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

To: WOSG
I don't know about Iraq. It's a tricky polling question, because there are too many ways to define "winning." To many conservatives, it would mean turning the ME into glass; to RINOs and libs, it's "pulling out." So I'd be cautious in making assumptions about Iraq. The national drive-bys have assumed that Iraq is a loser. I don't think so. Note that NONE of the "military" Dems remain competitive except Allen and Duckworth.

It's another of those "feelings" or hunches that the polls are absolutely failing to capture the true view of Americans. I think Iraq sets in motion a string of thought processes that go from not liking our situation to War on Terror to, "God, I don't want to be blown up" to "Bush has kept us safe," to Bush=Republican and "my local person is a Republican."

I was struck in 2004 when, after being polled by Mason-Dixon, I noted they had separated "War on Terror" and "War in Iraq" in their questions. So when their poll results came out, I re-analyzed the answers if one had joined those two together, and guess what? You had a winner every time.

Bottom line: Iraq actually HELPS Republicans, in a strange, twisted way.

241 posted on 10/30/2006 4:23:37 PM PST by LS (CNN is the Amtrak of News)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 229 | View Replies ]


To: LS

"I don't know about Iraq. It's a tricky polling question, because there are too many ways to define "winning." To many conservatives, it would mean turning the ME into glass; to RINOs and libs, it's "pulling out." So I'd be cautious in making assumptions about Iraq. The national drive-bys have assumed that Iraq is a loser. I don't think so. Note that NONE of the "military" Dems remain competitive except Allen and Duckworth."

FWIW, I think Duckworth will not win... polls but also based on FR comments that her signs arent out, etc. -- she's not running a good campaign. I dont know who Allen is, is that Weldon's opponent? Unfortunately, I think Weldon will lose, thanx to welltimed 'investigation'. Too bad, he's a great guy.

You are right to some extent on Iraq, my main point is that at this point in election cycle, we've lost some 15 points in support for Iraq war vs 2004, so even if it doesnt help Dems directly, its softened up GOP edge on national security; this is mainly thanks to the MSM, IMHO. There was an article on the gender gap this year, and I think the real problem is that some think we are too soft, some (mostly women) are focussed only on the impact to us, not the GWOT.

There is a bottom-line way to see the polling questions vs Dem/GOP support. All those who think of Iraq and war on terror as separate are buying into the Dem description of the war; all those who think of it as related are seeing it the way the Bush administration and the Republicans see it.

I think the Republicans are wrong to emphasis the risks and dangers we face now. The Democrats have made it their theme that 'we are not safe because Bush has screwed up in Iraq'.
Rather, we should have a much more POSITIVE CAMPAIGN that reminds people of the positive progress we've made in many many areas - economy, national security, etc.


257 posted on 10/30/2006 5:52:06 PM PST by WOSG (Broken-glass time, Republicans! Save the Congress!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies ]

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