Most Likely Iowa Caucus-Goers Favor Withdrawal

These are really two different topics so I'm splitting this post in half -- J

Via Political Wire, Republican pollster Strategic Vision has just posted its latest polling of likely Iowa Democratic and Republican caucus-goers. Before I get to the horse race numbers, I want to pass on some even more interesting data points.

Do you favor a withdrawal of all United States military from Iraq within the next six months?
RepublicansDemocrats
Yes56 percent83 percent
No38 percent6 percent
Undecided6 percent11 percent

As I noted last month, when Strategic Vision showed similar results among likely Iowa caucus-goers (Republicans split 54/37 in favor of complete withdrawal within six months), "Certainly there's an extent to which these results are reflective of the fact that Strategic Vision did not give respondents a chance to choose other alternatives, like withdrawing some troops over this time period or aiming to withdraw all American forces in six months or a year or two years. Still, the results are fairly clear: A fairly substantial majority of likely Iowa [Republican] caucus-goers favor the full withdrawal of American military forces from Iraq within the next six months. This majority is safe from the margin of error and, to repeat, these numbers come from a Republican poll" [emphasis original].

Just to add one more thing. You can always disregard a single poll as potentially being an outlier. But when the same poll with (assumingly) the same methodology yields almost identical results one month to the next, one needs to at least consider the possibility (quite strongly, in fact) that the poll is not necessarily an outlier, and is (quite possibly) reflective of the views of the population being polled.



Display:


Finally! (none / 0)

Regardless of the reasons why the United States chose to invade Iraq or even why a US presence remains there today, it is clear that the Bush Administration is putting too many of its resources--OUR resources-- into remaining there.  To date, the war has cost over $340 billion dollars--money which could have been spent much more wisely and with better end results.  It is estimated, for example, that the expenditure of a mere $19 billion would eliminate starvation and malnutrition worldwide.  In a time when the current defense budget is $522 billion, the goal of eradicating world hunger is clearly well within reach.  Thus, it is clear that the occupation of Iraq needs to end, and it needs to end now without regard to what this will do to United States interest in Iraq's oil.  There are simply much more important issues that need to be addressed.  


by Jessica on Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 08:52:45 PM EST

6 Months (none / 0)

Strategic Vision has asked this in their state polling for more than 2 years.  It is clear that when it appeared, in 2005, immediate withdrawal was considered an "extreme" position and this framing was a counter to other public polling questions showing a much greater desire to change policy and withdraw troops.

I tracked PA in 2005-2006 and while Santorum-Casey never changed during the campaign (51%-40% Casey in July 2005 and 52%-40% Casey on 11/6/2006), support for immediate withdrawal went from 34% in August 2005 to 47% in November 2006 and opposition fell from 57% to 38% in that time.


by Captain Spaulding on Wed Jun 27, 2007 at 10:11:41 AM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.