to 8% from 17%). Over that same period, John McCain went from a six-point lead over Obama (49-43) to a three-point deficit (43-46).

Put simply, it will be a lot easier for Obama to pass the Commander in Chief test if the public considers the war in Iraq won when they go to the polls in November.