Poll: Fewer And Fewer Americans Buying GOP Arguments About Iraq
April 17, 2007 -- 10:06 AM EST // //
Josh has already highlighted one of the key numbers in the new Washington Post/ABC News poll -- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's approval rating sits at an astonishing 53%, even though "establishment Washington tried to take her down," as Atrios puts it.
But I wanted to flag another number buried in the poll that is an eye-popper and says a lot about the strength of the Dems' political hand as they confront the White House:
20. Do you think (the United States must win the war in Iraq in order for the broader war on terrorism to be a success), or do you think (the war on terrorism can be a success without the United States winning the war in Iraq?)US must win war in Iraq for success: 37%.
Can be a success without US winning war in Iraq: 57%.
Now check out the response to the same question in WaPo's poll four months ago, back in January:
US must win war in Iraq for success: 45%. Can be a success without US winning war in Iraq: 47%.
As you can see, over the past four months the percentage of respondents who think the US "must win" in Iraq for the sake of the broader "war on terror" dropped eight points. Meanwhile, the percentage who think victory is not necessary to it has gone up a surprising ten points. This is striking -- because in that four months or so since Dems took power in January the overriding message that the White House, the GOP and all of their lackeys and shills in the media have been blaring at the electorate in every conceivable forum is that (a) victory is absolutely essential in Iraq and failure is not an option lest America become less secure; and (b) leaving Iraq would constitute a catastrophic defeat in the broader war on terror.
In other words, not only is the central White House/GOP message failing to persuade, but fewer people buy it now since back when the GOP propaganda campaign geared up again in earnest, and significantly more people hold the opposite view. Simply put, the White House and GOP are losing the argument, if they haven't completely lost it already -- suggesting that on Iraq, their once-daunting ability to persuade, something that was jealously eyed by Dems after the 2004 losses and has been hailed by the media for far too long since, has been reduced at this point to little more than smoldering wreckage.
Relatedly, it should be noted that WaPo reporter Jonathan Weisman deserves credit for his piece today on the showdown between the White House and Congress. It leans heavily on WaPo's poll numbers to make the case that "Democrats appear to be standing on firm political ground" over Iraq.
A couple weeks back a bunch of us stamped our feet about another Weisman effort that said Republicans were "gleeful" about impending Dem overreach on Iraq and terror despite WaPo poll numbers that made this GOP "glee" unlikely indeed. One wants to believe that blogospheric criticism helps bring around pieces like today's, but who the hell knows. Either way, Weisman's effort today was a good one, with lots of that underrated commodity known as "empirical information."
Update: Commenter Glenn writes: "What I would like to believe here is that Weisman listened to the liberal blogospheric criticism, realized the validity of (at least some of) that criticism, and adjusted his reporting accordingly." Yep -- exactly what I meant, despite my clumsy "blogospheric pressure" formulation, and I've edited the above accordingly.
To visit the homepage of this blog, where you can see many more posts, click here.