http://apnews1.iwon.com/article/20020916/D7M2NN780.html Polls Suggest U.S. Backs Bush Sep 16, 2:35 AM (ET) By The Associated Press (AP) President Bush waves after arriving at the White House following his weekend at Camp David Sunday,... Full Image President Bush has rallied public support in recent weeks for a possible attack on Iraq, say two polls released over the weekend. Two-thirds of Americans support using military force against Iraq, according to polls released by Newsweek and by ABC News for the "This Week" program. The support rebounded among Democrats and independents in recent weeks after slipping in August, the ABC poll found. Most in the Newsweek poll said they think military action against Iraq will cause serious problems for the United States among other Arab countries and could result in Iraq's use of chemical or biological weapons against Israel and the United States. Both polls suggest Bush has bolstered support for his Iraq policy in recent weeks. His overall job approval was at 70 percent in the Newsweek survey, up from 61 percent in late August. By a 2-1 margin in the Newsweek poll, people said it was important that the president have the approval of Congress, formal support from the United Nations and backing from most of the European allies. They also said by nearly 2-1 in both polls that Bush has done a good job of explaining U.S. policy toward Iraq. But they were divided in the ABC poll on whether he has provided enough evidence of the need for an attack. The Newsweek poll of 1,000 adults was taken Thursday and Friday, after Bush's speech to the United Nations, and has an error margin of plus or minus 3 percentage points. The ABC poll of 760 adults was taken Thursday through Saturday and has an error margin of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.
It is possible that the Saudi leadership is softening their stance in regards to the U.S. using bases there for action against Iraq. <A HREF="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=540&u=/ap/20020915/ap_on_re_mi_ea/saudi_iraq_7&printer=1">Saudis May Change Stance on Iraq </A>
Two out of three, huh? According to a University of Chicago survey: "70 percent of Americans agree that the government should do everything it can to keep handguns out of the hands of criminals, even if it means that it will be harder for law-abiding citizens to purchase handguns."
i understand your point...but please understand the context here...we've been told by glynch and others over the last week or so how ridiculous bush is...how incapable he is of getting support necessary for this...how he'll never be able to get the people/congress/un behind him. now...the people support it...which means congress won't be too far behind and since bush's speech the other day at the un, the tones have changed considerably...and when iraq says, "it doesn't matter what you say..we'll never let inspectors back in," that kinda forces the UN's hand...he's in violation of UN orders...now we get to see if the UN has the nerve to enforce their own orders...if they're not, i'm not real sure how relevant the UN security council is.
.............your point????? 2 out of 3 moms prefer Jiff.....That doesn't mean we all like that Sh!!!T
Max -- But did you even look at the rest of the data in the story? "Most in the Newsweek poll said they think military action against Iraq will cause serious problems for the United States among other Arab countries and could result in Iraq's use of chemical or biological weapons against Israel and the United States." "By a 2-1 margin in the Newsweek poll, people said it was important that the president have the approval of Congress, formal support from the United Nations and backing from most of the European allies." "They also said by nearly 2-1 in both polls that Bush has done a good job of explaining U.S. policy toward Iraq. But they were divided in the ABC poll on whether he has provided enough evidence of the need for an attack." According to Refman's own story, although the majority of Americans support their president, they still have unanswered questions and doubts about the need for an attack. Plus, they want him to seek the approval of Congress and the UN as opposed to unilateral action.
I'd like to know who and where they poll these people? It must be a very small group...cause most folks I know don't support an unprovoked strike on Iraq... maybe the bbs should do a poll?
Prior to Pearl Harbour, more than 2 thirds of Americans were against involvment in World War 2, saying that Hitler et al were none of their affair...I guess they couldn't be wrong either?
i don't disagree with you, or them for that matter. I would far prefer a coalition of nations...perhaps Saudi's change in position to allow us to use bases there is a step in that direction. but ultimately, if no one is willing to enforce these UN orders, the US and Great Britain would go it alone...and I would support that at that point. but again...i think refman posted this given the context of the discussion last week that bush would be unwilling to put a coalition or get any support for this...refman has said a couple of times here he is not for a strike without first trying to get the support of others...quite frankly, i don't think ANYONE either here or President Bush himself has advocated such a stance...only that if no one else will step up, we'll have to go clean up the problem by ourselves.
I agree with both of those 2 out of 3 polls. I think guns should be much harder to get, and we should get rid of Saddam. DaDakota
I already did... http://bbs.clutchcity.net/php3/showthread.php?s=&threadid=41106 Only 18.6% of the respondents do not support an attack on Iraq. Most people want to see either Congress or UN approval. But there are a substantial number who want to see Bush go ahead regardless of Congress or the UN.
Hmm. Maybe the circle of people you know is a relatively small and unrepresentative sample that happens to fit within the 1/3 of the US who is in the minority in this poll. I only personally know one person who voted for Clinton in either 1992 or 1996. Should I question the results of those elections? Or should I realize that the circle of people I know is relatively small and not necessarily representative of the United States at large?
This reminds of a story a history professor once told me. His brother-in-law was convinced that Barry Goldwater was going to win the presidency in 1964. His reasoning? "Everybody I know is voting for him." I'm pretty sure their poll was larger and more diverse than yours, rockhead. I guess I just made the same point mrpaige did, didn't I? It helps to read the entire thread.
