Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

FOX Poll: Most Oppose Port Deal; Republicans Lose Ground
Fox News Website ^ | 3/02/2006 | Dana Blanton

Posted on 03/02/2006 3:01:32 PM PST by Dave S

03/02/06 FOX Poll: Most Oppose Port Deal; Republicans Lose Ground Thursday, March 02, 2006 By Dana Blanton PHOTOS

Most Americans oppose allowing a Dubai company to run some U.S. ports, even as a majority understands the U.S. would continue to control port security, according to a new FOX News poll. One in four sees the United Arab Emirates as a strong ally, but most either disagree or are unsure.

In addition, the poll shows Republicans have lost ground on the issue of terrorism, and by a wide margin voters now think it would be better for the country if Democrats win control of Congress in this year’s midterm election.

For only the second time of his presidency, the poll finds that President Bush’s overall job approval rating has fallen below 40 percent — today 39 percent of Americans say they approve and a 54 percent majority disapproves. Late last year the president’s approval hit a record-low of 36 percent (8-9 November 2005).

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: dubai; fox; portdeal; republicans
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 561-568 next last
To: Howlin; Regicide
Ahhh, yes. So once again it all comes back to Bush's fault. Not the fault of the liars intentionally misrepresenting this story... not the fault of the lazy, incredibly biased media... not the fault of the hyperventilating "IMPEACH HIM NOW!!" crowd staggering all over this forum...

It's all Dubya's fault! How original!!

21 posted on 03/02/2006 3:14:50 PM PST by Coop (FR= a lotta talk, but little action)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Dave S

Sounds as though the Fox poll was highjacled by C-BS.


22 posted on 03/02/2006 3:14:50 PM PST by johna61
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeA
Go look at its internal numbers. It polled 43% Democrat, 33% Republican and 18% independent. The actual voting population only has a 2 point differential between Democratic and Republican voters, so this poll just like CBS totally over-emphasized Democratic input. If you weighted out that skew, it is likely Bush would be at about 45-46% approval. Not great, but it's not 39% either.

I did. Actually there are more Democrats registerd but they are too lazy and dumb to vote. However, if you think you could get an equal number of Republicans to the polls tomorrow as Democrats, you've been smoking something funny.

Maybe the absolute level is not correct but the guys that stick their head in the sand and say Bush's declining poll numbers are meaningless because he isnt running again are nuts. There are more than 450 races for the congress this fall and many of them will be affected by Bush and even if they werent it impacts his ability to get congress to act.

23 posted on 03/02/2006 3:15:24 PM PST by Dave S
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Dave S

I don't understand why "americans" who respond to these moronic "polls" are all over Bush for this and they were all as quiet as mice when Slick Willie was letting the RED CHINESE do the same thing at the ports in Long Beach. Sorry folks! I don't get it. To me, it's some kind of freaky Commie Pelosi/Boxer thing. This is a "scandal" created by the morons at the DNC and in the Liberal MSM that is being pimped by "outraged" Republicans. Geeeesh.


24 posted on 03/02/2006 3:16:27 PM PST by FlingWingFlyer (We did not lose in Vietnam. We left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: demsux
I had almost forgotten the phrase "camel jockey"...I still find it funny.

Me too...in a politically incorrect way.

25 posted on 03/02/2006 3:18:28 PM PST by neutrino (Globalization is the economic treason that dare not speak its name.(173))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Dave S
I did. Actually there are more Democrats registerd but they are too lazy and dumb to vote

Actually, IIRC, registration levels in the US are 1/3 demo, 1/3 Pubbie, and 1/3 Ind.

I think USA Today reported on that, but the rest of the MSM buried it.

26 posted on 03/02/2006 3:18:59 PM PST by Dane ( anyone who believes hillary would do something to stop illegal immigration is believing gibberish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: mystery-ak

Is that true?....then why don't they use those numbers?....and do/did you work for a polling company?....

Yes, in 2004 the voting percentages were 37% Dem, 37% GOP. The latest numbers I've seen show a 35% Dem to 33% GOP voting population.

Yes, I use to work in polling first for the Wirthlin Group. Dick Wirthlin was Ronald Reagan's pollster. Then I worked for Yankelovich Partners which before it was taken over by Harris Interactive did CNN/Time's poll. After that I worked for a Republican polling firm, Public Opinion Strategies headquartered in D.C.

I saw how the sausage is made with media polls when I worked for Yankelovich. The partner in charge of the office I worked out of was a hard core Democrat. Media polls are quick and dirty. The client wants them in the field and the results back as quickly and cheaply as possible. Weighting data takes extra time and can add as much as $1000 to the cost of a project. I often pointed out to the partner in charge of the Time poll that are party I.D. numbers were off and we needed to weight the data. He would just laugh and tell me "You're not doing campaign polling anymore son. This is media polling. It doesn't have to be right it just has to be quick."

That should answer it as to why they don't use weighting on these media polls. They really are a joke. Campaign polls will always be the most accurate political polls.


27 posted on 03/02/2006 3:19:47 PM PST by MikeA (Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, the mainstream media: The As*es of Evil)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

The fault for the low numbers lies with the side pushing something so unpopular.

And you're right, keep it up and the numbers will continue to fall. Shoot, we may even see minus approval ratings if Bush starts in with his guest worker talk after this.


28 posted on 03/02/2006 3:20:10 PM PST by moehoward
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Dave S
Suppose this one is rigged to
Naw, don't think it was rigged per se, but the internals show that a larger sampling of respondents were democrats over republicans, independents.. Now some people change their association with a party from time to time.

The Polls internals

POLITICAL IDENTIFICATION  
Democrat ..   43%
Republican .. 33%
Independent ..18%
Other..        3%
DK/WA..        3%

Another thread with info if anyone is interested.

29 posted on 03/02/2006 3:20:24 PM PST by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie
Most Americans oppose allowing a Dubai company to run some U.S. ports, even as a majority understands the U.S. would continue to control port security, according to a new FOX News poll.

Gee, Johnnie-Boy -- who'da thunk?? What with all those "facts" in support of the Dubai deal...

I guess most Americans are "ignorant" Islamphobes afterall??

30 posted on 03/02/2006 3:20:53 PM PST by F16Fighter (Does everything we've "learned about Islam from 9/11" change with the UAE Port deal?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dave S

Let's see, if one polls 10% more Rats and 18% "Independents" is it possible Republicans can't lose ground?


31 posted on 03/02/2006 3:21:09 PM PST by Wasanother (Terrorist come in many forms but all are RATS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

I almost questioned your post #5...glad I waited. LOL


32 posted on 03/02/2006 3:21:22 PM PST by Krodg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: moehoward

The fault lies with the clueless people ranting without the facts.


33 posted on 03/02/2006 3:21:53 PM PST by Howlin ("Quick, he's bleeding! Is there a <strike>doctor</strike> reporter in the house?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Dave S

Both polls are accurate.


34 posted on 03/02/2006 3:21:56 PM PST by HitmanLV (Listen to my demos for Savage Nation contest: http://www.geocities.com/mr_vinnie_vegas/index.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #35 Removed by Moderator

To: Krodg

Just a little too quick on the post, I was.


36 posted on 03/02/2006 3:22:15 PM PST by Howlin ("Quick, he's bleeding! Is there a <strike>doctor</strike> reporter in the house?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Dave S

There have been a bunch of polls with Bush under 40% post-Katrina. He started to recover (back to 50% recently in Rasmussen), but tanked again off the port deal fallout.


37 posted on 03/02/2006 3:23:14 PM PST by iPod Shuffle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: F16Fighter
Stupidity does not become less stupid because it is popular. Wonder if they quit lying about "running the ports" what the result would be. Amazing how the Port Deal Hysterics cling to their lies rather then debate factually.
38 posted on 03/02/2006 3:23:24 PM PST by MNJohnnie ("Good men don't wait for the polls. They stand on principle and fight."-Soul Seeker)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
The media keeps saying, "Bush Is Selling Our Ports to Arabs". I saw Russert last week say that, get corrected, then repeat it later to Arnie.

I am against that. When I first heard the story, I was against it. I thought the Prez was crazy, and wrong.

*Then* I found out the truth -- and now I'm for the deal.

Most people think "Bush is selling our ports". And they're against that. Most folks will *not* voluntarily go find any other info, so they'll not learn the truth until later, when the deal is looked into in detail.

This poll is nothing, just temporary, based on the MSM repeating lies.

And the really special thing is, when folks find out the truth, in a few weeks, once everyone has looked at this company with a microscope up the private regions (assuming they find nothing), it'll be the opponents of the deal that look like idiots, and the polls will swing the other way.

The MSM lies because lies work temporarily.

This is no big deal.

39 posted on 03/02/2006 3:24:27 PM PST by Dominic Harr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Syncretic

Well, there's your problem; you don't have the FACTS:

Flashback - December 13, 2004: Dubai, U.A.E., Joins U.S. Container Security Initiative (State Dept.)
US Department of State ^ | December 13. 2004


Posted on 02/21/2006 5:43:48 PM EST by new yorker 77


Becomes first Mideast port to participate in U.S. program

The United Arab Emirates has joined the U.S. Container Security Initiative (CSI) to help secure maritime cargo shipments against the threat of terrorism.

In a December 12 news release, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency (CBP) said the agreement will enable all cargo destined for the United States through the port of Dubai to be prescreened.

CBP will station a small team of officers at Dubai ports to identify sea containers destined for the United States; Dubai customs officials will be responsible for screening containers identified as potential terrorist risks, the U.S. agency said.

Dubai Ports, Customs and Free Zone Corporation is the sixth-largest port operator in the world and the first in the Middle East to join the CSI, according to the news release.

To date, governments representing 21 countries around the world have signed up to the CSI program, launched by the United States following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

Following is the text of the news release:

(begin text)

U.S. Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security

First Middle Eastern Port Formally Commits to Target, Pre-Screen and Secure Cargo Destined for the U.S.

12/12/2004

Dubai, UAE -- Today Dubai Ports, Customs and Free Zone Corporation joined the U.S. Customs and Border Protection's (CBP) Container Security Initiative [CSI] making it the first Middle Eastern port to participate. CBP Commissioner Robert C. Bonner and Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem, Executive Chairman of the Ports, Customs and Free Zone Corporation, signed a declaration of principles to acknowledge the agreement that will enable all cargo destined for the U.S. through the port of Dubai to be targeted and pre-screened.

"The threat of terrorism is real and, it's a global threat. Dubai Customs recognizes the absolute importance of protecting cargo against the terrorist threat. I applaud their bold action of assuming a leadership role in the Middle East," said Commissioner Bonner.

CBP will deploy a small team of officers to the port of Dubai, the 6th largest port operator in the world whose mission will be to target sea containers destined for the United States. Dubai Customs officials, working with CBP officers, will be responsible for screening any containers identified as a potential terrorist threat.

The primary purpose of CSI is to help protect the global trading system and the trade routes between CSI ports and the United States. By collaborating with foreign customs administrations, CBP is working towards a safer, more secure world trading system.

Under CSI, CBP has entered into bi-lateral partnerships with other governments to identify high-risk cargo containers and to pre-screen them before they are loaded on vessels destined for the United States. Today, governments representing 21 countries have signed up to implement CSI.

"I congratulate the Dubai Ports, Customs and Free Zone Corporation on this historic event. They are now partnering with the United States and are a leader in protecting the global trading system," said Ambassador to the UAE [United Arab Emirates] Michele Sison.

CSI did not exist before 9/ll. It was proposed by Commissioner Bonner and launched in January 2002. CSI has been accepted globally as a bold and revolutionary initiative to secure maritime cargo shipments against the terrorist threat. This initiative will continue to expand to strategic locations around the world.

The World Customs Organization (WCO), the European Union (EU), and the G8 [Group of Eight major industrialized economies] support CSI expansion and have adopted resolutions implementing CSI security measures introduced at ports throughout the world.

The 32 operational ports in Europe, Asia, Africa, and North America include: Halifax, Montreal, and Vancouver, Canada; Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Le Havre, France; Bremerhaven and Hamburg, Germany; Antwerp and Zeebrugge, Belgium; Singapore; Yokohama, Tokyo, Nagoya, and Kobe, Japan; Hong Kong; Goteborg, Sweden; Felixstowe, Liverpool, Southampton, Thamesport, and Tilbury, United Kingdom; Genoa, La Spezia, Naples, and Gioia Tauro, Italy; Busan, Korea; Durban, South Africa; Port Klang and Tanjung Pelepas, Malaysia; Piraeus, Greece; Algeciras, Spain; and Laem Chabang, Thailand.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is the agency within the Department of Homeland Security charged with the protection of our nation's borders. CBP unified Customs, Immigration, and Agriculture Inspectors and the Border Patrol into one border agency for the United States.

(end text)

(Distributed by the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)


40 posted on 03/02/2006 3:24:40 PM PST by Howlin ("Quick, he's bleeding! Is there a <strike>doctor</strike> reporter in the house?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 561-568 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson