jump to navigation

Clear majorities of Americans believe whitholding troop funding a mistake, including a majority of Democrats April 28, 2007

Posted by daveintexas in Current Events, Politics.
trackback

Really?

This seems newsworthy. 

61% of Americans oppose denying funds for additional troops to Iraq.  In a Bloomberg poll, 61% believe withholding funds is a bad idea, while only 28% believe it’s a good idea.

54% favor fully funding the war.  54% oppose Democrats idea to reduce troop strength.  57% favor finishing the job, and 59% believe pulling out now will harm American interests.

69% of Americans trust military commanders in the field more than they do members of Congress.  Only 17% want America to withdraw now.  And 70% believe announcing a timetable for withdrawal will increase insurgent attacks (duh), 85% of Republicans, 71% of Independents, and 60% of Democrats.

Now, I know Dems read polls.  I’m sure of it.  So what in the world are Harry, Nancy and Jack Murtha thinking?

Time to restrategize?

via some moron commenter over at AoS whose name I forget but is a pretty nice guy.

UPDATE: it occurs to me that the “withholding troop funding” negative might be a charge against Bush’s threatened veto of the current funding bill with a timetable for withdrawal.  I will wait and see what somebody who’s willing to do the homework comes up with that I can copy research these polls and their questions diligently to see what I can find.

UPDATE2: A quick read on the other Iraq polls still shows slight majorities favoring timetables for withdrawal, and that think we have a limited chance of success.  Guess I better dig up the questions.

Advertisements

Comments»

1. Paul - April 28, 2007

the congress has passed a bill funding the troops. The President has promised to veto this bill and effectively cut off this funding.

Who is witholding funds? The Congress or the President?

2. Barry in CO - April 29, 2007

>So what in the world are Harry, Nancy and Jack Murtha thinking?

They’re thinking that all they have to do is stick to the talking point: ‘a majority of Americans are opposed to the Iraq war’. Just keep saying it over and over; the MSM has their back. Damn what some polls say- to heck with facts. Like Harry Reid said- they feel they’re going to pick up Senate seats because of Iraq.

Keepin’ their eyes on the prize- in this case, the WH and 60 Senate seats.

That’s when the real trouble for this country will begin.

3. cranky - April 29, 2007

Paul, Congress is telling the enemy and the world that we’re going to leave the field in the middle of the 3rd quarter but here’s a bunch of money anyway including some for some spinach growers in California. WTF?

Why don’t you let me know when you’ll be going on vacation next year so we can put the word out to anyone who might be interested in having unimpeded access to your property and belongings. The code for your alarm system would be helpful, but not having it isn’t a show stopper.

4. Paul - April 29, 2007

Ok Cranky, You make a point but I can’t help noticing the significance of your “third quarter” anaolgy. A third quarter implies a fourth and final quarter. You can’t play footbal without a clock. As it stands now we are in Iraq without a clock, the game goes on and on indefinitely. Without a definite end date you can’t say whether we are in the first, fouth or fifth quarter. We have been at war in Iraq longer than we were in WWII and it is time that we set out some objectives and a timeline for achieving them.

5. daveintexas - April 29, 2007

Paul, two dimensional thinking on the topic is not useful. Everybody understands the disagreement, including you, apparently you’re willing to be purposefully obtuse in an attempt to make a point.

6. geoff - April 29, 2007

As it stands now we are in Iraq without a clock, the game goes on and on indefinitely.

That’s the difference between a game and war.

Who is witholding funds? The Congress or the President?

Congress slipped in a provision (along with the deadline, minimum wage hike, and plenty ‘o pork) to kill all guys with the first name of “Paul.” It it still “withholding funds” if the President vetos the bill?

I’m kidding, of course, about the “Paul” thing – it really only kills Iraqis who helped the US over the past 5 years, Shi’ite market-goers, Sunni males of military age, and probably lots of Kurds.

7. cranky - April 29, 2007

Paul, what quarter are we in with Bosnia? Korea? Japan? Germany? Here’s an objective for Iraq — win. And the timeline is it will be over when it is over and then we can figure out which quarter right now is.

It would have already been over if we weren’t so fucking worried about not pissing Muslims off and having the media dictate tactics so as to not offend the infamous Arab street. I spent 544 days in that ass-end part of the world — screw the Arab street.

Winners never quit and quitters never win. So what country do you want America to be Paul, a winner or a loser?

8. eddiebear - April 30, 2007

But don’t attack Paul’s patriotism.

This is the difference between a site like this and Kos/FDL/DU/Atrios.

Debate and differing opinions are allowed. Unlike the blue blogs, where going even .00000000001% off the Townhouse List is instant banning, de-listing, flaming and the like.

9. cranky - April 30, 2007

But don’t attack Paul’s patriotism.

Perish the thought. Sadly, the left is blinded by their hatred of Bush and conservatives; so much so that they prefer to see their countrymen suffer and die in order to advance their political fortunes.

But I would never question their patriotism.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: