Can this be partly accredited to the fact that Pakistan has nukes, so our citizenry thinks we should not attack anywhere in their country?
We attack any non-nuke nation by saying they will "develop nuclear capabilities" . But a nuke-brandishing nation is an ally, or a cold-war style opponent. Obama took a chance, to show he could be tough as president. It backfired because ALL that most Americans know about Pakistan is that they have nukes. Our debates are so light on substance and information that people who make their polling answers based on the debates alone will go for the "debate winners" and shun the debate "losers." Are pundits (opinionators) on television more important than factual reporting anymore? it would seem so. Then begin to report major slippage in the polls- people don't want to look uninformed, or support a "probable loser". We love (potential) winners and hate (likely) losers- even when the results show thats a terrible way to make up your mind.