Election Postponement: Good for Democrats or Republicans?

In a radio interview today, I was asked if the recent story on a terrorist attack postponing the elections was released as part of a Democratic strategy to generate more fear of President Bush. I pointed out that it would be a better strategy for the Republicans to get the Democrats on record as saying that the election couldn't be postponed.
If there was an attack and Bush's popularity went up because of it, I could see the Democrats calling for a postponement and maybe even getting one in some federal court. There are enough judges out there who are less than meticulous when it comes to actually reading the constitution and think that their personal idea of fairness trumps every written rule. For the Republicans to change the rules would involved going to every state legislature in the land, a clear impossibility. Democrats don't worry about elected representatives or existing laws as long as they can find a friendly court. Then, when the Supreme Court declares that court's judgment contrary to the clear wording in the constitution (the pesky document that puts election rules in the hand of state legislatures instead of the courts), the Democrats could then again claim that the election was stolen.
Better for Republicans to get this idea of election postponement out there now and have all the Democrats come out against it. We know that once Kerry goes on the record committing to something, he stands by his position. Wait...I may have that last part wrong...