It has been widely acknowledged that Kerry has a problem differentiating himself from Bush on how to handle the Iraq situation, given that Kerry won't commit himself to, or even talk about, an exit strategy. But it has been widely misunderstood that that problem lies in Kerry's appeal to Democratic voters.

Personally, I think Democratic voters are likely to stick with Kerry no matter what his Iraq position--because they want to get rid of Bush so badly. What I worry about is his ability to appeal to independent voters, without some kind of exit strategy.

Consider how fed up political independents are getting with the Iraq situation. In the latest CBS News poll, an overwhelming majority of independents say the result of the war with Iraq hasn't been worth the loss of American life and other costs of the war (67-25). And in the new ABC News/Washington Post poll, by more than 2:1 (65-32), independents believe we have gotten bogged down in Iraq. rather than making good progress.

Moreover, according to the CBS News poll, this is a group that now believes, by 52-40, we made a mistake getting involved in the war in Iraq and also believes, by 49-44, that we should have just stayed out of Iraq, rather than taking military action. Finally, independents have been in favor, for the last month, of turning over "control to Iraqis as soon as possible, even if Iraq is not completely stable" rather than having "United States troops stay in Iraq as long as it takes to make sure Iraq is a stable democracy" (essentially the Kerry position). In the latest CBS News poll, the margin among independents is 51-43 in favor of turning over control to Iraqis as soon as possible.

Despite these sentiments and the clear direction of change among these voters--toward less and less interest ins staying the course and more and more interest in an exit strategy--Kerry has refused, so far, to even mention the "E" word. Why?

One reason may be because he believes it would be wrong to simply withdraw the troops and abandon Iraq. And he's right about that. But there are ways to talk about an exit strategy without being irresponsible; an exit strategy doesn't mean just yanking the troops out. But it does mean setting a date to leave and a plan to turn genuine control of Iraq to an elected Iraqi government within that time frame.

James Steinberg and Michael O'Hanlon of the Brookings Institution have sketched the elements of such a plan, with an exit date of the end of 2005, hardly a precipitate departure. Other sober-minded foreign policy analysts like Leslie Gelb, former president of the Council on Foreign Relations, have called for a similar approach.

An exit strategy: it's not just for hard-core peaceniks anymore. Increasingly, mainstream analysts and mainstream voters--i.e., independent, swing voters--are leaning in that direction as well. Kerry has a chance to reach these voters with something clear and definite about how he intends to get the US out of Iraq. And if he doesn't, who's to say that Bush might not put one on the table first?

That's something to be avoided. C'mon, John, can you say E-X-I-T? I think you can.