harry hope

From NEWSWEEK, 8/23/03:
http://www.msnbc.com/news/956458.asp?0cv=KA01

U.S. troops have been the target of multiple attacks since hostilities
officially ended in Iraq on May 1

When is Enough Enough?

In a new Newsweek poll, Americans say they’re spending too much in
Iraq with too little to show for it.

And with the 2004 approaching, Bush is losing ground


By Jennifer Barrett
NEWSWEEK WEB EXCLUSIVE

Americans are increasingly pessimistic about the U.S. mission in Iraq,
saying the United States should reduce its spending and scale back its
efforts there, according to the latest NEWSWEEK poll.

SIXTY-NINE PERCENT of Americans polled say they are very concerned (40
percent) or somewhat concerned (29 percent) that the United States
will be bogged down for many years in Iraq without making much
progress in achieving its goals.

Just 18 percent say they’re confident that a stable, democratic form
of government can take shape in Iraq over the long term; 37 percent
are somewhat confident.

Just 13 percent say U.S. efforts to establish security and rebuild
Iraq have gone very well since May 1, when combat officially ended; 39
percent say somewhat well.

Nearly half of respondents, 47 percent, say they are very concerned
that the cost of maintaining troops in Iraq will lead to a large
budget deficit and seriously hurt the U.S. economy.

And 60 percent of those polled say the estimated $1 billion per week
that the United States is spending is too much and the country should
scale back its efforts.

One-third supports the current spending levels for now, but just 15
percent of those polled say they would support maintaining the current
spending levels for three years or more.

Against this backdrop, President George W. Bush’s approval ratings
continue to decline.

His current approval rating of 53 percent is down 18 percent from
April.

And for the first time since the question was initially asked last
fall, more registered voters say they would not like to see him
re-elected to another term as president (49 percent) than re-elected.

Forty-four percent would favor giving Bush a second term; in April, 52
percent backed Bush for a second term and 38 percent did not.

Despite the costs and the continued attacks against both U.S. and
United Nations personnel, most Americans support maintaining current
military levels in Iraq--for now anyway.

Fifty-six percent approve of keeping large numbers of U.S. military
personnel in Iraq for two years or less; 28 percent would support a
stay of one to two years, while another 28 percent would support a
stay of up to one year.

Eigh**** percent support keeping large numbers of troops in Iraq for
three to five years, three percent for six to 10 years, and 11 percent
for more than 10 years (just five percent want to bring troops home
now).

Sixty-one percent still believe that the United States was right to
take military action against Iraq in March; 33 percent do not.

But respondents are split on how effective the U.S. war with Iraq has
been in fighting Al Qaeda and terrorism in general.

Forty-five percent say the war has reduced the terror network’s power
by removing an oil-rich regime that supported terrorism while 38
percent say the war has actually increased Al Qaeda’s power by
inspiring a new generation of terrorists to take up arms against the
United States and its allies.

The failure to capture Saddam Hussein or Osama Bin Laden, and the slow
progress in Iraq have also affected Americans’ views on the Bush
administration’s efforts to fight terrorists at home and abroad--but
not drastically.

A slim majority (54 percent) still approve of the way Bush is handling
the situation in Iraq, though Bush had a 74 percent approval rating in
his handling of Iraq in mid-April

Fifty-seven percent say Bush is doing a better job than Democrats in
finding and defeating terrorists abroad, while 21 percent say
Democratic party leaders in Congress are dealing better with
terrorists.

At the beginning of last year, nearly three-quarters of those surveyed
thought Bush was doing a better job than the Democrats on fighting
terrorism overseas--just 9 percent gave higher marks to Democrats.

Fifty-seven percent say Bush is best at handling the fight against
terror at home, down from 74 percent in January 2002.

Nearly a quarter (24 percent) now think the Democrats do a better job
at handling homeland security, versus 11 percent in January 2002.

The biggest shift in opinion, however, comes in Bush’s handling of
non-terror issues.

A plurality of voters now think the Democratic leaders in Congress
have a better approach to dealing with the economy, tax cuts,
healthcare, education, social security, the environment and energy
policy.

In January 2002, more thought Bush had the best approach to handling
all the issues above, except the environment.

Forty-five percent of respondents now think the Democratic party
leaders are doing a better job of finding ways to stimulate the
economy (36 percent say Bush is)--a huge shift from January 2002, when
55 percent thought Bush was better on the economy and just 29 percent
thought Congressional Democrats were.

Over the past year-and-a-half, Americans have also shifted their views
of Bush’s tax cuts--45 percent prefer his cuts to those supported by
Democratic leaders now, but that’s down 12 percent from January 2002.

Nearly half of those polled (47 percent) say Democratic leaders have
the best approach to health care (31 percent say Bush does), a flip
from January 2002, when 45 percent preferred Bush’s approach and 36
percent liked the Democrats’.

Bush has lost the most support for his handling of education issues.
Just 39 percent prefer his approach now--down 16 percent from January
2002.

Forty-three percent say the Democrats are now doing the better job in
their approach to education issues.

Similarly, more Americans (45 percent) say Democrats have the better
approach to handling Social Security issues.

About one-third (32 percent) say Bush has the best approach to Social
Security, down 12 points from January 2002.

On the environment, 53 percent prefer the Democrats’ approach, while
29 percent support Bush’s handling of environmental issues versus 43
percent and 38 percent respectively in January 2002.

Finally, 42 percent of Americans prefer the Democrats’ approach to
energy policy, while 33 percent say Bush is doing a better job on the
issue (versus 33 percent and 46 percent respectively in January 2002).

Bush has the lead over Democrats in his handling of foreign policy in
general, with 48 percent of Americans preferring his approach to
foreign-policy issues (37 percent prefer the Democrats’ approach).


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NEWSWEEK poll is conducted by Princeton Survey Research
Associates, which interviewed by telephone 1,011 adults aged 18 and
older on Aug. 21 to Aug. 22.

The margin of error is plus or minus 3 percentage points.

__________________________________________________ __________

Harry

julian d.

You Bush-haters MUST be masochists. Why do you continue to
underestimate and underrate Bush? The udder-less Dem leadership is
caused by your hatred and frothing-at-the-mouth madness over your loss
in 2000, and your astounding complete loss of power in 2002.
Why do you continue to give me so much pleasure as Bush completely
runs circles around you? Why give me such a gift?


JD


"I knew that sooner or later President Bush would extend the
war on terrorism to a point which would cause the majority of
Democrats to blink," said Republican pollster William McInturff.
"The modern Democratic Party is built on a foundation of opposition
to the use of military force."

http://www.newhousenews.com/archive/benson081203.html


"Uday Hussein didn't need a phony study to comprehend Bush's lack
of "nuance." The London Sunday Telegraph recently reported that,
soon after the war began, Uday was deeply depressed. According to
the former director of Iraqi television quoted in the Telegraph,
the last words he heard Uday speak were these: "This time I think
the Americans are serious. Bush is not like Clinton. I think this is the end."

http://www.anncoulter.org/columns/2003/073003p.htm


"On the tape, Hussein acknowledged the death of his sons Uday
and Qusay Hussein and called their deaths "good news" - which is
more than the Democrats have said." - Ann Coulter; July 31, 2003

Well, one thing is for sure, even for those
imbeciles with very short memories; Cutting and
running will serve no one very well. The Iraqis
will stay a rabble and the U.S. will look foolish.
This is for the long-haul and the idiots (and Democrats
if you make a distinction) should get used to it.
-Rich

z

that's what the Dem leadership needs -- more ****!

ad

Translation:" Naturally, I cannot refute a word of this. So like the little piece of
fascist crap that I am, I will simply mindlessly attack the messenger"


"I am angry that so many of the sons of the most powerful and well placed managed
to wrangle slots in Reserve and National Guard units"
Colin Powell, commenting on his phony boss and the other repug s*** when he still
could say the truth

LOL!!!!!!!!! annie the trannie is trotted out......LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

"100% of American terrorists the blow up buildings loved little annie coulter"

abracadabra

Uh, why are we there?
There's no WMDs
We won't let the Iraqis form their own government.
Why are we there?

headkase

so you think iraq is a success story?

hk

robw

We agree!
He is running in circles.

robw

--
"Sing while you may" Edward Ka-Spel

julian d.

On 23 Aug 2003 23:33:31 GMT, headkase <psykoexgirlfriend@hotmail.com>


As far as getting rid of a murderous regime? Yes. No one suggested
transforming Iraq would be an easy task. The way I see it, our
military there has to do a LOT more killing.

JD


"I knew that sooner or later President Bush would extend the
war on terrorism to a point which would cause the majority of
Democrats to blink," said Republican pollster William McInturff.
"The modern Democratic Party is built on a foundation of opposition
to the use of military force."

http://www.newhousenews.com/archive/benson081203.html


"Uday Hussein didn't need a phony study to comprehend Bush's lack
of "nuance." The London Sunday Telegraph recently reported that,
soon after the war began, Uday was deeply depressed. According to
the former director of Iraqi television quoted in the Telegraph,
the last words he heard Uday speak were these: "This time I think
the Americans are serious. Bush is not like Clinton. I think this is the end."

http://www.anncoulter.org/columns/2003/073003p.htm


"On the tape, Hussein acknowledged the death of his sons Uday
and Qusay Hussein and called their deaths "good news" - which is
more than the Democrats have said." - Ann Coulter; July 31, 2003

dennmac

You're a friggin' liar, a lot of people on the right suggested just that
when the war drums were beating loudly back in the spring.


Don't worry, you'll get your wish. Just like they'll get theirs.