Polls: Public Divided On Iraq, But Numbers Depend On Question
With the candidates dueling over Iraq today, what are the polls telling us about where the public is on the war?
The latest round of polls on Iraq adds up to a clear message: The public widely believes the war was a mistake from the start. Nonetheless, the polls do show that the public is more divided over what to do going forward than in the past.
There's a reason for this: The polling on what to do next depends heavily on how the question is asked.
The reason this is important is that numbers showing more public support for staying in Iraq -- based on imperfect questioning -- could lead to more punditry saying that McCain is on the offensive on the issue, which could in turn affect public opinion.
Our snapshot of current public opinion on Iraq after the jump.
The new CBS/New York Times poll (full numbers to be released later tonight) finds that a large majority thinks the war was a mistake, with about 80% of Democrats and 60% of independents saying so against 70% of Republicans who still think it was the right thing to do. And eighty percent say they think McCain would continue President Bush's policies.
So, obviously, the Times poll is very bad for McCain, as it further illustrates just how much Americans regret going into Iraq in the first place -- and how much people expect him to represent a third Bush term, as Democrats have warned.
The new ABC/Washington Post poll, meanwhile, shows a more mixed picture for McCain. It has the public split right down the middle on whether to have a withdrawal timetable (Obama's position) or to have no timetable (McCain's position).
The result: Timetable 50%, no timetable 49%. One possible explanation is that the question ties the positions directly to the candidates themselves -- it asks whether you support Obama's position, or McCain's position. This suggests that when people tie what to do about Iraq to the candidates, the level of support for withdrawal drops somewhat -- due to the closeness of the presidential contest itself.
Interestingly, despite this, WaPo also finds a great deal of regret about having waged the war in the first place: Only 36% of respondents in this poll thought the Iraq War has been worth fighting, against 63% who say it wasn't worth it. But even though Obama opposed the war and McCain supported it, this doesn't appear to translate into much greater support for Obama's position on what to do next.
The new Quinnipiac poll, meanwhile, is much better for McCain: It showed a 51%-43% majority opposing a timetable, which the GOP can surely spin to their benefit.
Why? It's all in the question.
Quinnipiac's question premises the no-timetable position as waiting "until the situation is more stable and then begin to withdraw," with 43% still for a timetable and 51% saying no fixed date. At the same time, only 34% of respondents say the war was the right thing to begin with, and 59% say it was wrong. The reason, of course, is that this question creates the assumption that things will get more stable, and there will be a withdrawal in the foreseeable future.
It really does come down to how the question is phrased -- and thus how the issue is perceived. If McCain can convince the public that things are going to improve and a withdrawal of some kind will happen anyway and under better terms -- whether the claim is true or not -- he may just be able to blunt Iraq as an issue for the Dems.
And imperfect questioning on these crucial poll questions could help him do just that.
The MSM are shills for the GOP. Push polling and spinning the results are SOP.
July 15, 2008 4:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
wouldn't it logically follow that if americans increasingly believe that the war in iraq was a bad idea, that they will eventually come to understand that we should set a timetable for leaving?
i think that this still spells well for sen. obama, as in he can continue to make his case that by staying in iraq, we divert our resources away from the terrorists who attacked us.
July 15, 2008 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
You and others are asking the wrong question. It is not whether we should have gone to War in Iraq, but what to do now that we are in a War with Iraq. You are going to find that the American people are going to trust McCain going forward more than flip floppy Obama who has no military background and has proven he will agree with whatever he thinks is the popular position at the time. Obama has no moral fiber. He is a Chicago style slimy politico. McCain is a War hero who is willing to buck his own party to say what he thinks and has proven the ability to work across the isle. Hopefully it is not too late to have the Superdelagates change support of Obama to Clinton.
July 15, 2008 4:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Superdelegates"
And it isn't going to happen.
July 15, 2008 5:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are correct about the wrong question.
The question of "Do you believe the US should leave Iraq?" is always going to receive high ratings. Everyone, including all of Bush's staff, wants to leave Iraq.
Pelosi knows that the American people hate losing and that explains her continued financial support of the war. She says the people want out but she knows they will insist on victory, or at least, no humiliation, like Viet Nam.
That is also why Obama will not end the war but merely shift it to Afganistan and keep the security in force in Iraq, all the while blaming Bush. It might work, but it won't end the war.
We'll all be wondering why we are still in Iraq in 2012, after four years of Obama...
July 15, 2008 10:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
You or Josh need to get on one of the nightly news programs (or Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight.com) to spell this out. I'm so tired of the MSM misleading people because of their inability/unwilligness to do basic analysis.
July 15, 2008 5:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Second this.
July 15, 2008 5:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Third this!
If Ed Schultz from Air America can be a talking head on MSM, why can't TPM?
July 15, 2008 5:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
They don't pay enough.
Besides, we need Josh and DK and Greg and Eric and Kate and Andrew here to keep an eye on things. Remember, they watch Focked News so we don't have to!
July 15, 2008 5:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Watching Chris Matthews grill Pat Buchanan about the efficacy of the surge makes me wonder where Democrats actually running for office have been on this.
July 15, 2008 5:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
"actually running for office have been on this"
Do you remember 2006, when Rahm Emmanuel (I believe, or Chuck Schumer) made the argument that the Democrats shouldn't run against the war?
Fortunately, Ned Lamont didn't get the memo...Unfortunately, Ned ultimately lost.
But anyway, maybe there's some of that going on now.
July 15, 2008 5:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, the same DLC deep thinkers who opposed the 50-state strategy and thought Democrats would get their tails handed to them by opposing the Patriot Act.
And yes, Obama's FISA vote clearly shows that "there's some of that going on now."
July 15, 2008 5:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hiding in their bunkers as usual.
July 15, 2008 6:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please forgive the bluntness:
It is NOT a war. It is NOT a war. pIt is NOT a war. It is NOT a war. It is NOT a war. It is NOT a war. It is NOT a war. It is NOT a war. It is NOT a war. It is NOT a war. It is NOT a war. It is NOT a war. It is NOT a war. It is NOT a war.
Commander codpiece declared it so damn near a half a decade ago.
Operation Iraqi Liberation is an illegal occupation.
July 15, 2008 5:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
totally agree with you on this military occupation and it is an illegal one. War crimes for Bush, Cheney and Rice, et al.
July 15, 2008 5:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
New WaPo/ABC numbers:
Obama 50
McCain 42
July 15, 2008 5:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Breaking News!
Ya think?
Conclusion: Respondents are unequivocally ambivalent about Iraq.
Ah, yes. The never-ending quest for the perfect question.
July 15, 2008 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actuall, the new WaPo/ABC numbers:
Obama 49
McCain 46
This is among LIKELY VOTERS.
July 15, 2008 5:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
You mean it discounts newly registered voters, like young people and African Americans?
So if they also disallow caucus states, and allow McCain to run unopposed in Michigan and Florida, HILLARY CAN WIN!!!!
Or something.
July 15, 2008 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, the term Likely voters are Voters who say they are registered and will vote in November.
It has nothing to do with discounting newly registered voters.
July 15, 2008 5:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
People are ambivalent and will respond to leadership. Obama laid out his case this morning. McCain will continue to talk about "victory", "honor", making incoherent references to "our enemies" being on the run. The media will continue to pretend that McCain's captivity in southeast Asia forty odd years ago gives him some credibility on the contemporary middle east.
Obama is counting on a majority of the American people thinking and voting like grown-ups. After eight years of a fourteen year old who thinks he's living out a B-movie, it just might work.
July 15, 2008 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you. Someone needed to write this...
July 15, 2008 5:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's such a good observation.
It's fairly easy to know that the war was a mistake - what to do about it isn't so simple. I think the people polled answered thoughtfully - because it is such a mess and lives are stake.
July 15, 2008 5:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
The only numbers that matter at EC are the ones that show the race getting tighter, everybody knows that.
July 15, 2008 5:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
I did a weighted average of the state poll numbers from pollster.com and Obama is up 9 points.
From an electoral college perspective Obama is up 306 to 189 to 43 states that are tied.
The tied states (+/- 1) are Missouri, Indiana, North Dakota, Montana, and North Carolina -- North Dakota and Montana don't have a lot of data points.
And there are 7 other states where Obama is within 4 percentage points (Arizona, Florida, Texas, Alaska, South Dakota, Georgia, and Nevada.)
The horse race stories based on one national poll are not telling the real story - Obama has a stronger base of support and is currently winning the battleground states. And, there are more battleground states than any election since 1992 (and that was only because of Perot).
And, by the way, Obama's electoral map of 2008 is looking similar to Clinton's in 1992 out west, in the midwest (except Obama will take Indiana too) and in the north east. The south will shift some but the electoral margin looks to be as big.
Why is this story not being reported?
July 15, 2008 6:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're a fool to think Obama has a chance to win Indiana, Texas, etc.
Those Zogby Interactive Polls are junk.
July 15, 2008 6:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think Obama stands a damn good chance of winning Texas, and it has nothing to do with polls.
July 15, 2008 6:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
wow s.c. poll is pretty close.......................
July 15, 2008 6:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
It was made known last week that both Barack Obama and John McCain would be making major policy speeches today on the issue of Iraq and National Security.
Last week the Washington Post decided to conduct a poll on the issue of Iraq, and coincidentally revealed those results today.
The Washington Post feels that it's important for their readers to know that "seventy-two percent said McCain would make a good commander in chief." And the cable news agrees that it must also report this tidbit as it conveniently feeds the ongoing media narrative. This number doesn't surprise anyone given the fact that McCain has been running on his biography for decades.
Despite numerous polls these last months showing that the public believes that the invasion of Iraq was a mistake and that we must begin the process of withdrawal, The Washington Post wants their readers also to know that their poll results suggest on the issue of Iraq policy in general, Americans are divided equally.
It's not known if there were any ulterior motives of the Washington Post, but it does appear that their timely poll was somewhat of a preemptive strike. Surely the Post is aware of the previous polls showing that the public overwhelming agrees with Obama's position on the issue of Iraq. And surely they were aware that given the two opposing speeches, Obama would clearly make the stronger argument.
To be fair, the Post's poll also shows that 63% of respondents in this poll thought the Iraq War wasn't worth it. However, the 24hour news culture decided long ago that the question of whether invading Iraq was right or wrong is rather irrevelevant, thus the issue of judgement of those who voted for the war shouldn't be raised.
At the end of the day, the majority of people will never watch either speech. At most they might hear soundbites or dueling talking-heads arguing over which candidate made the stronger case. And to tie things all in a nice bow, they might hear selective numbers from the Washington Post poll.
July 15, 2008 6:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Democrats need to include in every question and answer about staying in Iraq, the cost of doing so. It costs $x every month we stay in Iraq which is as much as we spend on y.
July 15, 2008 6:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep. Over and over and over and over.
But I'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen....
July 15, 2008 7:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Washington Post Headline: Poll Finds Voters Split on Candidates' Iraq-Pullout Positions
Really? What Iraq-pullout position does McCain have? Talk about misleading.
July 15, 2008 7:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
McCain says we should trust him on Afghanistan because he knows how to win wars. Will someone please ask him to list the wars his expertise helped us win. The Revolutionary War? The War of 1812?
July 15, 2008 7:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's one of the stories on the Iran visit. It was couple from Dixon.
Knock yourself out, Weaver.
http://www.taosnews.com/articles/2008/06/22/news/doc485c12f32a3dd721447285.txt
July 15, 2008 10:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
ABC News/Wash. Post withheld results of poll favorable to Obama
Summary: ABC News and The Washington Post issued staggered releases of the results of their latest poll, withholding from their first release results favorable to Sen. Barack Obama, including the finding that 50 percent of registered voters would vote for Obama for president versus 42 percent for Sen. John McCain. The next day, the Post ran an article headlined "Poll Finds Voters Split on Candidates' Iraq-Pullout Positions," which did not mention Obama's 8-point lead over McCain. Later that day, ABC News and the Post issued a second release with additional poll results that stated: "Obama continues to hold most of the advantages in the presidential race."
http://mediamatters.org/items/200807170011
Not only were the questions of the Washington Post poll McCain-friendly, but the Post buried the results that were favorable for Obama.
July 18, 2008 6:41 PM | Reply | Permalink