Gallup Poll Shows the American People Support Democrat's Amendments

[demdiva]

You have to get to the end, but more Americans support setting a timetable withdrawl then don't

http://poll.gallup.com/videoArchive/?ci=23380&pg=

I'd suggest this instead of George Allen

Updated w/ numbers

17% Withdraw Now
32% Withdraw in 12 mo
42% As Long As It Takes
6% Send More Troops

So total withdraw now/within a year has 49%

[whometense]

1. looks like a great link -

thanks!

[ProSense]

2. Cool! Thanks n/t

[blm]

3. Put it up in GD - - use congratulatory subject

Gallup poll: 49% of Americans side with Kerry-Feingold on withdrawal

[demdiva]

4. Done

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2690302&mesg_id=2690302

[ProSense]

5. Are you registered at

Kos? I would love to see this posted there!

[demdiva]

6. yep ... same name.

How do I post an image that isn't online? I have the image but I can't figure out how to post it.

[ProSense]

7. You would

have to register at a site (photobucket, yahoo) that allows you to upload images for posting!

[demdiva]

9. ahhh ... brillant

[beachmom]

8. Actually, it looks like the public is evenly split

48% -- Stay or send in more troops
49% -- Withdraw now or in 1 year

Damn, this country is divided. Is there an argument, then, that the wishy washy Hillary/Warner position will snag all of the withdraw now folks (who, after all, have nowhere to go but Dem) plus enough of the stay now or send in more troops who want the war fought more competently? This was, afterall, Kerry's problem in 2004, something the anti-war lefties choose to forget. There are a LOT of people who are afraid of what will happen if we withdraw (and not just due to GOP talking points -- they are truly worried on what will happen to the Iraqi people which I perfectly understand). As far as Kerry goes, it is very obvious that even if he wasn't a politician, this is EXACTLY how he feels. He wants our troops out, and to be honest -- I don't think his withdrawal plan is particularly politically expedient. I think it actually may hurt him for '08, but so what -- HE IS DOING THE RIGHT THING. It's what is in his heart, and that's more important than enticing the "swing voters". If you don't believe me on this, check how the doves did in becoming president during the Vietnam era. They were right, but the Americans didn't want them as prez, because sometimes the truth does indeed hurt and people don't want to be reminded of it too much.

[ProSense]

10. A lot of people

still don't know the full truth. I bet if they did, more would come around to seeing the futility of this effort. Also there is a poll that shows 57% of Americans want Congress to investigate Iraq.

[beachmom]

11. Totally agree, especially with some of the media coverage or

rather, non-coverage. Still, the numbers are what they are. And, I just don't care. Kerry's position is right, and ever since he came out in April with it, he's walked taller and talked more clearly and with more passion than I've seen in him in a long time. His conscience is clear -- I wonder about the rest of the members of the Senate . . .

[karynnj]

12. I agree that this is not the politically expedient thing to do

The country is divided - but is shifting more to getting out. It's hard to use the Vietnam elections as the comparison.

In 1968, RFK would have been favored to win. The 1968 convention was a disaster with many people absolutely turned off by the protesters. This shifted some of the middle to Nixon's law and order campaign. Both parties had peace planks in their platforms. In an early version of the Nader people abandoning Gore, many liberals stayed home. Even so, 1968 wasn't a land slide.

In 1972, Nixon was the incumbent and, like a later President, he illegally used every power of the government and dirty tricks in the Democratic primary and the general election. In fact, to see how well Kerry did in 2004 - this was the comparable election. The country was at war, a significant percent of the people were against the war (more in 1972 than 2004), and their was a dishonest, unprincipled President. Nixon was smarter than Bush, but the media hated him and was far healthier with far more independent voices. McGovern was a smart principled war hero and had a good record in the Senate. Looking at all these factors, Kerry had the tougher circumstances, especially when you throw in the actions of some churches.

In 2008, there will be no incumbent and who knows what the war will be like. It's even hard to figure out which position would be most politically helpful. I agree that for Kerry - this is not politics. He wants to be President and likely would be now in a fair election, but I think Kerry puts this far beyond politics.

[wisteria]

15. The Anti-war factions in the sixties were viewed as scary and

radical. After the riots at the Dem convention, people felt safe going with Nixon who promised them he had a secrete plan to get us out of Vietnam.
Times have changed and Kerry is not associated with radical factions. I am not worried about this affecting his chances in 08, he comes across as sincere and smart. I feel, his plan may be a bit early for the American people to latch onto,but ultimately with a year, more people will see it Kerry's way. Personally, I think this may enhance his chances.

[ginnyinWI]

13. I see that 6% are with McCain

That ought to help him win the primaries! :sarcasm: :rofl:

[demdiva]

14. LOL

[ProSense]

16. LOL! n/t