Posted on 09/24/2007 8:26:23 AM PDT by avacado
Given that moonbats love their useless polls, here are some numbers from Rasmussen Reports that are sure to get their wings flapping. And yes, I am cherry picking the report just as Harry Reid and his losers love to do.
Following President’s Speech, Public Remains Divided on Iraq
- By a 50% to 38% margin, women want Congress to force a troop withdrawal. By a 49% to 43% margin, men disagree.
- Among those who saw the speech, 53% said that Congress should support the President’s approach while 36% disagree.
- By a 49% to 43% margin, those who saw the speech opposed Congressional action to withdraw troops.
- Among those who watched the President’s speech, 47% said it was good or excellent. Twenty-one percent (21%) said fair and 32% said poor.
IOW the Madison avenue style anti-war drumbeat has found women’s minds more maliable to lies than other specific groups.
Congress: 11% approval rating. ‘Nuff said.
Thanks for posting this. It makes me wonder where these Dems are getting the figures for their talking points, that “the majority of this country is against the war.”
“Among those who saw the speech, 53% said that Congress should support the President’s approach while 36% disagree.”
Knowledge is power.
Reminds me of the stats re: man is causing global warming. Once exposed to the research on the other side, they change their opinion.
The speech wasn’t even good, but the point is, when the Dems’ constant defeatism sound bites are rebutted, people choose victory.
I must say these are GOOD numbers. A majority saying the congress should SUPPORT THE PRESIDENT'S approach in Iraq" means a majority support the war in Iraq and think we can win.
A majority opposing congress forcing a retreat, even a narrow one, can me interpreted as "a narrow majority of Americans support our troops in Iraq and oppose a withdrawl."
And yes, it WAS a very good speech.
LOL...you can cherrypick the info to support what we believe, and I'll parse it better than Dan.
A moonbat friend of mine (known for 20+ years) and I were talking on the phone. We somehow got to Bush and he states that ALL Americans are against Bush. I told him that the last official poll on Bush was in 2004 and Bush won by almost 4 million more votes and that he was being easily duped by polls designed to lead you around by your nose. He hung up on me.
I'm not so sure. I'm a woman, I support the entire WoT (anyone remember Afghanistan?; the media doesn't) and nobody called me. I sometimes wonder if people who do these surveys don't carefully pick their calling areas in order to ensure the results will be weighted toward uberleftists.
Wow, the reaction was a bit overboard. They really can't stand to have their fantasies jeopardized. Do the two of you still speak?
He called back about 4 hours later and apologized. He's in a real quagmire. I think he'd be a Republican but his wife is a raging moonbat. He's sort of stuck. I keep asking him why he wants to vote Democrat and have more of his paycheck missing. But it's useless talking to a Bush-hater.
By those that watched the speech.
Divided between two bad positions. No one even considers the third position.
The invasion of Iraq had some very positive results, most notable the death of Saddam Hussein, and the elimination of a terrorist supporting government.
The attempted establishment of a democratic government in Iraq, however, was an idealistic yet naive quest, that was doomed for failure. Islamic culture is incompatible with freedom and democracy. A look at any of the current governments of countries with Islamic majority populations should have warned against that.
Following the capture and execution of Saddam, while the invasion and liberation of the Iraqi people was still popular with them, we should have left with the warning that if any subsequent leader crossed us, we would be back to pound them again. Muslims respect power only. Diplomacy and concessions they see as weakness, and in their culture, the weak are exploited.
If we had been smart, we would have left long ago. Now if we leave, all the work we have done in Iraq up till now will be lost, because instead of leaving as conquerors as we could have right after Saddam's capture, if we leave now, we leave defeated. Now, there are no good alternatives. Leaving shows weakness, and staying creates hostility and costs a billion dollars a day.
What is really unsettling is that no one seems to have learned from our Iraq experience. Politicians still parrot George Bush’s mantra that Islam is a religion of peace, and they ignore the wide spread support Islamic radicals get from the mainstream Islamic public. They still can’t seem to grasp that when Muslims are given the vote, they vote for Mullahs and Islamic leaders who will take the vote and their freedom away from them.
Until we understand these simple lessons we will never find a solution to Islamic terrorism.
Good post!
It's a shame, but there's just no helping some people.
bttt
The mistake too many "conservatives" make is thinking Iraqis are just like Americans. They aren't. Because they're not Americans. Conversely, all Democrats feel that Iraqis are now subjects of American imperialism and had better stay on the plantation and do what they're told. This ticks them off, and I don't blame them a bit.
Any was you slice it, cutting after Saddam's fall and running when REAL Islamists are trying to impose REAL Sharia law would have been a disaster, making whatever gains previously made pointless.
Real Muslims want to live under real Sharia law, at least they think they do. In Iran the younger generation are having second thoughts, but so far, not enough to do anything about it.
Anyway, if they want to live under Sharia law and vote to do so, how are we going to stop them without subverting democracy?
In Turkey the Muslim populace has voted into power an Islamic government. This isn’t an unusual occurrence. It happens at regular intervals, but the Turkish constitution stipulates that the military intervene when Islamic governments are elected. They have in the past, and are threatening to do so again. This is the only way a democratic government with a majority Muslim population can remain secular. All other secular governments with Muslim populations are either dictatorships or monarchies.
You really think Iraqis are different? that they won’t vote to enslave themselves in an Islamic theocracy?
I think pollsters are like global warming sensors.
They exist only in cities and convenient locations for the readers.
Just like the exit pollsters in 2004 were ONLY in urban locations and totally ignored rural locations. Push polling is BY DESIGN only happening in convenient areas which intent to increase the likelyhood of a leftward tilt.
sort of like “we randomly selected people comming out of this DNC meeting...”
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.