What the h*ll is this?? Zogby/UPI poll GOP better for Iraq?

[jillan]

How can this even be close?

UPI Poll: GOP pres better for Iraq war


Published: Aug. 31, 2007 at 12:01 PM
WASHINGTON, Aug. 31 (UPI) -- A narrow plurality of participants in a UPI-Zogby International poll said a Republican U.S. president is more likely to see the Iraq war to a successful end.

Some 39.4 percent of those asked choose the GOP when asked which party member as president would “bring the war to a successful conclusion." Another 35.9 percent said a Democrat would -- slightly outside outside the poll’s 1.2 percentage-point margin of error -- and 16.8 percent said “neither.”

While 81.7 percent of Republican respondents chose the GOP on the question, a relatively smaller 71.8 percent of Democrats said “a Democratic president.” Those extra Democratic opinions didn’t cross the aisle, however, as 18.3 percent of Democratic participants chose “neither.” More Republicans (3.8 percent) said “Democrat” than Democrats (2.6 percent) said “Republicans.”

As to which individual would best handle the war, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, a Republican, came in first with 13.7 percent with former U.S. Sen. Fred Thompson, R-Tenn., an undeclared candidate, second at 10.6 percent.

Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., was third (10.3 percent) followed by Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill. (8.7 percent), Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., (7 percent) and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., (6.7 percent).

The Zogby interactive poll of 6,711 U.S. residents was conducted Aug. 17-20.

http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2007/08/31/upi_poll_gop_pres_better_for_iraq_war/5618/

[Rick Myers]

1. Good. Then all the Republicans can MOVE TO Iraq!

Two birds, one stone.

[redqueen]

2. ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1697984&mesg_id=1697984

[valerief]

3. They only polled the really, really rich people benefitting from the war. nt

[pwb]

4. O k but I want someone better for the U S.

not republicans

[AtomicKitten]

5. The GOP has handled Iraq quite nicely up until now.

[Kolesar]

6. Which means that 39.4% of the population are asshole Republican zealots

25% of the public is voting "neither". This means that this is still a republican war and their albatross to wear around their necks.

[PATRICK]

7. Is there a nasty subtlety in the ?

The GOP is seen as pursuing the war to an end. Dems are there to end the war as a lost cause(ignoring the war crime and treason aspects). The responders have their own dilemma of being asked possibly to determine who would PURSUE the conclusion, successful, to the war. The Dems have been playing to the anti-war majority even as some sneakily want to maintain some of the aims of the war. This question is a war question, not a peace question and Dems can't have it both ways unless magically they are trying to entice votes from some of those hawkish patriots who can be only convinced that the current WH team has just not been smart enough.

The public also doesn't get that the most likely(the inevitable) "new" GOP WH will be firmly in the control of the Bushes and their pals. It would be nice if Dems would start making this point even if Guiliani is temporarily, possibly, in the way of making that stick.

There is a subtle use for this type of question to hammer the subtle Dems who are less than Kucinich on this one. However, a major pollster should know very well how the MSM cherrypicks such questions even as the buildup for a new war begins. This encourages the propaganda/death game all over again. Thanks Zogby.

[rodeodance]

8. my gawd! I really am stunned!!--really.

[Darkseid69]

9. It wa an interactive poll

Take these with a grain (or a lot) of salt

[AlCzervik]

10. i would like to see the internals on that poll, how a break down of the

respondents? UPS article is very light on details.

[Jim__]

11. Even democrats are losing faith in the Democratic politicians.

The pukes got a plurality because close to 20% of Dems answered "Neither". I am beginning to believe "Neither" too.

[caraher]

12. The results make more sense when you look at the question

Most Americans will take "successful conclusion" to be something like the neocon fantasy scenario. A Repug president probably is more likely to continue betting on a bad hand rather than folding, and everyone knows you can win if you don't play, right?

The wording is a train wreck from the start. Really, the war in Iraq had indeed ended when * pulled his infamous "Mission Accomplished" stunt. The war in Iraq was never the hard part. Truer to the facts would be to ask about who would better manage the occupation to a successful conclusion. And for everyone but the PNAC crowd and war profiteers, a successful conclusion involves our no longer delivering Americans in and out of uniform to the terrorists the occupation bred.

[jillan]

13. This is a Zogby poll - please join Zogby

They email me their polls all of the time.

Maybe everyone at DU should sign up with them so we could get better representation.

http://interactive.zogby.com/

[hvn_nbr_2]

14. Depends on who is defining "successful end"

Without looking at the details, here's my theory on this poll:

Most reality-based people know that there isn't going to be any "successful" end to this war, based on any kind of normal definition of success. So reality-based people don't think any Dem or Puke can achieve a successful end.

On the other hand, wingnuts still think Dumbya can achieve success if they would just lock up all the dissenters and blow up at them Eye-rack-ie Al-Qaedaists, but they know that no Dems will do that.

Ergo, nobody thinks Dems will end it successfully, although for very different kinds of reasons. But a small percentage of wackos think a wacko like themselves can do it.