POLL: AMERICANS 'WANT TO WIN IN IRAQ'
Tue Feb 20 2007 16:21:32 ET
In the wake of the U.S. House of Representatives passing a resolution that amounts to a vote of no confidence in the Bush administration's policies in Iraq, a new national survey by Alexandria, VA-based Public Opinion Strategies (POS) shows the American people may have some different ideas from their elected leaders on this issue.
The survey was conducted nationwide February 5-7 among a bi-partisan, cross-section of 800 registered voters. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percent. The survey was commissioned by The Moriah Group, a Chattanooga-based strategic communications and public affairs firm.
The survey shows Americans want to win in Iraq, and that they understand Iraq is the central point in the war against terrorism and they can support a U.S. strategy aimed at achieving victory, said Neil Newhouse, a partner in POS. The idea of pulling back from Iraq is not where the majority of Americans are.
# By a 53 percent - 46 percent margin, respondents surveyed said that Democrats are going too far, too fast in pressing the President to withdraw troops from Iraq.
# By identical 57 percent - 41 percent margins, voters agreed with these statements: I support finishing the job in Iraq, that is, keeping the troops there until the Iraqi government can maintain control and provide security and the Iraqi war is a key part of the global war on terrorism.
# Also, by a 56 percent - 43 percent margin, voters agreed that even if they have concerns about his war policies, Americans should stand behind the President in Iraq because we are at war.
# While the survey shows voters believe (60 percent- 34 percent) that Iraq will never become a stable democracy, they still disagree that victory in Iraq (creating a young, but stable democracy and reducing the threat of terrorism at home) is no longer possible. Fifty-three percent say it's still possible, while 43 percent disagree.
# By a wide 74 percent - 25 percent margin, voters disagree with the notion that "I don't really care what happens in Iraq after the U.S. leaves, I just want the troops brought home."
When asked which statement best describes their position on the Iraq War, voters are evenly divided (50 percent - 49 percent) between positions of "doing whatever it takes to restore order until the Iraqis can govern and provide security to their country," and positions that call for immediate withdrawal or a strict timetable.
# 27 percent said "the Iraq war is the front line in the battle against terrorism and our troops should stay there and do whatever it takes to restore order until the Iraqis can govern and provide security to their country."
# 23 percent said "while I don't agree that the U.S. should be in the war, our troops should stay there and do whatever it takes to restore order until the Iraqis can govern and provide security to their country."
# 32 percent said "whether Iraq is stable or not, the U.S. should set and hold to a strict timetable for withdrawing troops."
# 17 percent said "the U.S. should immediately withdraw its troops from Iraq."
The survey also found that voters thought it would hurt American prestige more to pull out of Iraq immediately (59 percent) than it would to stay there for the long term (35 percent). Public Opinion Strategies "scored the best win-loss record among the major polling and media firms in the 2004 election" and was named Pollster of the Year in 2002.
posted on February 20, 2007 05:27:25 PM new
When asked which statement best describes their position on the Iraq War, voters are
evenly divided (50 percent - 49 percent)
between positions of "doing whatever it takes to restore order until the Iraqis can govern and provide security to their country," and positions that call for immediate withdrawal or a strict timetable.
posted on February 20, 2007 05:31:43 PM new
Bear, you yourself have said many times you don't believe in polls. WHAT'S UP???? LOL You can't have it both ways!!!!
posted on February 20, 2007 06:13:46 PM new
Associated Press-Ipsos poll conducted by Ipsos Public Affairs. Feb. 12-15, 2007. N=1,002 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.1.
.
"Would you favor or oppose sending more troops to Iraq?" 2/12-15/07
Favor-35%
Oppose-63%
Unsure-2%
"Do you think sending more troops to Iraq would help stabilize the situation there, or not?"
Would Help-32%
Would Not Help-64%
Unsure-4%
LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) -- Former New York mayor and 2008 presidential contender Rudolph Giuliani said Wednesday he is not sure the tide will turn in the war in Iraq, as President Bush has said.
The Washington Post
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
A recent poll by The Washington Post and ABC News reported that 70 percent of Americans oppose the way the president is handling the situation in Iraq. About 65 percent are against sending more troops.
"The only way we can win is to leave before the job is done." --George W. Bush, Greeley, Colo., Nov. 4, 2006
posted on February 20, 2007 07:13:07 PM new
Uh, let's see. First off, your copy/paste is from that bastion of unbiased reporting, the Drudge Report. Then, Public Opinion Strategies, the makers of your poll, are an unabashedly political organization, who conduct polls for the express purpose of promoting Republican candidates and issues. This is from the "What's New" section of their website:
11.08.06 -- PUBLIC OPINION STRATEGIES MOURNS REPUBLICAN LOSSES, CONGRATULATES MANY INDIVIDUAL WINNERS IN TOUGH RACES
The Republican polling firm of Public Opinion Strategies (my bold) (POS) polled for the only freshman Republican U.S. Senator, one new Governor, and five new members of Congress. Overall, the firm polled for four winning U.S. Senate races, six winning GOP Governors, at least 46 Members of Congress, as well as numerous downticket statewide and legislative winners.
Gee, ya think this is an unbiased poll?? This organization gives new meaning to the term POS.
posted on February 20, 2007 07:36:03 PM new
profe says:
profe saysL "First off, your copy/paste is from that bastion of unbiased reporting, the Drudge Report."
I know you and kiara have a very difficult time understanding that because a site posts these bits of info...doesn't mean that's where they originally came from.
Why the two of you have difficultly 'getting' that is beyond me.
That poll was in the link from and Investors Business Daily - a site I posted yesterday or the day before. It is NOT a drudge POLL.
SAMEinfo
Too difficult for you and kiara to grasp, I see.
IF say the AP posts a news article and drudge or the WA Times or CNS news, or World Net Daily reports the SAME article...it does NOT mean it was FROM them - NOR does that give the SAME story/article less credibility....but rather they used the AP article to ALSO post on their site.
AS was done in this case.
"Then, Public Opinion Strategies, the makers of your poll, are an unabashedly political organization"
Just as when ANY political biased site like the WA POST, or ABC or CNN or See-BS....post THEIR polls. Not ONE bit different.
Please don't try and pretend they are somehow more credible than any other poll. They each MAY have a bias....but you continue to imply this each and every time ANY poll is posted by the righties.....while being gallible enough to believe a left leaning MSM poll is more credible.
posted on February 20, 2007 08:53:09 PM new
Whenever you see a c&p like this one, take the main headline and go to Google's advanced search and pop it in.
Check out the sites that publish the identical crap, World Nut Daily, Free Republic, Rush Limbaugh, Drudge, etc and then check back again later and see how many other fringe sites and blogs pick it up and run with the same item over and over again as they all mindlessly defend Bush.
posted on February 20, 2007 09:58:50 PM new
See.....proof positive that kiara STILL can't grasp the concept of news being reported on sites SHE doesn't approve of....even though the WA Post and the NYT do the exact same thing.....take news from the wire services.
tsk tsk tsk
thick head I guess....can't penetrate it with how the news works all over the world.
Maybe she can remember when an article helen posted.....was on a more acceptable website....but it originated from the MOSCOW TIMES. LOL LOL LOL
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on February 20, 2007 10:32:52 PM newSee.....proof positive that kiara STILL can't grasp the concept of news being reported on sites SHE doesn't approve of.
Once again you have no idea what you're saying about me, Lindak. If you wish to read it as 'news' you have every right to do so and if these are the sites you wish to get your 'news' from and follow daily you have every right to do so.
Personally I do not see them as legitimate news sites and have every right to voice that opinion.
Truthfully I think those that post here are intelligent enough to choose their own sources for news so I don't understand why you felt the need to even bring my name into this topic.
posted on February 20, 2007 10:37:28 PM new
I chose to do so to point out, once again, how you just can't GRASP how many news sources take news from the wire services and many different other sites post that exact news article.
The left does it ...the right does it. And I don't care which ones you don't like. lol lol I don't like the treason times either....but people DO read it....just as they read all the sites you don't like.
It's called taking it all in and then making an intelligent decision.
But you just can't grasp that. lol
=====================
The Antiwar Surge.
Iraq is unpopular, but embracing defeat may prove politically disastrous for Democrats.
BY BRENDAN MINITER
Tuesday, February 20, 2007 12:01 a.m. EST
Wall Street Journal
In mid-January an Associated Press-Ipsos poll found that public support for President Bush's troop surge increased to 35%, up from 26% a few weeks earlier.
The same poll found that a slim majority of Americans were against the war in Iraq, but 68% said they opposed shutting off funds to fight it, and 60% said they would oppose Congress's withholding funds necessary to send additional troops.
The poll was not an anomaly.
Hillary Clinton and her chief strategist, Mark Penn, himself a former pollster, know how to read public opinion surveys.
Which may explain why she steadfastly refuses to "apologize" for voting to authorize the war in 2002 while also calling for Mr. Bush to end the war before he leaves office and favoring a nonbinding Senate resolution opposing an "escalation."
The war may not be popular, but the public isn't ready to support losing either.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
Ann Coulter
[ edited by Linda_K on Feb 20, 2007 10:43 PM ]
posted on February 20, 2007 10:56:21 PM newI chose to do so to point out, once again, how you just can't GRASP how many news sources take news from the wire services and many different other sites post that exact news article.
Linda, I wasn't even posting in this topic when you brought my name into it so how in the world do you know what I grasp or not as I go about my day?
I think you fail to grasp the difference between news and editorials and opinions. It seems to be blurred in your mind so you have no idea what I meant when I said to trace the headline through Google's advanced search and check the sites that post the identical article, editorial, poll, opinion or 'news' as you call it.
posted on February 20, 2007 11:36:26 PM new
LOL...because you didn't do it in this ONE thread, doesn't mean it hasn't been your MO all along. Because it has been. You're not fooling anyone here. lol Except maybe yourself.
I often point out others posting editorials or op-ed pieces....I also point out when I'm posting an opinion I happen to agree with.
So try and stop playing your pretend games, kiara.
Often op-ed pieces or editorials also include links to support whatever info their speaking about. That doesn't make it NOT REAL NEWS/INFO....lol just because the proof or link to substanciate what's being said is also included in them.
Like here's an example of what I believe you don't 'get', kiara.
A canadian paper posts an article with a subject like - "Canadian woman can't keep rock star at home, even though she poll dances for him"
Now....the Assoc. Press OR reuters or any other wire news sites picks up on that story.
Then the [say] NYT puts a copy of that same article in it's 'entertainment' section.....and World Net Daily uses the same exact article to speak about current relationships.
What you're NOT getting is that the story is still valid....true....and the FACT that it was reported in BOTH the NYT AND WND doesn't mean WND is less credible than the NYT for posting/reporting the SAME EXACT story/information.
Try and get that concept through your skull
[ edited by Linda_K on Feb 20, 2007 11:49 PM ]
posted on February 21, 2007 12:22:56 AM newA canadian paper posts an article with a subject like - "Canadian women can't keep rock star at home, even though she poll dances for him"
With a headline like that I'd wonder what kind of editor the paper hires. 'Women' is plural and 'she' is singular. 'Poll dances' is when someone gets excited over the poll results and dances around?
What you're NOT getting is that the story is still valid....true....
Only in your mind.
I will try to explain it in another way. The rhetoric, propaganda and talking points that always support Bush and are posted from one internet site or forum or blog to the next usually all match up to the same right-wing sites and are not usually picked up by the rest of the media whereas real news and current events of the day are usually picked up by all sites, right, left and center even though some may put a slightly different spin or tilt to it.
posted on February 21, 2007 06:12:55 AM new
Prof, you really think a professional study group would deliberately poll only Republican adults on their views?
And havent YOU on many occasions c & p'd a GIF or JPG image of polls.?
Waco, just with the AOL polls YOU NO LONGER quote.
It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived.George S. Patton
posted on February 21, 2007 10:28:30 AM new
Bear,
BUSHY's Iraq Civil War is crumbling around him as I type. Soon BUSHY will be retired living in the disgrace of a failed Presidency.
Already many Americans are saying BUSHY is the worst President America ever had.
posted on February 21, 2007 10:43:59 AM new
Bear here is a AOL poll just for your information.
Poll: Most Think Country on Wrong Track
By Darlene Superville
The Associated Press
Monday 22 January 2007
Washington - Americans are in a dark mood about the state of the union, the administration, Congress, Iraq and even some personal traits of President Bush, a poll finds.
Most believe the country is on the wrong track - a complete flip from five years ago, according to an AP-AOL News poll that finds little to cheer about in advance of Bush's State of the Union speech Tuesday night.
Americans see the president as likable, decisive and strong - but also stubborn. Only a minority think he is honest - 44 percent, down from 53 percent two years ago.
Two-thirds of Americans, 66 percent, think the country is on the wrong track. That's about the same as a year ago, when 65 percent thought so, the poll found.
That's a stark reversal from mid-January 2002, when 68 percent said the country was on the right track and 29 percent said it was not. Then, the nation was still coming to grips with the terrorist strikes four months earlier on New York and Washington that killed nearly 3,000 people. And, U.S. troops Bush sent to Afghanistan had toppled the Taliban government that harbored the terrorists believed responsible.
After the U.S. led an invasion of Iraq in March 2003, public support for the mission there began to slide as the war continued, the U.S. death toll climbed and the violence raged on.
posted on February 21, 2007 04:50:55 PM newWaco, I see you still believe in Santa Claus.
I'd rather have someone still believe in Santa Claus then have a small group of people believe the people of Canada speak Canadian.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
posted on February 21, 2007 08:09:11 PM newProf, you really think a professional study group would deliberately poll only Republican adults on their views?
In this case yeah, I do Bear. Go read their website. Publican Opinion Strategies is unabashedly dedicated to winning elections for it's Republican candidate clients and doing "research" which furthers a Republican agenda.
And havent YOU on many occasions c & p'd a GIF or JPG image of polls.?
lots of times. However, I have always taken the results of polls directly from pollingreport.com, which doesn't conduct any polls itself, but only aggregates the results of national polls. What they DON'T include are these kinds of polls taken by what are essentially private advertising firms doing research for paying customers. There's a big difference between this type of poll and Zogby, Gallup etc. Back in the dark ages, when it was almost illegal and certainly immoral and unchristian to say anything doubtful about President Bush or the war, I never posted any polls. Why? Because the major polls, which can be found on pollingreport.com, ALL showed overwhelming support for Bush and his agenda. I suppose I could have gone and dug up some slanted poll that showed exactly the opposite of what every other legitimate poll in the country was showing, but I chose not to. During the election, and as Americans began to pull the Texas wool off their eyes, I began to post polls that showed the change in opinions about the war and about Bush. I never posted any of the silly research conducted by moveon.org and their ilk, because their opinion taking is just as suspect as this is.
