Pollster.com: 'Remarkable' Positive Opinion Change on Iraq

NewsBusters ^ | Mark Finkelstein

[governsleastgovernsbest]

Being against the war after she was for it, could it be soon be time for Hillary to be for it again?

The question arises in light of the recent findings by Charles Franklin [pictured here] at Pollster.com. According to his November 6th Pollster.com analysis, there has been a "remarkable" shift, in a postive direction, in public opinion on the war in Iraq.

Excerpts from Franklin's Ten Months of Opinion Change on War and More [emphasis added]:

[fhayek]

While not necessarily FOR the war, she can certainly understand why the President would want to engage in such a policy.

[Always Right]

Hillary: “My husband initiated the ‘regime change in Iraq’ policy.”

[Dilbert56]

Witch: “It was the Democrats, you know, holding the President’s feet to the fire, that caused the turnaround in Iraq.”

[TruthShallSetYouFree]

According to his November 6th Pollster.com analysis, there has been a "remarkable" shift, in a positive direction, in public opinion on the war in Iraq.

These polls are just the tail wagging the dog. Public opinion only changed becuse the war itself has changed. It is not "remarkable" at all.

This is the equivalent of going to a Yankees/Red Sox game at Yankee stadium, and when the Red Sox jump off to a 4-0 lead in the first inning, asking the fans in the bleachers how they thought the game was going. There is no further scoring until the seventh inning, when the Yanks score eight runs. Would it then be "remarkable" that the fans would have a more positive view of the Yankees' chances at that point?

[saganite]

It would be remarkable if I ever had positive opinion of the Yankees! However, your point is well taken.

[RedRover]

The only flaw in that analogy is the that public isn’t watching from the bleachers. They’re still getting their news from MSM sources. And the MSM isn’t reporting our runs on the scoreboard in Iraq.

[Luke Skyfreeper]

While not necessarily FOR the war, she can certainly understand why the President would want to engage in such a policy.

Exactly.

[AHerald]

Hillary: “My husband initiated the ‘regime change in Iraq’ policy.”

LOL. You know your Clintons. I'll be thinking of your post when she says it.

[Berlin_Freeper]

I noticed you don’t hear the phrase “the increasingly unpopular war in Iraq” anymore from the MSM. They were chanting that one daily!

[Hornitos]

Same as the Democrats said about the fall of the Soviet Union. They would try to hinder and slam President Reagan at every turn, and when the Evil Empire finally fell, they declared: “See? It wasn't really a big threat at all.”

[pas]

Is this what is behing Pelosi pushing another I am commander in Chief vote?

[kidd]

This is the equivalent of going to a Yankees/Red Sox game at Yankee stadium...

Sort of.

Its more like listening to the game on the radio, with the announcer telling its listeners that the Yankees are in a quagmire and that the Yankees should quit before the fifth inning starts. Then when the seventh inning starts and the Yankees start scoring go to an extended set of commercials.

[Frwy]

Flippity Floppity. Doesn’t matter who does it. A flip flopping politician can win both sides if the sides don’t keep up on the status of the FF-er. FF-ing is being used as a “confuse them out of their minds” approach. Just sound confident while doing it. Hillary hasn’t mastered the confident part. She won’t either. She’s smart in name only.

[bt_dooftlook]

Or, perhaps, reporting a Red Sox grand slam in the first inning (which was expected), then spending the next two hours talking about the failure of the Red Sox to pay SS for the peanut vendors and the failure to fix leaking pipes at the stadium; after celebrating a home run for the Yankees, they reveal at the top of the ninth that the score is now 12-1 due to the Red Sox getting hit after hit to drive home unreported runs over the previous seven innings...

[Kevmo]

The war is what’s on people’s minds, and that explains why Ron Paul’s numbers are higher than Duncan Hunter’s, and also why he brought in more than $1Million in one day.

So, here’s my suggested strategy. See my tagline.

All Hunter has to do is say, “We should withdraw from Iraq — via Tehran” during a debate and he’d get the exposure he needs + the dialog moves towards military strategy, where he’s a freeping expert and Ron Paul is nuts.

Excerpt:

Voters don’t care nearly as much about immigration right now as they do about other issues. Or for that matter - interestingly for our Giuliani debates - “moral/family values”. At least, that’s what they told the ABC/WaPo poll this past week. It’s all about the economy (stupid), health care and Iraq. Immigration might be something they like to grouse about, but they won’t vote about it, not this time around. Granted this is “all voters”, and the sampling is slightly skewed toward Democratic leaners, probably to better capture the current national mood. But overall people care about as much about immigration as they do the “war on uncontrollable fear” — which is to say, “not very much”.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/postpoll_110407.html

“3. Thinking ahead to the November 2008 presidential election, what is the single most important issue in your choice for president? “

Iraq/War in Iraq 45

Terrorism/National
security 9

Economy/Jobs 29

Health care 27

Immigration/Illegal
immigration 8

Morals/Family
values 3

Global warming 1