Upcoming Iraq Report Will Be Mistrusted, Poll Finds
How bad is the Bush administration’s credibility problem? This bad:
A majority of Americans don’t trust the upcoming report by the Army’s top commander in Iraq on the progress of the war and even if they did, it wouldn’t change their mind, according to a new poll.
President Bush frequently has asked Congress — and the American people — to withhold judgment on his so-called troop surge in Iraq until Gen. David Petraeus, the commander in Iraq, and Ryan Crocker, U.S. ambassador to Iraq, issue their progress report in September.
But according to a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll released Thursday, 53 percent of people polled said they suspect that the military assessment of the situation will try to make it sound better than it actually is. Forty-three percent said they do trust the report.
CNN Polling Director Keating Holland said he doesn’t think the mistrust is directed at Petreaus as much as it is what he represents.
Holland said, “I suspect most people are hearing the words ‘general’ and ‘Iraq’ and that’s what they’re basing their opinion on.”
He added, “It does seem to indicate that anyone associated with the Bush administration may be a less than credible messenger for the message that there is progress being made in Iraq.”
There’s another big factor now leading to the likelihood that this report will be disbelieved by a large chunk of the American population that can’t be labeled cut and runners or Democrats. And it got a lot of publicity. The Washington Post’s Dan Froomkin:
The “Petraeus Report” — the supposedly trustworthy mid-September reckoning of military and political progress in Iraq by Army Gen. David H. Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker — is instead looking more like a White House con job in the making.
The Bush administration has been trying for months to restore its credibility on Iraq (as well as stall for time) by focusing on Petraeus — President Bush’s “main man” in Iraq — and his report to Congress. But now it turns out it that White House aides will actually write the “Petraeus Report,” not the general himself.
This means that the report is going to be released and it is now predictable what is going to happen.
If Petraeus himself totally wrote it, or at least appeared to, there are some Americans who might even against their other inclinations give him the benefit of the doubt if the report indicated signs of progress due to the “surge” coupled with a “let’s hang in there” message.
But the fact that it now is going to be written by the Bush administration means it will only be embraced and pointed to by those who already strongly defend the war and by people such as conservative talk show hosts and Fox News commentators. Democrats will likely reject it out of hand. Independent voters and those who once supported the war but feel it has been hideously mismanaged and that it’s time now to declare a visible end-game will distrust it and consider it one more White House effort to manipulate and buy time.
In other words, it’ll wind up being one more Bush administration document in a government that increasingly seems to be of the base, by the base and for the base — often acting to dole out information to give supporters debating talking points support and ignoring the wishes of its critics and other Americans who seek information from sources other than folks with a political agenda.
Meanwhile, in Congress, a report written by the White House is unlikely to give Republicans running for re-election and facing increasingly angry voters the support they will need to “stay the course” and continue to strongly back the White House. A report written by Petraeus himself had been what they were expecting to get.
The seemingly solidified skepticism on the war that the poll reflects will not be melted by yet another Bush administration report that says to voters “Trust us when we tell you these are the facts. When have we ever misled you before?”
16 Responses to “Upcoming Iraq Report Will Be Mistrusted, Poll Finds”
If it’s already going to be mistrusted just wait until people find out it was written by the White House and not the general himself, those numbers will skyrocket.
The question is obvious, if they have no reason to manipulate the report, why not just let the general himself make it? Mind you, they could still manipulate a report written by the general, or simply make clear to him that a bad result is not an option, but writing it directly?
They just don’t care anymore, do they? I mean, they’ve always shown little interest in public opinion, but this is just laughable. It’s not the Petraus report, it’s the White House report on Iraq! Geez, they could at least TRY to make it look honest. Fine, we wouldn’t believe it anyway, but the GALL is insulting all by itself.
This adminstration has so overcooked the books it’s not funny.
And I mistrust any poll that asks 1 question of the entire sample (do you support war or not?) and then goes on to ask all the other questions……including the one you choose to highlight……..of only 1/2 the sample?
Now that is the lack of credibility pot labeling the kettle.
And what’s with the link which is purportedly to the “complete results” of the poll, which leads one to a PDF file of poll results for 5 out of apparently at least 32 questions?
Mmmm…thanks for the cherries, CNN!
OMG – Could this administration put it’s own interests and beliefs above everyone else. They didn’t screw their own party by getting rid of Rummy after a bad election, did they?
Yes, of course, all sane people would logically believe that the progress report should come directly from Petraeus, not from the Administration.
But, exactly where did this half-baked notion of calling for an “administration” report on progress?………….can we dare mention it was the Democrat controlled Congress that specified this?
If Petraeus himself totally wrote it, or at least appeared to, there are some Americans who might even against their other inclinations give him the benefit of the doubt if the report indicated signs of progress due to the “surge†coupled with a “let’s hang in there†message.
But the fact that it now is going to be written by the Bush administration means it will only be embraced and pointed to by those who already strongly defend the war and by people such as conservative talk show hosts and Fox News commentators. Democrats will likely reject it out of hand.
It was ALWAYS supposed to be written by the White House. Does no one know how to do basic freaking research anymore, or does it just get in the way of the preferred truthiness? Because the CNN article contains outright falsehoods, and you’ve reinforced them wholesale without ever checking the relevant source material.
You ARE aware that the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans’ Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007, aka PUBLIC LAW 110–28 as passed by the Democratic majority Congress and signed into law, REQUIRES that said report be made by the White House, and not by Petraeus and Crocker? See Title III, Section 1314, for bleep’s sake.
Essentially you (and CNN, and Froomkin, and a host of others) are ranting and complaining and demagogin’ that the White House is doing EXACTLY what the Democratic majority Congress required them by law to do., and holding that up as some kind of example of devious perfidy and corruption on the part of the White House.
GMAFB.
CS, your query led me to do some further searching for “the missing pages”.
Lo and behold, you may well have stumbled into another Rathergate by CNN.
Jules Crittenden has your answer……..
LOL…so do we ever get to see the ‘complete results’? I didn’t see a link on Jules’ post but not sure if I missed something.
Honestly, I don’t think I’ve ever seen that technique used. Ask 32 (or more, who knows?) questions, but only publish the ones that support your narrative. It’s one thing when an article ABOUT a poll uses cherry picking like that, but I think this is the first time I’ve seen a news agency have the gall to actually withhold most of the data…which begs the question, why?
And when you ask one question to lead off, then decide to ask your further questions only after they have provided an answer to your first question……I think my college statistics professor would take umbridge at the potential for misleading bias……not that we could accuse CNN of such a possible bias.
I’ll keep looking for the full set of questions…….it may be subject to “subscription only” rights for the moment.
Here’s what Congress passed, and the President signed:
(A) The President shall submit an initial report, in classified and unclassified format, to the Congress, not later than July 15, 2007, assessing the status of each of the specific benchmarks established above, and declaring, in his judgment, whether satisfactory progress toward meeting these benchmarks is, or is not, being achieved.
(B) The President, having consulted with the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Commander, Multi-National Forces Iraq, the United States Ambassador to Iraq, and the Commander of U.S. Central Command, will prepare the report and submit the report to Congress.
(C) If the President’s assessment of any of the specific benchmarks established above is unsatisfactory, the President shall include in that report a description of such revisions to the political, economic, regional, and military components of the strategy, as announced by the President on January 10, 2007. In addition, the President shall include in the report, the advisability of implementing such aspects of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group, as he deems appropriate.
(D) The President shall submit a second report to the Congress, not later than September 15, 2007, following the same procedures and criteria outlined above.
Is there any lack of clarity as to whom Congress tasked to prepare and submit the report? Anyone surprised that the report is being prepared by the White House, with the input of appropriate officials in Iraq and throughout the Executive Branch?
If it is such a surprise then you obviously didn’t even bother to read the supplemental bill.
If you are surprised, it is on YOU, not the admin.
Sickening how many times the same false indignation is being expressed around the blogosphere.
Where was this indignation when the bil was passed with THAT EXACT WORDING?
Amazing.
Leave it to the Democrats to allow Bush to grade his own test and then complain when he gives himself all A’s.
Actually it was quite a smart political move for the Dems to do that, Nic, since the media eagerly bites on the “anonymous Congressional aid” sources who start complaining that Bush has decided to write the report himself, without checking the facts…
And the blogosphere gobbles up the media reports and regurgitates them….
And the readers swallow it and shake their head with righteous indignation.
Everyone has played their assigned roles, to a T.
The poll takers didn’t call me, so I offer here what my response would have been.
I have reached the point of being sceptical about anything the administration claims.
I would also be sceptical about anything news outlets or blogs report that the admistration has claimed.
Note that the anonymous “senior Congressional aides” are NOT anonymous to the media. They know who they talked to.
[...] The Moderate Voice is yet another blog that obviously didn’t read the original bill. But the fact that it now is [...]