According to an ABC News/Washington Post poll, support for Dubya and his little war continues to slip.
56% of those asked now believe that the cost of the war outweighs the benefits and is not worth it.
57% disapprove of the way that Bush is handling the situation in Iraq.
53% disapprove of the way that Rumsfeld is doing his job.
52% believe that Rumsfeld should be replaced.
Fewer than half believe there has been significant progress towards restoring order. But 60% believe that the elections should take place in as scheduled in January, and 58% believe we should remain there until order is restored.
Bush’s approval rating on Iraq is down to 42%.
The margin of error is 3%.
I wonder where all of these people were during the election? What suddenly opened their eyes? And I keep reminding myself that Time’s Person Of The Year title is given to the person who has the largest impact — for good or ill.
feed for comments on this post.
Subscribe to blog
To whom it may concern:
I just got back from IRAQ. I have been in Mosul and Bagdad for almost 9 months. So I beleive I can speak with great athourity on your dilema regarding the Presidents approval ratings.
You must understand that the news agencie(s) that conducted this poll have a clear agenda against the president and the policies toward the war on terror.
So they (ABC/Washington Post) conduct a poll (using north eastern USA demographics) that show the statisitics which you mention. If the truth about the actual progress in Iraq were to be broadcast with the same enthusiasm as the negative aspects of this war were you would have a different perspective on this war.
Here is the truth:
As of 1 October this year.
We (US Military/government)have liberated approx 50to 75 million souls.
The US Military and contracted agencies provided (for the first time) over 16 million public and private telephone circuits (both cellular and copper)
WE created the ability for schools, hospitals and soon private residents to access the internet via MSNBC (Ironic isn’t it).
WE built 275 additional Schools (there were under 100 prior to the war).
Established countless farms and ranches which to feed the populace. There were no ranches and farms prior to the liberation of IRAQ.
Iraqi Oil exploration and sale has yeilded a surplus for their new economy (thank you Haliburton).
US Authorities have trained nearly 60 thousand men and women to be law enforcement officers.
US coalition forces have built a 250 thousand person Iraqi Army which is successful and improving as a force.
Established nearly 100 local governmental agencies in which to protect and enrich the Iraqi peoples lives.
Built and in some cases re-built 80 hospitals.
Yes, I know many American men and Women have died over there. Many more will die I am sad to say before this is all over.
It must be clearly understood that we (USA) must end the threat of terrorism now and it must take American blood.
On Sept 11 2001 not quite a dozen terrorists proved they they can do us great harm in a magnitude that we still do not understand. Iraq was a haven of intra terrorist activity for many years. Do you remember what the last administration did about terrorism? Answer: Nothing.
All the Clinton administration wanted to do was arrest them and put them on trial. I would like either the Washington Post and or ABC news name one terrorist that has been successfully tried and found guilty of a terrorist crime during the Clinton years. Answer: Nobody.
USA and coalition forces will defeat the terrorists who are curretly attacking progress for a free IARQ and a free and safe world.
None accomplishments I have mentioned ever gets reported by the MSM (Main Stream Media) I hope this puts things in perspective.
1Remark from Phil — Tuesday, 12/21/2004 @ 12:38 PM
Thank you for commenting and thank you for your service.
You need to understand that, while I support our troops and the men and women who are part of our military, I do not support either this President or this war.
During the Clinton administration, terrorist attacks included the Oklahoma City bombing, the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, the 1998 bombing of the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania and the 2000 bombing of the US Navy destroyer Cole in Yemen. The Clinton administration actively pursued investigation of these incidents, and these were the results:
Oklahoma City: Michael Fortier was sentenced to 12 years and fined $200,000 in 1998, Timothy McVeigh was sentence to death in 1997 and executed in 2001. Terry Nichols was convicted in federal court in 1997 and sentenced to life in prison.
1993 WTC: 6 Islamic extremists were convicted in 1997 and 1998 and sentenced to 240 years in prison each.
Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania Embassies: Mohamed Rashed Daoud Al-Owhali, Mohammed Odeh, Wadih el Hage, and Khalfan Khamis Mohamed were sentenced in 2001 to life imprisonment without parole.
USS Cole: On September 29, 2004, a Yemeni judge sentenced Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri and Jamal al-Badawi to death. Ibrahim Hussein Abdel Hadi Eidarous and Adel Mohanned Abdul Almagid Bary were arrested in London in 1999 by Scotland Yard by request of the U.S. and were extradicted. Khalid al Fawwaz, a Saudi dissident living in London since 1994, was ordered to be extradicted to the U.S. He remains in custody in London pending an appeal. Anas Al-Liby was captured in Afghanistan in 2002. Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani is believed to have been captured in Pakistan in 2004. Mohammed Atef was indicted on November 4, 1998 for his role in orchestrating the attacks. He is reported to have been killed during the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan.
So, of the 21 conspirators in the 5 terrorist attacks:
— 12 were arrested and dealt with during the Clinton administration,
— 4 were arrested during the Clinton administration but not sentenced until the Bush administration,
— 3 were arrested during the Bush administration,
— the whereabouts of one is in question and
— one is presumed dead.
Regarding your statement:
There’s a whole lot of “nobody” there.
Clinton also signed into law the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, which was primarily a response to the Oklahoma City bombings.
As to the polling methods and standards followed by ABC, you can read about them here. For this particular poll, a total of 1,004 randomly selected Americans were interviewed. The margin of sampling error for the results is +-3%.
But, even if ABC used skewed methods as you allege, the new results show a drop in public opinion when compared with earlier poll results. If you assume that the new sampling is skewed, then you must also assume the prior sampling to be skewed since they came from the same source. The end result is still a lowering of public opinion regarding the Iraq war, Rumsfeld and Bush from one sample to the next.
This poll showed 53% approve of the Bush administration record on terrorism and 43% do not. One year ago the numbers were 70% approval and 28% disapproval. That is quite a shift and is way outside the margin of error.
The polls still shows that a majority — 58% — believe that now that we are in there, we are going to have to stay until order is restored. Those of us old enough to remember Vietnam have misgivings.
And the question we should be asking is not just are we doing some good there?, but should we be there in the first place?
According to the 9/11 Commission Report:
In other words, before invading Afghanistan, the Bush administration was already aware the Iraq was not involved in the 9/11 attack. And weapons of mass distruction have been conspicuous only in their absense. I have no trust for a President who would pull the country into a war on premises he knew to be false.
2Remark from Judy — Tuesday, 12/21/2004 @ 5:08 PM
You are wrong.
1) The terrorists that you state that are doing “240 years in prison each” never did a single day of time here in the USA. Name the prison they are in. You can’t because they are not here in the US. Your info is incomplete and or wrong. In fairness you do not have the info I have. Essentially many of those have disappeared into the European court system as you stated.
The Clinton administration was unsuccessful at every facet of fighting terrorism. After the Yemen bombing OBL (Osama Bin Laden) was in custody in Yemen. Clinton did not act. WE would pay for it later.
You are right on this:
The OKC bombers were dealt with accordingly. That is only because they were domestic terrorists. I know a terrorist is a terrorist.
2) I am an US Army intelligence officer (COL) and it was one of my jobs in OIF to ensure that the correct info got to the press on a daily basis. In other words nothing too sensitive could be released. I hold a degree in Journalism (Stanford 82). While I applaud your party line version of how polls work (which is what the news agencies want you to hear) you are sadly ignorant of how they (in this case ABC, Washington Times) derive their results. Based on demographics -they usually use men/women & or republican/democrat- the results are given a specific weight prior to the poll. The POLLSTER DECIDES HOW TO WEIGHT THE RESULTS BEFORE THEY CONDUCT THE POLL! Zogby pointed this out after the 04 election. In essence the pollsters deliberately find the 1000 or so souls to poll and out of that number determine their results based on the demographic of each individual called. In other words they throw out those that do not fit their pre-established demographic profile. I know this because I worked for the San Francisco Chronicle during the first Reagan Administration in 1981 and I assisted the staff pollster in conducting several local polls on the election. Surely you remember the exit polls on Nov 2, 2004 and how wrong they were. If you were to conduct a pure (pure entails no weight for demographics) national poll of 100,000 Americans on whether or not they support the Presidents prosecution of the war on terror you would have a near 65% approval rating in Bush’s favor. Do you know how I know this? He got reelected! President Bush held true to his convictions regarding the war on terror and he won. The purpose of the poll you cite is to erode confidence in the President and the decision to prosecute the war on terror. It’s that simple.
3) I find it tragic that many like you cite the “I support the troops but not the war” gag. I know this comes from the Vietnam days when some people would spit on men coming home from Vietnam. To quell those stigma liberals recently came up with the mantra “I support the troops but not the war.” There is one problem though. There is no longer a draft. That alone makes that tired old statement irrelevant. Contrary to untrue BS (Air America Radio) the men and women prosecuting this war are not drafted and they are not forced at gunpoint by President Bush, VP Cheney, Don Rumsfeld and or Halliburton to serve and fight for their country. We want to do this because we understand the stakes involved. We never want to see another 9/11 again. The US Military intends on killing terrorists overseas before they get to our shores. Remember we have been dealing with this threat (Iraq/OSAMA/Iran) for over 25 years prior to OIF (Operation Iraqi Freedom). Telling everyone you support the troops and not the war is a cute politically correct way of not sounding anti-American. Nice try but that dog doesn’t hunt.
If you truly support the troops which are the Soldiers, Sailors, Marines Airman (here-to-fore known as War Fighters) stationed in OIF than you have to support the war because War Fighters prosecute/execute the war. Side note: It seems to me that the media/public ACLU, etc is still trying to indict a young Marine for shooting a “dead Iraqi” while fighting in fallusha…… so much for supporting the troops.
In any event there would be no war with out us. War Fighters support the POTUS (President of the United States) in the objectives he has outlined on the war on terror. War Fighters perform those activities which shall accomplish the POTUS objectives. POTUS does not tell us how to fight the war. He commands military leaders to achieve those objectives he has outlined with approval from his administration and Congress. Fleet, Air, Division, Brigade and Battalion commanders lead War Fighters in the prosecution/execution of the war. President Bush does not do what President Johnson did during Vietnam which was to personally instruct Generals where to Bomb in North Vietnam. We the War Fighter determine how to prosecute the war.
If you do support us (War Fighters) in ensuring we return home safe than logic would prevail that you support every terrorist we kill in Iraq. Ergo you support the war. Don’t blame Bush or Rumsfeld for the prosecution/execution phase of this war (which is what everyone is all fired up about) War Fighters are doing that. POTUS is responsible for the decision to conduct the war and the results after.
Remember, You cannot have it both ways. Either you are against us or you are for us. There is no in between. Chose!
4) Regarding your assertion that Iraq had no involvement in 9/11and or with Al Qaeda consider this one small example:
In May 03 we recovered 12 tons of explosives that were held by Al Qaeda operatives who were sent back to Allah in a fire fight outside of Kandahar AFG. The lot numbers of the explosives and the weapons (300 AKMS rifles and 150 anti tank weapons) were traced back to a warehouse that was captured in Tikrit Iraq just weeks earlier. This is just one example out of hundreds which prove the relationship between Iraq and Osama Bin Laden. Oh, speaking of WMD in that raid we recovered nearly a thousand hollow/empty 120 MM mortar rounds. The inside coating of these rounds were made of a ceramic materiel. When we swabbed the interiors of the ceramic lining we found traces of a unidentifiable Bio Toxin i.e gas. In other words they were emptied prior to our arrival. That info never got beyond pen of the Reuters news service people that were at the scene.
You see WAR FIGHTERS here on the ground in SWA (South West Asia) see and witness events you are not going to hear about from the press because they are anti-American and anti-Bush.
5) The 9/11 report is pure unfiltered bullshit. I have read all of it. It is a bipartisan back patting session/document designed to please and protect everyone say for those that made the ultimate sacrifice. It is 9/11s Warren report. Get real. I have spent 9 months in Afghanistan and 9 months in Iraq. Not one member of either house in Congress has spent one day in the areas I have been in to include David Kay. Most of Kay’s derived information was based on the fact that he did not personally find a WMD on the launch pad ready to fire so anything less was discounted as circumstantial.
6) You seem to have a grasp on current events. Here is a challenge for you if you have the courage to pursue it: Between 1998 and 2002 in violation of several UN sanctions (a fact that the western media seemed to ignore) Iraq exported over 11 million tons of explosives, ordnance and light infantry weapons out of country. General Muhammad Al Gaza (A captured Iraqi officer) confessed that he was in charge of the depot which sent this materiel to unknown origins world wide. How about checking to see where all of that went??
Bottom line Iraq was knee deep in the terrorism business 9/11 not withstanding.
3Remark from Phil — Wednesday, 12/22/2004 @ 8:52 AM
1) You are wrong. Ramzi Yousef and Eyad Ismoil are currently serving their 240 years each in the Supermax prison in Colorado. This prison also houses Ted Kaczynski, Terry Nichols and at one time housed Timothy McVeigh. I don’t know about Mohammed Salameh, Nidal Ayyad, Mahmoud Abouhalima and Ahmad Mohammad Ajaj (the others convicted of the 1993 WTC bombing). But in the absense of evidence that they are not in the US, then I am assuming they are also serving time in that or similar facilities. Don’t know what info you think you have, but it doesn’t appear to be too complete.
Those who were convicted in foreign courts of crimes committed on foreign soil and who have not been extradited to the US are, of course, out of the hands of US justice. That’s the way the law works. Foreigners in the US who are convicted of crimes here are likewise out of the hands of their home country’s justice system unless we agree to extradite them.
Osama bin Laden was already in Afghanistan when the Cole was bombed in Yemen. He had been in Sudan in 1996, and the Sudanese officials had offered to deport him to Saudi Arabia but the Saudis rejected the plan despite Clinton administration pressure. The US did not have enough evidence for his indictment at that time and dropped plans to capture him.
2) I understand very well how polls work. I applaud your degree in journalism, but wonder if your studies included training in statistics and probability? If you want to know how ABC derives its results, read the info at the link I provided before. It thoroughly discusses their methods of randomization, weighting, etc., and why they use those methods. For what it’s worth, my former college roommate also has a degree in journalism, has worked for newspapers and is a published author. But she couldn’t analyze a set of statistics if her life depended on it.
You totally ignored my statement:
I’m not sure where you get your idea that an approval rating of 65% could be derived from the election results. Bush won 51% of the popular vote, not 65%. So there are already 49% of the voting populace that don’t have a lot of confidence in him. Bush was re-elected by the narrowest popular-vote margin for an incumbent since Woodrow Wilson in 1916. That’s hardly a mandate. And, other than Bush’s stand on Iraq, only a small percentage of his supporters actually know what his stand is on any of various other issues.
3) You can find it tragic if you want, but that’s how I feel. And I remember Vietnam all too well, and I remember the “welcome” that returning troops received. You would do well to remember it also. Those who do not remember history are doomed to repeat it.
As to it being a “cute politically correct way of not sounding anti-American,” nice try but no cigar. This country was founded on our right to disagree with our government. Accusing those who express dissenting opinions with being “anti-American” or in league with terrorists is, well… un-American. It’s a transparent ruse used by the current administration in a blatant and misguided attempt to keep dissenters quiet. Kill dissent and build a theocracy – not my idea of a good time. I believe very strongly in the US Constitution and all of its active amendments, including the first, and in our republican form of government. It’s that belief that causes me to shout it from the roof-tops when I disagree with our current elected officials and work to get a different crop that agree with me elected. It’s also why I vote every chance I get.
“War Fighters” don’t plan the war – they are good little soldiers and do what their leaders tell them to. Quite frankly, I wonder how many of those serving in the National Guard because of the education benefits who truly bought the “one weekend a month and one week per year” line are happy to be in Iraq, or even believe they should be there? Just as I cannot speak for all Americans, you cannot speak for everyone in the military.
25 years… yeah… that would be back in the Reagan administration. Why didn’t Reagan or the first Bush do anything about Osama bin Laden? Why blame it on Clinton? Oh, and… that army that Bush marched into Afghanistan… that would be the army that Clinton built during his 8 years in office.
The “War On Terror” cannot be won – no more than the “War On Drugs” has been. Anyone who thinks it can has been blinded by the current administration’s party line. The Bush administration’s tactic seems to be “keep ‘em scared and stupid.” If you disagree with that, there are some Lucky Charms you can chew on over in the right-hand column.
4) I still contend that evidence shows that Osama bin Laden and Sadaam Hussein weren’t overly fond of each other.
5) I’ve read all of the 9/11 report, too. If you disagree with its conclusions, provide some verifiable evidence to the contrary.
David Kay, who was not part of the 9/11 commission, wasn’t in Iraq all by himself. He worked in conjunction with the CIA and the military. Up until the time he returned to Iraq he maintained that Iraq was in violation of international orders to get rid of WMD that it possessed. He had every reason to want to find them.
Look… we can go on arguing with each other, but what would be the point? I’m not going to convince you and you’re not going to convince me. Why hang around arguing with someone who writes a blog that upwards of 2 people ever read?
4Remark from Judy — Wednesday, 12/22/2004 @ 7:37 PM