Poll: Support For Bush’s Iraq Policy Edges Up
A new poll shows a small increase in support for President George Bush handling of the Iraq war — coming at a critical time when he’s trying to shore up Republican support and Democrats are pondering their next move.
The Wall Street Journal:
Public discontent with the Iraq war has slightly eased, increasing President Bush’s political maneuvering room at a critical point in debates over war costs and troop levels.
A new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll shows an uptick in support for the president’s handling of the war. As Mr. Bush prepares to follow Congressional testimony by top Iraq Gen. David Petraeus with a speech to the nation tonight, the proportion of Americans who believe the troop surge is helping and that victory remains possible has edged up.
These aren’t massive increases…but most likely enough for Bush to maintain his Congressional control on this issue:
Those shifts in public opinion remain modest, the Journal/NBC poll shows. Solid majorities continue to disapprove the president’s performance, say victory in Iraq isn’t possible and that the war hasn’t been worth its human and financial costs. Yet only one in four Americans say troops should leave now regardless of conditions on the ground.
That’s bad news for the Democrats.
It means if they clamor for an immediate exit (as many in the party’s base including the netroots want) they will be at odds with the bulk of Americans. And Republican strategists and the White House could try to accentuate that divide by maneuvering the Demmies into taking positions and seeking votes that put them at odds with the majority. MORE:
The slight improvement in Iraq sentiment followed extensive news coverage anticipating the testimony of Gen. Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker; the telephone survey of 1,002 adults was conducted Sept. 7-10, with the vast majority of interviews completed before their Monday testimony. The survey’s margin for error is 3.1 percentage points.
The Journal notes that this may be enough for Bush to consolidate his control over policy until the end of his term. The Democrats would need a two-thirds majority to force an accelerated troop pullout…the vote needed to override a certain Presidential veto. And, as the Journal notes, there are no signs of that happening:
The proportion of Americans who say the war remains winnable has edged up to 37% from 32% in July, while the majority who say it isn’t has diminished to 56% from 62%. The proportion saying the troop surge is helping the situation on the ground has risen to 33% from 29% in July and 24% in April.
The proportion saying the Iraq war has been worth the financial and human costs ticked up to 35% from 33% in July. Mr. Bush’s approval rating on Iraq is still paltry at 30%. But that’s up from 22% in July.
This isn’t a massive shift. But the name of the game is for Bush to keep his GOPers in Congress in line and deprive the Democrats of the big majority they need. And all signs now indicate that the General’s testimony and the way the White House has positioned itself and “spun” its position has done just that.
5 Responses to “Poll: Support For Bush’s Iraq Policy Edges Up”
Davebo, this is in part to what I was alluding to in the Eisenhower thread previously, as well as a man- on-the-street segment shown on the early evening news broadcast.
As far as partisan battling goes, this has had to be a frustrating three days for the anti-Bush group.
You had a lame duck President, hanging on the ropes in the 13th round and I suspect all the left/Dems salivated that this week would be the knock out blow. Now, not only is it clear there was no knockout blow delivered, but all things considered, it’s starting to look like Bush is actually getting the better of it.
From purely a political spectator’s standpoint, quite amazing.
Bush is suceeding in building a firewall from the Balkans to the Arabian sea. This is the real reason our army is in Iraq. We are keeping the Russians and the Chinese from having direct access to the largest know oil reserves in the world. He cannot say that, but he understands the average American much better than Noam Chomsky or Pat Buchanan. Americans will not give up their SUV’s or air conditioned shopping malls without a fight. All you foreign policy experts who think we can survive and thrive as isolationists are living in dreamland. You all want the stuff that being an empire brings, but decry the method. Grow up.
Most of this is Republicans coming home. They just like to hear optimistic talk of progress, just as they did during the bizarre “Strategy for Victory in Iraq” PR campaign in December 2005, which also produced an uptick in poll numbers (an even greater one than this, actually).
As a Democrat opposed to this war, I don’t fret this at all. There was never going to be a veto-proof majority to cut off the war, even if Petraeus showed up and said the security situation went completely backward since February. Too many Republicans will vote the way Bush tells them to.
That’s why I’ve never bought into the militant end-the-war campaign of Daily Kos. Sure, it’d be great to disengage the US from the Iraq catastrophe right away; we shouldn’t let more Americans die for a hopeless cause just so politicians can kick the can down the road and save face. But the way to do that is to change the narrative in Washington. And to do that, Democrats need to embrace the more moderate bills like the one floated by Lamar Alexander and Ken Salazar that imposes the Iraq Survey Group findings. Sure, it won’t end the war right away. And yes, it will give some political cover to Republicans who only recently discovered that America hates this war. But it will also help cement the movement in both political parties away from long-term commitment to an open-ended war. Once you go down that road you cannot turn back.
This nightmare just won’t stop. I agree with Elrod that the Democrats need to line up behind modest bils in order to lure more Republicans aboard. Actually, I favor modest and step by step drawdowns on principle, Republicans or no Republicans. I don’t think we should introduce changes abruptly, unless it becomes an emergency.
I’m wondering more and more, though, whether anything can succeed until after the next elections. With every new develpment in Iraq, there is a new reason for ‘staying the course’ claimed by the President. The reasons change, but the message is always the same: we have to stay in full force.
In thinking about the Crocker and Petraeus testimonies (they’ve given a number of TV interviews), I realize what a good sales job they did. While being charmingly modest about predicting successes, they’ve had no qualms about predciting exactly what terrible things would happen if the President doesn’t get his way about troop levels. It’s kind of odd, how sure they are about reading the tea leaves in one direction, while being so careful about reading them in another. (I’m not saying they’re dishonest; they’re just persoally invested in the success of their
jobs).
I pity the next president, who will inherit this mess.
I pity us, who will have to liive with years more of the same.
Jim Lehrer posted 10 more photos of the dead.
Er … anybody notice that virtually every “stat” cited falls within the margin of error?
Which means that the “conclusions ” reached are specious. The biggie: 31% to 33% in a 3.1% margin of error is meaningless. That OUGHT to be noticed as such by any educated reader.
And certainly by an educated REPORTER.