Why look at what's passed through a reporter's mental digestive tract when the unexpurgated data are available. And more interesting.
It's a PDF, of course.
http://www.opinion.co.uk/Documents/FINALTABLESMarch08.pdfIf you want what the OP's probably based on, it's here:
http://www.opinion.co.uk/Newsroom_details.aspx?NewsId=90For people that like lots of data, here's the survey (with a different but overlapping set of questions) from 2007:
http://www.opinion.co.uk/Documents/FINALTables.pdfBon appetit!
------------------------------------------
On edit: I read about an earlier poll today, assumed I was simply reading about the same poll from two sources. Stupid igil.
BBC News/ABC news did their own poll.
Some of the data:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/14_03_08iraqpollmarch2008.pdfWhat appears to be a bit more of the data (complete? dunno.):
http://www.abcnews.go.com/images/PollingUnit/1060a1IraqWhereThingsStand.pdfSome of the data, partially digested:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7296117.stmMore of the data, more digested:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7296117.stmIt should be pointed out that the two polls agree on some points, but disagree significantly (which is to say, to a large extent, not just to a degree that's statistically different) on other points. No surprise there. On one or two points (such as whether the US should leave immediately) they seem to say opposite things, which is worth keeping in mind, even though the sample size on the second poll is about half of the first (ORB) poll. They were done within a few days of each other, so timing's not an issue, I don't think.