Poll: Public Worry About Iraq Growing, Most Want U.N. to Take Lead Role

[NNN0LHI]

http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGAO3VVSYJD.html

Public confidence in the Bush administration's handling of Iraq is slipping, says a poll that indicates more people now think the United States is not in control of events there.

People were about evenly divided on the question of whether things are going well in Iraq concerning the goal of bringing stability, with 51 percent saying yes and 47 percent saying no, according to the CBS News poll released Friday. In early July, 60 percent said yes and 36 percent said no.

Asked whether the U.S. is in control in Iraq, 42 percent said yes, and 47 percent said no.

Seven in 10, including just over half of Republicans, say the United Nations should take the lead role in establishing a government in Iraq. The Bush administration is currently discussing what role the U.N. should take in Iraq.

more

[hang a left]

1. i really truely am so

flabbergasted that it is that high on the approval. I guess I just read too much du. it all seems so devilish to me. most people must just watch tv, i swear. i think the end of the world is near, and 42% of the people think all is well in iraq. i just don't get it

[PAP]

2. Never underestimate

W.C. Fields may have expressed it most succinctly: "Never underestimate the stupidity of the American public, they're dumber than you think." Which obviously is exactly what the Bush-Chaney junta is counting on.

[newyawker99]

18. Hi PAP!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[rook1]

21. PAP

I would certainly like to see a link to that quote.

[colorado_ufo]

23. Hi PAP!

Welcome to DU!

[diplomats]

4. What I want to know is

how come his job approval is still 55 percent when only 51 percent think things are going well in Iraq? That's not exactly high but shouldn't it be in line with the Iraq number? Regardless, this is not good for the WH.

[The Magistrate]

12. There Is An Identification Factor, Sir

Many people identify the office of the Presidency with the country itself; thus to ask if they approve of the person holding that office is, in a way, to ask if they approve of the country. Hence the response to an approval question related to the office is generally larger than the response to a question relating to some specific issue.

[alcuno]

10. The poll was not a yes/no question

In early August the question asked how things are going...
Very well 6%
Somewhat well 47%
Somewhat badly 28%
Very badly 13%

The "media" would have reported it 53% "yes", 41% "no".

On Edit: The "no's" are up 6% because of undecideds. It's bad news.

[Rollins]

3. people think the UN can come to save the day...

This is all just my theory:

People think if things get real really rough the UN can save the day. They think Bush is holding on only because of the election. I think Bush is trying to work out a deal where his cronies retain control of the oil wells and other resources while the UN manages the people. The question is how much of either that crude or the money from that crude us the Bush cronies going to have to pay the UN Security Council countries before they send in their boys to die?

[RamboLiberal]

5. Here's a link to the poll

http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/CBSNews_polls/iraq_back082903.pdf

Things are not looking good for whistle-ass

[diplomats]

6. Thanks for posting the link

Here's what gets me: Bush's approval rating on the economy is 39 percent and 50 percent on foreign policy. But his overall rating is 55 percent??!! Can anyone explain this? (Also, who are the 27 percent of Dems who approve of Bush? Geez.)

[Spazito]

8. Hmmm, some thoughts on the "dems"...

is it possible that some repubs, when asked party affiliation, say they are dems just to mess with the poll? Given that they would have given Bush high marks for everything, it would stand out for sure. Just a thought, a slightly devious thought.

[TahitiNut]

16. A "poll busting" technique.

It seems evident from this poll that approximately 2-4% misidentified themselves as "Democrats". From the poll:
____________________ UNWEIGHTED WEIGHTED
Total Respondents .. 930
Total Republicans .. 288 ...... 294
Total Democrats .... 308 ...... 299
Total Independents . 334 ...... 337

From what I see in the above, the actual R/D/I responses to the poll were 31.0%/33.1%/35.9%. After weighting, this became 31.6%/32.2%/36.2%. This represents a subpopulation change of 2.1%/-2.9%/0.9% due to weighting. When "R" is amplified by 2.1% and "D" is suppressed by 2.9%, this represents a net shift of 5.0% in the proportional responses to highly partisan question. It also skews the "D" response demographics.

AFAIK, this is a right-wing "poll busting" technique. Such polls are conducted by telephone and typically have reject rates (no answer, refused to answer, no adult answering, etc.) generally around 50%. Since the polling organization knows their final 'sample' won't be demographically congruent with the general population, they "weight" the number of respondants based on their answers to demographic questions (often "Are you D, R, or I?"). When one takes into account the 50% response rate, it only takes 1-2% of those who are called to skew a poll by 2-4% in the raw percentages, which can net to twice that in the deltas. I don't believe it's an accident that the polls seem shifted, particularly on partisan positions, by up to 6-8%.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

7. But, But, But....

that would mean that our Fearless Furher would have to admit that he was WRONG!!!!!! He'll never ever do that!

[not systems]

11. Don't worry about that.

We have always been at war with Oceana.

[Sideways]

14. Stop Saying That It's Eastasia This Year

It's room 101 for you!

[Beetwasher]

9. Telling statistic:

q47 When it comes to their dealing with Iraq, do you think members of the
Bush Administration have been telling the entire truth, usually telling
the truth but hiding some things, or have they been mostly lying?
Entire truth 17 33 6 12
Hiding 61 62 60 60
Lying 19 4 30 22
DK/NA 3 1 4 6

Hiding+Lying=80%

That's not good for them at all....

[Robin Hood]

13. So will the public bash the french for not saving our sorry butts, again?

All that freedom fry bullshit sure bit us in the ass real quick.

[NNN0LHI]

15. Bit us almost instantaneously n/t

[JNelson6563]

17. reminds me of a scene from Braveheart

Do you remember, there was to be a battle, Wallace had pulled off some great victories but Edward got his bribes through to the Scottish nobles. When it really mattered the nobles just kinda smiled at Wallace and trotted off the field.

It so reminds me of this situation. We are Wallace only we don't have noble intentions.......

The nobles trotting off the field would be represented by Old Europe here only they weren't bought off by bribes. The upstart (Bush) got out of hand and is now about to be deservedly knocked down a few pegs.

I dunno, I see history replayed all around me.

Daily I think of Bush's Rove as Henry VIII's Thomas Cromwell (who BTW was also a Machiavelli fan--as well as a contemporary). What we need now is a Henry II (of England) and a version of his brilliant right hand man, Beckett.

Julie

[calimary]

20. Yeah, but Beckett won sainthood. I doubt Karl Rove has earned

anything but the exact opposite.

[sendero]

19. what?

Just a few months ago the UN was 'irrelevant'.

There is almost no question the UN will eventually take over, I hope they tell Bush it is on their terms period.

[Fovea]

24. Actually

I fear that we will be given an ultimatum by the U.N.
Come back to compliance with major international agreements and end unilateralism, or we pull out of the whole region.

I think the brutal message sent the U.N. was that there is a fine line between intercessors for peace, and tools of occupation.

[okieinpain]

22. why would any american want the U.N., to lead the way in Iraq. Hell

weren't we just calling the U.N., a bunch of girlie men, afraid to do what needs to be done. now we won't them to take the lead, somebody has got the message wrong here.