Public Now More Optimistic About Iraq
By Alan Stewart Carl | Related entries in 2008 Election, Iraq, PollsA new Pew Research Poll shows 53% of Americans believe we will succeed in Iraq. That’s the highest percentage since the summer or 2006 and 11 points higher than last September. The percentage of people believing the war is going “very well†or “fairly well†has also jumped, from 30% six months ago to 48% now.
These numbers are unsurprising. They correspond to the two-thirds drop in troop deaths over the same period as well as the overall decrease in violence across Iraq and specifically in Baghdad. The question is, who benefits the most politically if the situation remains more stablized? Conventional wisdom holds that a less chaotic Iraq would lift the fortunes of John McCain and the Republican party because fewer voters would be demanding American withdrawal. However, greater stability would also give credence to the Democratic position that it’s time to begin our departure. And, better yet for the Democrats, they could frame such a policy as pragmatic and practical, rather than having to walk so close to the surrender/defeatist line.
What happens in Iraq between now and November will influence and could very well determine the outcome of the election. Whether we see continued progress towards stability (a goal we should all be rooting hard for) or a return to violence, how the candidates address the evolving situation and changing facts will tell us a lot about their ability to manage the conflict as president. I don’t care where you sit on the political spectrum, what we want is a president who can make policy based on the reality of the situation not the ideology of their party or the fluctuation in the polls.
This entry was posted on Thursday, March 13th, 2008 and is filed under 2008 Election, Iraq, Polls. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
March 13th, 2008 at 11:53 am
Surely you are kidding yourselves here? The Democrats have bet the farm that Iraq will keep getting worse. Likewise, McCain has staked everything on it remaining stable.
If it gets much worse again, whoever the Dem candidate is will have “I told you so” rights (Obama more than Clinton, but at that stage it won’t matter). If it keeps improving, McCain will rightly claim that he stood up for the surge when everyone considered it political suicide to do so.
A final note: What do you mean when you say “Ideology”? Are you suggesting that candidates not have high ideals? Is it wrong to have an ideology that the poor should be fed? Should we avoid an ideology of taking care of our environment? Unfortunately, we have managed to take a perfectly good word – one that has actual meaning – and reduced it to mere marketing lingo.
Apply your leadership concepts to how Churchill managed the war against Germany. Analyze his “Never Surrender” speech against your advise. Leaders do what they believe is right, even when it is very unpopular.
March 13th, 2008 at 11:58 am
Dozens more dead today as car bombs go off in Iraq
March 13th, 2008 at 12:27 pm
You really need to stop reading the politico.
A more appropriate poll would be the USA Today/Gallup (released today) that asks:
Which would be better for the United States?
Keep a significant number of troops in Iraq until the situation there gets better: 35%
Set a timetable for removing troops and stick to it regardless of what is going on in Iraq: 60%
From here:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/03/13/politico/
March 13th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
How can anyone assign 53% to something that has never been defined? Just what – exactly – is success in Iraq? This is just BS – and more BS – it’s like that never ending war from “1984″.
March 13th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
Pew is a reputable polling source. I think it’s reasonable to assume they’re data is decent — anyway, I’m more concerned with the trend than the actual percentage who believe this or that.
As for Doug’s comments — hold on, you’re taking this FAR beyond the point of this post and inferring all kinds of things that aren’t implied. My use of the word “ideology” just meant that some politicians have a tendancy to continue hold on to certain beliefs even if the facts no longer support them.
Also, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to think stablitiy in Iraq could favor the Dems. I reject that they have to hope for people to die in order to prove their point.
March 13th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
3,987 of our fighting men and women are now dead in Iraq. 12 in the last week. What political progress has been made? Well, before last week, I too was optimistic. After all, it would be wonderful if this mess could be resolved and Iraq became a shining light of democracy for the Iraqi people and for us. Some real political progress had been made — it wasn’t a great deal, but it was something. What happened last week? The Iraqi Supreme Court struck all of that progress down as against the Iraqi Constitution — apparently, the Court was afraid that the progress in question would benefit Moqtada Al Sadri (spelling?) too much. There wasn’t a real question of unconstitutionality. Now what?
Also, the number of civilians dying in Iraq has doubled in March from January. Something bad is stirring again. I am reading that although Moqtada Al Sadri agreed to extend the truce, he doesn’t really have control anymore. The Iraqi people still want us out and now according to every poll. And finally, 12 of our troops were lost last week.
I know the media is busy focusing on the election and most people aren’t following what is actually happening in Iraq. But I am. I hope it will get better again and I hope the recent signs there do not reflect a downward trend. However, we need to stay realistic about this. We cannot police a civil war forever.
March 13th, 2008 at 9:37 pm
I wouldn’t be surprised to see the Dems (or at least Clinton) start supporting the war and change her buzzwords from “change” to “victory”.