Do you think that President Obama deserved to win the Nobel Peace prize?

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

Poll question: Do you think that President Obama deserved to win the Nobel Peace prize?

How does DU compare to the general public?

A new Quinnipiac poll has found that 26% of registered voters agree with the Nobel Peace award being given to President Barack Obama. 66% disagree.

Do you think that President Obama deserved to win the Nobel Peace prize or not?
26% Yes, 66% No (Of those expressing an opinion: 28% Yes, 72% No)

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1402


Do you think that President Obama deserved to win the Nobel Peace prize or not?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

1. Yes, clearly.

No one's done more for peace in the last year than Barack Obama.

[ixion]

2. Except, you know, people who actually believe in Peace...

:eyes:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

6. As opposed to that war-mongering Nobel Peace Prize committee?

If you're trying to be a smart ass about the escalation in Afghanistan, that's not the promotion of world peace.

It may be the promotion of American peace, and isolationism; but it ain't world peace.

[ixion]

8. I know it isn't... it is conquest and occupation, not peace

and as such, I do not believe Obama was a worthy recipient.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

10. In order to build that pipeline, right?

Is that why Obama planted those nukes in the WTC?

Fortunately, the Nobel prize committee's staffed by rational human beings not prone to loony conspiracy theories.

[ixion]

12. "You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war"

-- Albert Einstein.

So, apparently, you consider Einstein to be a "loony." I guess that shows where your true allegiance lies.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

16. He wasn't a loony.

Just wrong, and self-contradictory.

You'll remember he advised Roosevelt to build the bomb.

And he'd take no issue with Obama winning the prize.

[Luminous Animal]

26. And he considered that letter his one great mistake in his life.

[ixion]

28. the amount of speculation you apply to that is astounding

and not at all credible.

[PVnRT]

35. Wow, I didn't know you were a spirit medium now

What would Gandhi, King and Linus Pauling think?

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

36. .

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

38. It's hard to say.

Pauling, like Einstein's nuke advocacy, worked for the allies in WWII and likely would believed in the just war theory. Pauling, like Obama, won the Nobel Peace prize, mostly for his work in opposing nuclear proliferation, which is major reason Obama won his. I've no doubt that, like most intelligent people, he'd be pleased with the Nobel committee's decision.

King, I suspect, would have remained neutral on the subject. He opposed Vietnam, of course. But the major reason was the draft and racial in equality. He was obviously a rational thinker, and if he had opposed the war, I doubt it would be over a lousy and ironic Einstein quote. Would he have supported the Nobel committee's decision? Umm, yeah.

Gandhi? Nah, he wouldn't support the war. But then again, he wrote friendly letters to Hitler. So I wouldn't be taking his advice on defense issues anyway. Would he support the Nobel committee's decision? Of course he would.

[rollingrock]

55. I agree about Einstein

Einstein is certainly self-contradictory, as is the irony of naming a so-called peace prize after a major arms manufacturer and the inventor of dynamite (Alfred Nobel).

[Tim01]

18. He was a math guy.

That doesn't mean he knew anything about people.
An awful lot like suggesting that computer geek must have a great grasp of social skills.

And the bottom line is that if you are a weak country some other country will conquer you eventually.

Not that I think we should be going all over the fucking globe and mucking around in other peoples business. But rather we should mind our own business, and have the ability to obliterate anybody who wants to give us a go on our own soil.

[NightWatcher]

3. Other: not quite yet. Waiting to see what else he does before saying NO or YES

[marshall]

37. It was a prize for hope, not accomplishments

Hope is one of the most powerful forces in human nature.

[Stinky The Clown]

4. No ......

..... and isn't it ironic that, after having won it, he escalates a second hand war.

[stray cat]

5. Who deserved to win instead?

[ixion]

7. someone who has actually worked for peace

there are many...and Obama is NOT one of them.

[Xithras]

22. Piedad Córdoba, Sima Samar, Hu Jia, or many of the dozens of other people nominated.

Sima Samar is an outspoken critic of the US actions in Afghanistan, the chair of the Afghan Human Rights Commission, the UN apppointee in charge of monitoring and reporting on human rights abuses in Sudan (remember Sudan? If so, it's because of her). She is an outspoken proponent of womens rights causes in the middle east (for which she has several standing bounties and religious execution orders on her head)

She has put her very life on the line to improve the lives of others, to expose humanitarian disasters, and to improve the lives of people in not only her own nation, but in others as well.

How has ANYTHING Obama has done even come CLOSE to comparing?

And that's just ONE nominee. I have nothing against Obama, but his receipt of the prize was a failure of the committee in that people who have genuinely dedicated their lives to improving the worlds lot, and to actually speading peace, were ignored in favor of someone they merely hoped would act to further their cause.

[FBaggins]

30. I'll send you a list

typed single-space and double-sided... four columns of 8-pt font to a page.

But you'll have to pay the $538.22 postage.

[donheld]

46. Tiger Woods

Oh you said Peace prize not Piece prize? :D

[glen123098]

9. I deserve it more than Obama does

And I have done nothing to earn it.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

24. Well... there's always next year.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

11. METHODOLOGY NOTE

"No opinion" and "I don't know" are useful for forced polling where you get a call out of the blue, but I don't like "no opinion" options on polls people participate in only voluntarily because most no-opinion folks will not bother to vote. It creates a category that is bound to be inaccurate.

In the Quinnipiac poll the percentage of people expressing an opinion break down to roughly 28% YES and 72% NO.

In this poll everyone who votes is in the expressing an opinion category by definition.

So those are the best figures for comparison.

As of this writing that is almost exactly the break-down here which, if it holds up, would make this the first issue I've ever seen where DU matches the American public, though probably for somewhat different reasons.

[951-Riverside]

13. I love the fox news-esque poll

Instead of just asking a question and letting people vote with their conscious you post results from another poll in an attempt to shape your participants opinions. I don't think you're playing fair.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

21. The Quinnipiac results are what make the poll of interest

It would be more rigorous for me to have done a poll and then written an OP comparing that poll to the quinnipiac set, but that would be less interesting to most readers.

It probably affects the result, yes, but I would think this crowd would be more moved to contradict a mainstream poll than duplicate it.

[yodoobo]

48. Its a simple yes or no question

You can vote however you feel.

[Tim01]

14. They gave him the prize because he isn't Bush.

And they "hope" he will be different and "change" the way America is doing things. Clearly, he will not.
That is a stupid reason to give someone the peace prize.

[ecstatic]

15. For the courage of his convictions, yes

[jtylerpittman]

17. No

And to be honest it really takes away from the legitimacy of the Nobel Prize.

[JackRiddler]

19. Depends on how seriously one takes the Nobel Peace Prize.

It's a mechanism for a committee of five (5) elderly Norwegian former members of parliament, who are appointed on the basis of party membership, to exert influence over the world media agenda, nothing more.

That's right, the Nobel Peace Prize is bestowed by a small committee of the Norwegian parliament.

Sometimes, when they're not playing RISK, they choose a worthy cause that can actually use the PR and prestige boost. This is probably the only good that can come of this prize. Examples include the campaign to ban landmines, the Grameen Bank, Doctors without Frontiers, Martin Luther King, etc.

Sometimes they try totally half-assed realpolitik (a specialty among a certain breed of well-meaning Northern European social democrats) by giving it to a political leader. Obviously this year's pick had done nothing to "deserve" it, assuming there is anything in the prize to "deserve," and he has now shown that he does not intend to live up to it, if living up to it means advancing peace in the world.

Or, in one word: Kissinger.

[rug]

20. As much as he deserves the Nobel Prize for Economics.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

44. now, now... play nice

:rofl:

[VMI Dem]

23. Like Henry Kissinger?

Yeah, sure.

[blindpig]

27. The bar is pretty fuckin' low. n/t

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

34. lol! I didn't see your post and I mentioned Kissinger too in mine. :)

[Mojambo]

25. Afraid not. n/t

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

29. About as much as Kissinger did.

[berni_mccoy]

31. Even Obama said he wasn't worthy. Ironic that 2/3 of Americans support his decision to escalate

in Afghanistan, while 2/3rds think he didn't deserve the prize. I guess that means 50% of the people are at least honest about their lack for want of peace.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

32. Yes and No.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

33. No, but the Peace Prize was also given to Henry Kissinger..tells

you a lot about the Committee's judgment.

[JonQ]

39. He did end all war

forever, in his first week. So obviously he deserved it.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

41. Fair enough

[closeupready]

40. No, absolutely not.

Buck stops with him.

[madokie]

42. You durn right I do

[yurbud]

43. only if he got it for simply not being Bush...

[Cant trust em]

45. Interesting. A few months ago when it was announced, I posted that I didn't agree

with him winning the award. The responses at the time were pretty rough.

[yodoobo]

47. NO one did more for peace than Obama last year

That is why he won.

He deserves the prize and your thanks.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

51. My thanks? Ha.

I voted for him. He didn't vote for me. He lives in a publicly funded mansion and makes $400K. I don't.

The idea that politicians, even the best of them, are doing us some grand favor is sick.

He wanted to be president. Having secured the job he has an absolute moral obligation to do an extraordinary job.

[cliffordu]

49. Nope. you have to create some fucking peace somewhere, dontcha???

[timeforpeace]

50. Wow, up to 36%. Keep this going a few weeks, he's got a chance.

[maryf]

52. If the criteria was written in doublespeak (as I wonder)...

Yes! War is Peace! :sarcasm:

[PurityOfEssence]

53. FUCK no!

Everyone's SO sure this guy will live up to lofty dreams and cherubic fantasies. That's fine, I suppose, but to mistake vague hopey-changiness for ACTUAL ACCOMPLISHMENTS is idiocy of the first order.

Whether required or not, there's an intimation of altruism with that award, and I flatly dispute this.

At least Teddy Roosevelt actually brokered a lasting peace to a full-on war; even if he was more than just a bit of a thug himself, that's SOMETHING.

We're constantly insulted for not falling in line and betting on the come with this man, even though his long and undistinguished voting record as a legislator confirms him as being nothing short of an ultramoderate.

[Quantess]

54. He won it, mostly, for not being named George Bush.

And I also think it was a positive reinforcement for a future act which Obama disappointed the Nobel Committee by not doing: Obama did not end the Iraq occupation, and he did not withdraw troops from Afghanistan.