Not really too surprising, considering the mostly negative events that have transpired over the past couple of months. Most opinions on the war should have changed. I was just amazed that everybody changed their minds. Not one positive change in opinion among the entire group, and every change in opinion was statistically significant (more than -5%). I saw Lewis Black last night (he was hilarious, go see him if he's in your town) and he made an interesting observation. Obviously, we all know which direction he leans politically, but he does his best to insult everybody. Anyhow, here's the gist of what he had to say,"For the first time ever, we are having the discussion about going to war, whether we should go, etc... after the WAR HAS ALREADY HAPPENED!!!" A lot of the talk going on now is stuff we should have thought of before we launched "Shock and Awe" over Baghdad. And the question becomes, did they really have a plan for this? Did it enter into their minds that it would be this difficult? Did they expect Iraqis to embrace us like little kids embrace their parents after their first day of kindergarten? I mean, besides giving Haliburton all the oil contracts, did they really have a plan???
??? The "worth it" rating for college grads is -13%, which seems to be about the average across the board (maybe a little lower), what's significant about that? To me the biggest thing that stands out is that support among registered Democrats has dropped 30%, by far the biggest among any group (only people age 65 and older, whose support dropped 27%, even come close)--can we say "politicking"?
Also, note the people whose income is less than $20K. Same percentage as post-grads (43%). So does this mean that post grads earn less than 20K?
Here's another perspective: if you strip away the less than 20K income cohort, (presumably the least likely to vote), and everyone else in the other income groups who now say the was was "worth it" turn around and vote for Bush, guess what? The Democrats are crushed. Meanwhile, we have more than 12 months before the election. A lot can happend in 12 months, a whole lot. Right now, the media play on Iraq implies complete unadulterated choas, mayhem, and quagmire-dom. I doubt things there 12 months from now are going to be exactly like they are now. Even if at that point they are EXACTLY as they are now, Bush isn't doomed. IN either instance, it's the status of the economy that will have the most important impact on the election's outcome.
Re: Re: New War Poll on Bush unlike the 83% of republicans that still insist this illegal mess should get the thumbs up
This isn't about an upcoming election, oh wise politicker. It is about people losing faith in the justification of the Iraqi invasion and occupation. And winter starts in less than two months. Are the oil companies ready?
Re: Re: New War Poll on Bush This, from a political standpoint, is by far the biggest reason why Bush desperately wants to push through some sort of Medicare prescription benefit. Seniors, especially veterans of WWII and Korea, think he's awful on Iraq.
Re: Re: Re: New War Poll on Bush Yeah, but he could give out free white shoes to those over 70. He would then carry the senior vote.
Here is another interesting poll. http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...&u=/ap/20031102/ap_on_el_pr/divided_democrats Democrats Struggling vs Bush. One point was very interesting to me. It seems that more than 4 out of 10 registered democrats want to compromise more with Bush, while almost half of them want to compromise less. So, it is almost 50/50 with the democrats. Why is it that we only get the uncompromising half here in Big Soccer? Any democrats here who want to compromise with Bush? Maybe those who do are not soccer fans.
Re: Re: New War Poll on Bush What I think is interesting with those results is that the higher your level of eduction, the more you trend towards being against the war - both before and after. Also interesting that the under $30k groups have the least support for the war. Probably because they (and/or their kids) are the ones fighting.
Re: Re: Re: New War Poll on Bush Yes, but aside from people with post-grad education, there's little significant difference before the war (74% both for people with no college and some college, and 68% for college grads) and now it's actually 1% popular among college grads than among people who aren't college grads. Yep, this is one of the main things that makes me think we should institute some form of national service...
I actually agree with Alex on something! The draft! While the idea of a draft is scarey as hell for those of us who shudder at the idea of serving in the military ...I think the fact that it IS scarey for both potential draftees and their parents is the point. Maybe in the future, with a mandatory draft, our country and leaders will not be so eager to hit the drums of war and when they do maybe us, as citizens, will be more willing to ask their hard questions before the first bomb is dropped. If it means preventing another Iraq debacle than I am all for it!
Well, it works for Switzerland, I guess. But it didn't work in the US, when they had it. At least not in the way you intend it to work, as a deterrent. It didn't stop America from getting involved in wars. I think the only reason to bring back the draft would be if it was deemed to be necesary for national security. I hope we don't get to that point.
Re: Re: Re: New War Poll on Bush Uh, no. Those who graduated college have the highest level of support for the war, 55%. It's only the Post-Grads (i.e. The Idiots of Society) who oppose the war. Post Graduate school is where the incompetents of society hide out.
(1) With a mandatory draft it would be MUCH EASIER to start a war. The marginal cost of war would go down enormously. The political costs may go up a bit, but hardly to the extent you imagine. (2) The number of US soldiers killed is still fairly small, certainly in comparison with the millions of lives you wish to disrupt. (3) Quality vs. quantity. Soldiers who volunteer are more likely to be effective than those who are drafted. Of course, you assume that we'll never need to fight, but that's a dangerous gamble over the long-term.
Re: Re: Re: Re: New War Poll on Bush Sorry Ian, but the post-war numbers you are quoting are just 1% higher than that of some or no college - well within the margin of error. You can't make a definitive statement that one group is higher or lower than the other. However, you can make that statement about the pre-war (or early - whatever) numbers. Good to know that you think all of our highest gov't and corporate leaders are the "Idiots of Society".