Majority view (plus)

[Lanya]

[..........]
According to the results of the latest Washington Post/ABC News poll, disapproving of President Bush's Iraq policy is not just the majority view; it is the sentiment of two out of every three members of the American public.

Support for a troop withdrawal -- and, specifically, for Congress to stay Bush's hand -- is not the domain of the antiwar left. It is the view of a solid majority of Americans.

Consider some of these findings, listed in order of how strongly those views are held. (And I'm only including those with over 55 percent support):

* 67 disapprove of the way Bush is handling Iraq.

* 67 percent oppose sending additional troops to Iraq.

* 66 percent support reducing U.S. military and financial support for the Iraqi government if the Iraqis fail to make progress toward national unity and restoring civil order.

* 64 don't think the war with Iraq was worth fighting.

* 58 percent want Congress to limit the number of troops available for duty.

* 56 percent feel the U.S. should withdraw its military forces from Iraq in order to avoid further U.S. military casualties, even if that means civil order is not restored there.

And in an somewhat related finding:

* 63 percent feel they cannot trust the Bush administration to honestly and accurately report intelligence about possible threats from other countries.

Dan Balz and Jon Cohen write about the poll in The Washington Post; Gary Langer for ABC News.

A new Gallup Poll finds that 65 percent of Americans see the British troop withdrawal announcement as a sign that things are going poorly in Iraq, rather than well -- contrary to the White House spin.

Another Gallup Poll, this one on the U.S. role in the world, finds that a record 73 percent of Americans say they don't think leaders of other countries around the world have respect for Bush, and 61 percent are dissatisfied with the position of the United States in the world today.
[..........]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2005/04/11/LI2005041100879.html

[sirs]

So, when nearly every poll was indicating overwhelming support of our efforts initially, that apparently means nothing.  But a poll now means so much more?

Actually, what it demonstrates is validation of the "right now/instant gratification" mentality that permeates American culture.  If Iraq isn't working within a week, it has to be a failure.       Remind me again how long it was before our country's consitution was put together...how long it took for our country to become a free democracy after we touched toes on the East Coast

Pathetic

[Religious Dick]

So, when nearly every poll was indicating overwhelming support of our efforts initially, that apparently means nothing.  But a poll now means so much more?

And just when did nearly every poll indicate overwhelming support? I don't seem to be able to find that in the history of the polling data. In fact, the Time/CNN poll from the week of Feb. 19-20 2003, the week Iraq was invaded, showed only 54% of Americans supported a ground invasion of Iraq. That's hardly overwhelming, especially when you consider that this was a time frame when the Bush administration was promoting it's assertion that Saddam had WMD's, and visions of mushroom clouds were dancing in Condi Rice's head. The "overwhelming support" the Bush-bots keep trying to assert ("don't blame us - everyone else supported the war too!" NOT!) has never existed. Check the data yourself.

http://pollingreport.com/iraq10.htm
http://pollingreport.com/iraq9.htm
http://pollingreport.com/iraq8.htm

Pathetic

You're tellin' me!

[Michael Tee]

<<* 63 percent feel they cannot trust the Bush administration to honestly and accurately report intelligence about possible threats from other countries.>>

Obviously, the entire nation is turning irrational.

[sirs]

Strange RD...when I look at the archives of polls, like Rasmussen, Gallup, USA-Today, ABC News, etc., etc., etc, back when the war on terror began, they consistently demonstrated broad widespread SUPPORT.  1 ABC poll has Bush as the 3rd greatest President ever.  And even your Times' poll demonstrates MAJORITY support, as if that supposedly refutes my recollection.  Is their a reason your helping to make my point?

Oh, and it wasn't just Bush promoting Saddam's WMD.  That'd also include pretty much every Democrat when Clinton was promoting them, and pretty much every Eurpean country's leader and intelligence service doing the same, UN included.

Want a do-over?

[sirs]

Obviously, the entire nation is turning irrational.

Not at all.  Just impatient

[Religious Dick]

Strange RD...when I look at the archives of polls, like Rasmussen, Gallup, USA-Today, ABC News, etc., etc., etc, back when the war on terror began, they consistently demonstrated broad widespread SUPPORT.  1 ABC poll has Bush as the 3rd greatest President ever.  And even your Times' poll demonstrates MAJORITY support, as if that supposedly refutes my recollection.  Is their a reason your helping to make my point?

Oh, and it wasn't just Bush promoting Saddam's WMD.  That'd also include pretty much every Democrat when Clinton was promoting them, and pretty much every Eurpean country's leader and intelligence service doing the same, UN included.

Want a do-over?

No, I don't need a do-over. How about some links to those polls that you claim support your position?

[sirs]

Strange RD...when I look at the archives of polls, like Rasmussen, Gallup, USA-Today, ABC News, etc., etc., etc, back when the war on terror began, they consistently demonstrated broad widespread SUPPORT.  1 ABC poll has Bush as the 3rd greatest President ever.  And even your Times' poll demonstrates MAJORITY support, as if that supposedly refutes my recollection.  Is their a reason your helping to make my point?

Oh, and it wasn't just Bush promoting Saddam's WMD.  That'd also include pretty much every Democrat when Clinton was promoting them, and pretty much every Eurpean country's leader and intelligence service doing the same, UN included.

Want a do-over?

No, I don't need a do-over. How about some links to those polls that you claim support your position?

They're in the archives of the polls I referenced.   There are a whole slew (if that's a word) of them, starting in '02.  Rasmussen, NYTimes, Gallup, etc.  Again, too many to count.  I'd start there, since that's where I started.  And you did catch even your poll produced majority support for the war in Iraq.  Still don't want that do-over?  No biggie, you helped make my point, and its appreciated

[Religious Dick]

Strange RD...when I look at the archives of polls, like Rasmussen, Gallup, USA-Today, ABC News, etc., etc., etc, back when the war on terror began, they consistently demonstrated broad widespread SUPPORT.  1 ABC poll has Bush as the 3rd greatest President ever.  And even your Times' poll demonstrates MAJORITY support, as if that supposedly refutes my recollection.  Is their a reason your helping to make my point?

Oh, and it wasn't just Bush promoting Saddam's WMD.  That'd also include pretty much every Democrat when Clinton was promoting them, and pretty much every Eurpean country's leader and intelligence service doing the same, UN included.

Want a do-over?

No, I don't need a do-over. How about some links to those polls that you claim support your position?

They're in the archives of the polls I referenced.   There are a whole slew (if that's a word) of them, starting in '02.  Rasmussen, NYTimes, Gallup, etc.  Again, too many to count.  I'd start there, since that's where I started.  And you did catch even your poll produced majority support for the war in Iraq.  Still don't want that do-over?  No biggie, you helped make my point, and its appreciated

You stated support was "overwhelming". 54% is hardly overwhelming, it's barely a majority, and a majority well within the margin of error at that. And the links I listed include polls from NYTimes and Gallup, among others (but not Rasmussen).

Further, I follow the polls quite closely, and I have no recollection of any set of polls with a sufficient sample size to be considered an accurate representation to say any such thing.

If there are too many to count, why haven't you yet been able to produce a link to single one?

[Plane]

http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/transcripts/2003/mar/030304.liasson.html

[Plane]

   When Governor Barnes decided to change the Georgia flag , he knew that it was the right thing to do and he didn't care that he couldn't convince a majority of Georgians.

     He did the right thing spiting most Georgians and giving the governorship to a Republican for the first time since the Johnson administration.


       He went to Massituchets and was given a profile in courage award.

[Religious Dick]

http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/transcripts/2003/mar/030304.liasson.html

That's still not a poll, with data indicating sample size, margin of error, text of the questions asked, etc. It's a discussion of a poll. But even taking it a face value, it still indicates rather tepid support on the part of the public:

Support for President Bush's policy of using military force to get rid of Saddam Hussein is still strong. In the latest CNN-Gallup poll, 59 percent supported sending US troops to Iraq. In the latest CBS poll, 66 percent approved. But ask the question, `Should the US take military action fairly soon, or should it wait to give the UN inspectors more time,' and you get a more complicated answer. In the CBS poll, 62 percent say give the inspectors more time. In the CNN poll, 40 percent approve of going to war without UN approval, but that number jumps to 80 percent with another UN resolution. Keating Holland, the polling director at CNN, cautions that these polls are not necessarily a predictor of public opposition if the US proceeds without UN approval, as appears more and more likely.

And, IIRC, the US did indeed proceed without the UN approval public support was contingent on.

[Religious Dick]

   When Govenor Barnes ecided to change the Geogia flag , he knew that it was the right thing to do and he didn't care that he couldn't convince a majority of Georgians.

     He did the right thing spiting most Georgians and giveig the governorshi to a republicn for the first time since the Johnson administration.


       He went to Massituchets and was given a profile in couage award.

Get back to us when somebody nominates George Bush for a Profile In Courage Award.

Time has discredited minority opinions at least as often as it's vindicated them. At this point, I don't think there are many doubts left that history is going to do about as much for supporters of the Iraqi war as it has for supporters of the Vietnam war.

[Plane]

   When Govenor Barnes ecided to change the Geogia flag , he knew that it was the right thing to do and he didn't care that he couldn't convince a majority of Georgians.

     He did the right thing spiting most Georgians and giveig the governorshi to a republicn for the first time since the Johnson administration.


       He went to Massituchets and was given a profile in couage award.

Get back to us when somebody nominates George Bush for a Profile In Courage Award.

Time has discredited minority opinions at least as often as it's vindicated them. At this point, I don't think there are many doubts left that history is going to do about as much for supporters of the Iraqi war as it has for supporters of the Vietnam war.

I hereby nominate George Bush for a Profile in Courage award.

An awrd especially given for doing what yo are sure is the right thing , even when you are the only one.

[sirs]

I follow the polls quite closely, and I have no recollection of any set of polls with a sufficient sample size to be considered an accurate representation to say any such thing.

My recollection is obviously different, since I've been tracking them since the war on terror began, not just Iraq

If there are too many to count, why haven't you yet been able to produce a link to single one?

88% approve, so says ABC poll

I could keep posting them, but I'm sure you'll find some way to invalidate each and every one