Latest Poll Shows White House Clout On Iraq Further Eroded
Coming on the heels of a Los Angeles Times report indicating that the Pentagon wants “to “double down” in [Iraq] with a substantial buildup in American troops, an increase in industrial aid and a major combat offensive against Muqtada Sadr, the radical Shiite leader impeding development of the Iraqi government,” a new poll underscores a bit of a problem:
The White House’s political clout is shrinking by the day:
As the White House searches for a way to move forward in Iraq after the midterm elections and the Iraq Study Group’s recent recommendations, the American public has grown increasingly pessimistic that the war there can be won, the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll finds.Nearly seven in 10 respondents say they feel less confident the war will come to a successful conclusion. What’s more, two-thirds believe the United States is already doing all it can to reduce the violence there. And a majority even says the U.S. doesn’t have an obligation to killed or wounded American soldiers to remain in Iraq until the mission there is completed.
“For the public, there is no confidence left,” says Democratic pollster Peter D. Hart, who conducted this survey with Republican Bill McInturff. “It is just not going to happen — that we’re not going to be victorious, that we’re not going to be able to stay the course, that we’re not going to be able to have a successful conclusion to the war.”
Will Bush and his new Secretary of Defense Robert Gates essentially not read the 2006 mid-term election results as indicating a growing public sentiment for signs of a “light at the end of the tunnel” in Iraq?
It’s still too early tell. Perhaps Bush and Gates won’t opt for an increase in troops. But if they do, it is increasingly clear that they will battle a political pincer comprised of opposition from Democrats (who now control Congress partly because of public souring on the war) and from Republican political survivors (who saw their colleagues go down in defeat partially because of the war and would like to remain in Washington a bit longer themselves).
The tantalizing question: was Vice President Dick Cheney stating actual policy when he told ABC News before the election:
Cheney said that even with pollsters predicting that Democrats would likely make gains in both houses of Congress Tuesday, voter sentiment would not influence Bush’s Iraq policy.“It may not be popular with the public — it doesn’t matter in the sense that we have to continue the mission and do what we think is right. And that’s exactly what we’re doing,” Cheney said. “We’re not running for office. We’re doing what we think is right.”
Several problems facing the White House should it decide to actually boost the number of troops and go for a huge spending boost on the war:
- The conventional wisdom (which you could also call “consensus”) matters in American politics. And the conventional wisdom immediately after the elections was that the vote was the public sending the administration a message, partially on the war.
- There was enormous hype about the Iraq Study Group, its members, and how it could help provide a blueprint to a graceful U.S. exit from Iraq. If there’s a big boost in troops, lots more spending and no sign of any kind of timetable indicating the beginning of a wind down, many Americans (of both and no parties) will perceive this as meaning the administration basically brushed the Study Groups’ findings aside. Given the polls, election results, prevailing Democratic party sentiment and unease within the Republican party itself, this will enmesh the White House in more debilitating political controversies and perhaps send a message abroad that it’s not a political lame duck White House but a politically dead duck White House.
Is the stage set between a large portion of Congress (including some Republicans) and an increasingly antsy and irritated public opinion against the White House? The answer should emerge within weeks…
9 Responses to “Latest Poll Shows White House Clout On Iraq Further Eroded”
The president is going to get a rude awakening about where he really draws his real power from. He thinks his word is law when it comes to the use of military force, but our system is not so rigid. We have checks against serious, long-term incompetence. The public, the Congress and now major portions of the military brass see his actions as risking national security, and unless he honestly responds to those concerns, he will force a confrontation that he cannot win. If he continues on this blind path, he’ll find himself with no power at all.
Sry, OT again (but what’s missing here are open threads), but you showed an interest in other people’sd views about centrists, joe. This is from a commenter at poor Ann Althouse’s place:
johnstodderinexile said…
“A centrist is a person whose political views lie between those of left-wingers and right-wingers. Such a person could be one who falls in the middle because they believe in polite compromise, or one who views the Republicans and Democrats as two evils and struggles to determine which, in any given election, is the lesser.
Thanks, but no thanks. This is a lousy definition of a centrist, obviously written by a true-believing ideologue.
How about: A centrist views each political issue separately, rather than taking direction from political opinion thugs of the right, left, or any political party.
Or how about: A centrist is one who agrees with the liberals’ goal to of the common man’s general welfare, but thinks most of their strategies to do so are either stupid or corrupted by special interests.”
I vote for the second definition
Bush won’t sign on to anything that makes it appear he is not achieving victory in Iraq. What is so sad, is that most Americans stopped believing this was a possibility a long time ago. The ISG’s findings only identified the elephant in the room. It is sickening that our troops are over in Iraq, caught in a civil war, and are dying due to one man’s inability to admit his policy has been a failure. The only hope is that congressional Republicans will join their Democratic colleagues in urging him to face the reality of the situation, and negotiate a way out.
Good job democrats. They did an absolutely Amazing job along with the press in destroying any credible reason for being in Iraq.
The Republicans had their heads handed to them on a platter this election by a bunch of Democrats that could NOT get elected on their own issues so they had to make an issue.
We all know that issue was…..We voted for Invading Iraq…..however thats not gonna get us put back in power so what do we do to get in power again??? I know lets pull out the antiwar card and pretend that we were duped by GWB and his own person intelligence agency.
GOOD JOB Democrats. Americans love you for your lying, cheating ways. We have come to accept lies and distortions of the truth as the way, the truth and the light in Americas political landscape……..How sad for us.
Ther WAS NEVER a credible reason to “be in Iraq”.
Good job republicans and Brownie and Rummy….
We NEVER VOTED FOR INVADING IRAQ with the real intellegence….not even the real truth.
GOD JOB republicans for yet another BRAIN DEAD failure.
You cannot deflect the blame. The truth is out. The election is over and it is pretty damn clear that YOU failed that too.
But please, keep falling on your face, and, running in circles, and getting our kids killed for nothing you friggen idiots.
“GOOD JOB Democrats. Americans love you for your lying, cheating ways. We have come to accept lies and distortions of the truth as the way, the truth and the light in Americas political landscape……..How sad for us.”
Now, stop whining, pls. OK, Dems beat the Greedy Ole Party at their own game. But still, historians won’t forget who originally developed this innovative new approach on marketing bad politics. Yes, it’s been the republicans who invented selling “lies and distortions of the truth as the way, the truth and the light in Americas political landscape”. That can’t be taken away from you!
Gray62
You offer just hate rhetoric against my restatement of fact…and you are happy with yourself?
Thanks for making my point. Sorry the truth hurts.
You can’t fight a prolonged war based on a lie-sooner or later the truth surfaces, and when it does, the public stops supporting it. With a Republican majority in Congress, and the “Hammer” maintaining party discipline, the GOP almost had it made. Congressional Republicans viewed themselves as the administration’s lieutenants, not as a separate branch loyal to the Constitution.
Few investigations were held, GW was given carte blanche for 3 1/2 years to fight his war. When the media had the temerity to report the true picture of the dismal results, they were attacked for their liberal-leaning bias. FNC and the am radio crowd were the administrations’ outposts, spreading its -propaganda er message at every turn. It all held together for a while. Until Abu Ghraib, and leaks about secret prisons and warrantless wiretaps. Then the president’s right hand men were embroiled in court action- Rove in the CIA leak case, Delay in a redistricting case, headed by Texas prosecutor Ronnie Earle. The house of cards continued to fall with resignations of 3 other House members, and the unprecedented revolt of the Generals against Rumsfeld.
So, blame the Democrats all you like, but there were many forces at work in changing public opinion towards this war. Only 21% now approve of the Chimp-in-chief’s handling of Iraq. Does that mean the other 70%+ are Democrats?
Kim Ritter says:
Amen, Kim! This is one man with some serious Daddy issues. He can’t admit his mistakes because it would show that his Daddy was right to not depose Saddam after the Gulf War and that he was wrong, especially when he was using deposing Saddam to show that he was “better than Daddy”. Sadly, he also won’t take any of the political cover the ISG report could offer him because everytime Daddy (here in the form of James Baker) saves his bacon, he feels emasculated (not that he’s ever turned down the help previously in his life). There were times I thought that Bush was insane (particulary when trying to do the same thing over and over and expecting different results) but now I figure the man is just needs some intense therapy.