Posted on 05/14/2012 6:38:42 AM PDT by Colonel Kangaroo
According to a new Reuters/Ipsos poll, veterans favor Obama over Romney by as much as seven percentage points. They favor cutting the defense budget. Read more...
COLUMBIA, South Carolina (Reuters) - Mack McDowell likes to spend time at the local knife and gun show "drooling over firearms," as he puts it. Retired after 30 years in the U.S. Army, he has lined his study with books on war, framed battalion patches from his tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, a John Wayne poster, and an 1861 Springfield rifle from an ancestor who fought in the Civil War.
But when it comes to the 2012 presidential election, Master Sergeant McDowell is no hawk.
In South Carolina's January primary, the one-time Reagan supporter voted for Ron Paul "because of his unchanging stand against overseas involvement." In November, McDowell plans to vote for the candidate least likely to wage "knee-jerk reaction wars."
Disaffection with the politics of shock and awe runs deep among men and women who have served in the military during the past decade of conflict. Only 32 percent think the war in Iraq ended successfully, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll. And far more of them would pull out of Afghanistan than continue military operations there.
While the 2012 campaign today is dominated by economic and domestic issues, military concerns could easily jump to the fore. Nearly 90,000 U.S. troops remain in Afghanistan. Israeli politicians and their U.S. supporters debate over whether to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities as partisans bicker over proposed Pentagon budget cuts.
Mitt Romney has accused President Obama of "a dangerous course" in wanting to cut $1 trillion from the defense budget - although the administration's actual proposal is a reduction of $487 billion over the next decade.
"We should not negotiate with the Taliban," the former Massachusetts governor contends. "We should defeat the Taliban." He has blamed Obama for "procrastination toward Iran" and advocates arming Syrian rebels.
Romney, along with his primary rivals Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich, had also accused Obama of "appeasement" toward U.S. enemies - a charge that drew a sharp Obama rebuttal. "Ask Osama bin Laden and the 22 out of 30 top al-Qaeda leaders who've been taken off the field whether I engage in appeasement," the president shot back. He has reproached GOP candidates: "Now is not the time for bluster."
If the election were held today, Obama would win the veteran vote by as much as seven points over Romney, higher than his margin in the general population.
FADING COOL FACTOR
The GOP's heated rhetoric, aimed at the party's traditional hawks, might be expected to resonate with veterans. Yet in interviews in South Carolina, a military-friendly red state, many former soldiers expressed anger at the toll of a decade of war, questioned the legitimacy of George W. Bush's Iraq invasion, and worried that the surge in Afghanistan won't make a difference in the long run.
"We looked real cool going into Iraq waving our guns," said McDowell, 50, who retired from the 82d Airborne Division in November with a Legion of Merit and two Bronze Stars. "But people lost their lives, and it made no sense."
Now he worries. "I really don't like the direction we are going, how we seem to come closer daily towards a war with Iran."
In Columbia, where McDowell lives in a leafy subdivision, the streets are named for American Revolutionary war heroes, and the Confederate battle flag still flies on the capitol grounds. Pizza parlors offer a 10 percent discount to uniformed soldiers from nearby Fort Jackson, one of eight military bases that pump $13 billion a year into the state's economy.
In exit polls, a quarter of voters in January's primary identified themselves as veterans.
Among them were Karen and Kelly Grafton, devout Southern Baptists who live in the small town of Prosperity, outside Columbia, and spend their vacations at Nascar races. They voted for Santorum.
"He just came off a little bit better than the others," said Karen Grafton, 51, a real estate agent who served 20 years in the Air Force. "He stuck to his story about what he has done and what he will do."
The Graftons' votes, however, like many veterans', can't be taken as evidence of a hard-line military stance. Registered Republicans, they cast their ballots for Obama in 2008 because he promised to bring the troops home from Iraq.
"I went to war for George Bush," said Grafton, 48, a retired Army master sergeant who served in special operations units in Somalia and Iraq. "But we can't keep policing the world."
Karen Grafton, a retired Air Force recruiter, said she'll be "glad when we're out of Afghanistan." The military budget? "I'm sure it can be cut," she said. "Everyone has to make concessions." Still, many former soldiers worry that Pentagon cuts could mean stingier salaries, pensions, and education and housing benefits.
(imho) it would have been over is less than one year (perhaps eight months or less). It was always a given bin Laden was in pakistan. The saudis should have had their wakeup call as well. iran should have been obliterated where the mullahs did not live through 9/13. Hind sight is always 20/20 though (imho) many of the top brass were ignored (for the reason of fear) by those having been elected. (imho) Americans are tired of wars where the ROEs make it impossible to win.
What they do is go to the Democrats who tell them they want a story about “X.” This week they asked for a story about “Vets for Obama.” I am betting these three have never voted for a Republican in their lives.
“Libya, anyone?”
I believe Obama also went into Somalia. Panetta is plumping for a Syrian engagement. And we’ll probably be in Iran before November.
Demographics are important but so is simply verify the authenticity of those polled. The Gallup folks regularly documented that twice as many respondents claimed to have served in Vietnam than actually did. People embellish when you get to anything more than age, sex and political affiliation.
“Here, look at the monkey. Look at the silly monkey!”
Well, they have been selling the military to gays and women as some kind of professional step up, not to make war. Worse is the erring leadership, which tries to retain the best with “package plans”, which basically makes it look like an extention of entitlement in the leadership. Obama is the worst leader and is trying to brainwash the troops and make them fund all this garbage communist non-profit organizations attached to the Federal government charity drive list.
It’s disgusting.
The military is to be designed as a flying unstoppable machine/bullet targeted at enemies, it is not a career thing, nor something carrying the warrant of a local official like a cop.
But...but...it’s a ‘Global Force for Good.’
Indeed. The media always rephrase things to feelings. The military man should know about the commitment to a mission and eventual losses of any kind within the scope of the mission uncompromising aspects. This ethic is not drilled when signing up or goes out the way after Basic Training.
The final question to the military man and family is this one: who do you want to shake your hand at a military funeral when you or your loved one is a casket?
Certainly not Obama gay-pedophile-rapist types in my books. And that is the crux of the question.
I'm not so sure about that anymore. A buddy of mine went back into the active reserves a few years back because he “missed the camaraderie”. He's told me since that the military isn't the same as when we were in—and the change is NOT for the better—the PC cr@p has permeated into everything. And, I was astonished and appalled to see an 0bama bumper-sticker in the PX parking lot at Ft Sam Houston last week!
That pretty much sums it up. But I’m not in favor of trying to civilize people who like to bugger little boys and find goats to be more attractive than women. There are “republicans” out there, who believe that we must do what the British Empire couldn’t do over the course of three centuries and three wars. I thought the objective was to go over there kill some jihadis, drop some bombs and get the hell out! It don’t take TEN years to do that! What interests do we have over there that we can’t protect with a long-range missile launch???
I suspect this is total crap probably written by some urban metro-sexual with non-existant exposure to the military.....34 years US Navy...most vets I know are counting the days until they can vote Obama out
That picture says a lot.
The contempt on their faces is nearly uniform.
No wonder they started disarming the military when people from his administration comes to speak.
On Iraq he seemed to believe that Obama has thrown away everything that had been accomplished there.
A lot of Americans died trying to turn Iraq into a half-way decent country that would not be a danger to its neighbors. Whether that was ever achievable, given Arab Muslim attitudes and traditions, is debatable, but Obama clearly has no interest in making that happen. Rather he needed to please his anti-war base by undoing as much as possible of what Bush accomplished. If the whole intervention in Iraq becomes a total failure, that's probably a positive for Obama and for the Democrats: they can use that to reinforce the theme that it was wrong to get rid of Saddam Hussein.
If a future Iraqi government becomes as big a problem for the US as Saddam was, they won't care and they won't be held accountable. How many Americans blame Jimmy Carter for the current problems in Iran? Without his help, the current gang wouldn't have taken over the country in 1979.
I have encountered/know WWII vets who still think this communist incarnation of the Democrat party is the Democrat party of the 1930’s.
They just want their oldphartville life and social security check. They do not care about anyone, the future, or anything else.
Steaming Pantload!
Al-Reuters, who embeds their reporters with the Jihadis, cherry-picked a few liberal malcontents and made a story about it.
“Find the facts to support my solution...”
So one guy voted for Paul, and the other couple wanted Santorum...therefore they support Obama???
That’s beyond twisted logic from the author.
Just a couple of caveats: the MSM likes to use “veteran” interchangably with “active duty military” and “military retireee.” But as all FReepers know, a veteran is someone who served in the armed forces at one time or another, a group that includes everyone from your father or grandfather who volunteered during World War II, to the young man or woman who was discharged from active duty last week. Individuals on active duty are (obviously) still serving, and retirees are those who spent enough time in service to earn a pension and other retirement benefits.
Speaking from experience, I can assure you there is minimum support for Obama among individuals in that latter category. I’m a retired military officer and I live in an area (Tidewater Virginia) with one of the largest armed forces communities in the nation. There are even fewer Obama stickers on cars than I saw four years ago, and many of those with Obama decals on their bumpers (and DoD registration decals on their windshields) belong to African-Americans.
But in fairness, I have also met a number of black military retirees who have no use for the Annointed One, and plan to vote for Romney in November. Many in that group are retired officers or senior NCOs who understand that Barry and his policies spell disaster for our armed forces, and our national security.
And that begs another question: I can’t find the internals for that Reuters poll anywhere (what a surprise). It would be very interesting to see how they assembled their “veterans” sample. Obama certainly has more support among younger troops and among those from minority groups. But the veteran/military voting bloc is still over-whelmingly conservative and Republican. Come November, there will likely be a 60-40 or 70-30 split among veterans, favoring the GOP.
Finally, if veterans are breaking for Obama, that should put states like South Carolina in play (after all, 25% of GOP primary voters in the state identify themselves as vets). But by all accounts, the Obama team has written off the state. Just one more indication that the Reuters poll (and the article) just don’t add up.
I know my military retiree brother in the latter category has absolutely no intention of voting for President Obama.
The veterans I know don’t favor Obama at all.
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.