![]()
Friday's "Hannity and Colmes" featured a discussion of a recently released Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll which found that, when asked the question, "Do you personally think the world would be better off if the United States loses the war in Iraq?" 19 percent of Democrats answered "yes" while 20 percent answered "don't know," leaving only 62 percent who definitely disagreed with the idea that the world might be better off if America lost. By contrast, 87 percent of Republicans and 76 percent of Independents disagreed with the idea that a loss by America might be a good thing for the world. (Transcript follows)
Sean Hannity introduced the discussion with Republican pollster Kellyanne Conway and Democratic strategist/author Doug Schoen, and posed his first question to Schoen: "Doug, 20 percent of your party wants us to lose the war?" Schoen rationalized the numbers, contending that "we don't know what victory is," and that Democrats are "fed up" and "have had enough."
Below is a transcript of the exchange from the Friday October 5 "Hannity and Colmes":
SEAN HANNITY: In a sure sign that liberalism has run amok in this country, the latest Fox News poll shows that Democrats are not only planning for a withdrawal from Iraq, but that one in five actually believe that [the world] would be better off if we lost the war outright. Joining us now to try and make sense of that tragic poll result, Republican pollster Kellyanne Conway, Democratic pollster and author of The Power of the Vote, Doug Schoen, is with us. Doug, 20 percent of your party wants us to lose the war, lose the war?
DOUG SCHOEN, Democratic strategist: Sean, we don't know what victory is. First, it was deposing Saddam, then it was political reconciliation, now it's rooting out terror. A lot of Democrats are fed up with this war. And what that figure says to me is they've had enough, they don't know what our goals are, and they just want out.














Comments Policy
I'll buy that
October 6, 2007 - 18:30 ET by dervishDemocrats don't know the meaning of victory. But they've been pretty familiar with losing, which is maybe why the question was framed that way.
I think it's telling that this dweeb didn't even begin to dispute the result; he just went right to the spin. Just goes to show that our perception of them is dead on.
Dervish
October 6, 2007 - 18:39 ET by well99I think there is a big difference between the Dems talking heads..reid,hillary,Koed and that ilk than a regular person who is a Dem.The Dem strategist lie out there butts.That is how they make a living.
Exactly my point.
October 6, 2007 - 18:48 ET by dervishIf you find a poll result that you don't believe, you attack the poll -- something wrong with the sample, the way the question was worded, whatever. This guy doesn't seem to doubt for a second that the numbers are right.
Speaking of which, doesn't that poll look a bit slanted toward Democrats?
My point
October 6, 2007 - 18:59 ET by well99Is that I dont think the regular people that are Dems believe the way their leadership and the left wing do.62 % is still the majority.There is a problem with polls yes.You dont know who they are asking.
I understand.
October 6, 2007 - 19:02 ET by dervishAnd don't you think a Democrat strategist should be making that point?
A honest one would
October 6, 2007 - 19:53 ET by well99Now to find a honest one.Good luck on that.
I think this guy was being honest,
October 6, 2007 - 19:59 ET by dervishbut trying to put a happy face on the result. Dishonest Democrats respond to unflattering charges with statements like "I did not have sex with that woman."
To be fair, Republicans
October 8, 2007 - 11:12 ET by rwestTo be fair, Republicans have been unclear on what victory is as well. By Bush's account, the meaning of "victory" has run the gamut from a "democratic oasis in the Middle East" to "less sectarian violence".
Anyway, this poll is so grossly slanted toward the right-wing pundits that it shouldn't have ever been shown anywhere. The Iraq war is not a video game or a football game and will not have a "winner" and a "loser", and couching it in those terms dishonors America and the troops. I don't think any Americans want to see another 3,000 dead Americans and 600,000 dead Iraqi civilians so that we can get a "winner" sticker from the chickenhawk talking heads.
19%
October 6, 2007 - 18:33 ET by BlondeNineteen percent of democrats are certifiably stupid.
And self-admittedly so. Go figure. I'd like to see what Reid, Pelosi, & Murtha replied...Ten to one they're all in the certifiably stupid category.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
I think you're right about
October 6, 2007 - 19:59 ET by motherbeltI think you're right about them being stupid. Schoen says: And what that figure says to me is they've had enough, they don't know what our goals are, and they just want out.
The question was NOT "Do you want the US out of Iraq?" The question was "Do you think the world would be better off if the US LOST the war" Not left, not withdrew...LOST. In what world does that translate to "they don't know what our goals are; they've had enough." Is he saying they are so fed up they want a defeat just to end it?
Either Schoen is performing a masterpiece of spin, to disguise the fact that 1 in 5 Democrats want the US to fail, or they are ALL too stupid to understand the question.
And if they were all too stupid to understand and thought they were answering a different question, the poll is worthless.
400 billion later and we havent stopped Iran or Syria
October 7, 2007 - 13:08 ET by Daniel BakerI believe we should withdraw most our troops We have Accomplished the Mission in Iraq. We should take a smaller role and leave them be while we take out the nuclear regime in Iran.
_______________________________
Learn about "the best choice for people of faith" http://www.evangelic...
DB... Can we not do
October 7, 2007 - 13:14 ET by bigtimerDB...
Can we not do both...with the help also from Israel as far as taking out Iran's nuclear facilities?
Just curious what you and others think.
Iran has missles targeted at our Iraq troops
October 7, 2007 - 19:37 ET by Daniel BakerWe better hope the Patriot missle still works. We should reduce thenumber of targets in Iraq.
_______________________________
Learn about "the best choice for people of faith" http://www.evangelic...
point being Daniel
October 7, 2007 - 19:54 ET byif Iran thought we were serious they would not dare AND they would not be arming terrorists in Iraq now. (Thank-you frau pelosi)
Support our Troops
You're exactly right. If
October 7, 2007 - 22:22 ET by GregEYou're exactly right. If they really thought we were serious, they'd back off their activities. But as they watch our fearless leaders we call politicians, they can see that there is no unity against them and without unity, they're pretty sure America can't act and any threat is empty.
Thanks for the response
October 7, 2007 - 19:56 ET by bigtimerThanks for the response DB.
I kind of figured that was the case most likely, I also figured we must have some kind of a major plan for this scenario if it came to be.
Very scary indeed, but then again this world is now, that is for sure.
And of those 19%, 75% of
October 6, 2007 - 18:35 ET by Roger the ShrubberAnd of those 19%, 75% of them frequent Newsbusters....
I heard this poll this
October 6, 2007 - 18:36 ET by bigtimerI heard this poll this morning.....
I believe it is more than 19% myself...we all know how polls are now don't we?
LMAO!
No doubt about it.
October 6, 2007 - 18:41 ET by dervishThe 19% were the ones brazen enough to admit it out loud to a stranger.
And likely over half of the
October 7, 2007 - 22:24 ET by GregEAnd likely over half of the "I don't knows" are really "yes" that is in the mind of the interviewee, but dare not cross the lips.
And who do these people
October 6, 2007 - 20:04 ET by SMGalbraithAnd who do these 19% want to win?
If we lose, someone will be victorious. Or is the thought that a weakened America itself is good for the world regardless of who emerges out of the ashes of Iraq. There is the saying that there are liberals who believe that there isn't a problem in the world that can't be solved simply by having the US walk away from it or not be involved.
Or in this case, having the US defeated.
But that's silly if not, more seriously, a form of self-loathing or self-hatred. One must examine the full consequences of our defeat. Someone will win. Someone will replace us in Iraq. Who will that party be?
It's much like the question for those who wish to see the US withdraw from the world and not be the dominant power. If the US is not the dominant power in the world, some country (or countries) will replace us. That's been the recorded history of the world since the establishment of the nation state (if not before then).
So, the question emerges: If the US isn't the dominant power, which country do you wish to see replace us?
Because someone will.
SMG
Unbelievable...
October 6, 2007 - 18:52 ET by rgoldDo you think anyone in this 19% actually has a loved one in the war?
Or for that matter even knows someone in the military?
They might feel differently if they did.
rg..... Hear! Hear!
October 6, 2007 - 18:55 ET by bigtimerrg.....
Hear! Hear!
Do you think anyone in this
October 6, 2007 - 18:59 ET by SMGalbraithDo you think anyone in this 19% actually has a loved one in the war?
Or knows someone who does?
My guess - my hope - is that this 19% is all Bush hatred. They just want Bush to lose. Not the US. Somehow they've convinced themselves that a loss for Bush is not a loss for the US.
Crazy.
Look, if Bush proclaimed this as "National Cute Puppy Dog Month", a good 20% of liberals would be against that announcement.
I'm hoping against hope that a good 15% of the above are in that crowd.
SMG
LOL!
October 6, 2007 - 19:02 ET by rgoldYeah , but I support cute puppy dogs, I Just don't want them to be the dog of the month!
unfortunatly, one of my
October 8, 2007 - 19:08 ET by jezebelleunfortunatly, one of my friends has a brother in service and wants us out if iraq and is voting for hilary...(shudder). I asker her if she was serious and she refused to discuss it with me. She is very angry with the war and the administration and gets angry if I try to talk to her about it. I think she feels I have no right to agree with the war because i don't have someone there right now. she totally discounts the fact that my brother was in the gulf war.
I finally watched the movie World Trade Center (was so scared to see it for so long) and became unbelievably fired up about kicking the shit out of those who did this to us. I just wish the liberals were able to see thru thier cloud of bullshit and recognize the truth
jezebelle... The leftists
October 8, 2007 - 19:21 ET by bigtimerjezebelle...
The leftists won't remove their rose-colored glasses...they have no intention to...it will never fit their agenda for power or satisfy their hatred for Pres. Bush and conservatives.
They really need mental help for any true happiness IMHO.
They are really gonna need it in '08 if we get somebody with an 'R' in the WH.
Can you imagine the dem's and msm..it will be soooo much fun!
jezebelle, here's a great Hillary YouTube called Triphorgetin
October 8, 2007 - 19:33 ET by RJIt probably won't change her mind, but you'll get a laugh out of her blustering when she sees it.... :^)
(Hat tip to Bigtimer!)
http://www.theeagle939.com/?p=650
Geez, RJ
October 8, 2007 - 19:39 ET by BlondeThat deserved a beverage alert.
I loved the t-shirts in the vid.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Hey RJ... Great job! I
October 8, 2007 - 19:45 ET by bigtimerHey RJ...
Great job!
I am LOL...that made me happy you found the way to do that...I never thought of it.
Enjoy jezebelle.
You were the one who found it, BT
October 8, 2007 - 19:53 ET by RJI just had to search for it on the net.
And, blonde, I hope you didn't waste any Cruzan Blackstrap!
BTW, is anyone watching the new show, "Cane", about Florida Sugar and Rum producers? Last week the government promised to subsidize half the 100 million it would cost to build a new ethanol plant. Sugar....ethanol.....subsidies....now, that's topical....
"Harry Reid is a complete buffoon." -Lou Dobbs
RJ....Cane?
October 8, 2007 - 19:56 ET by BlondeDo tell (where & when).
You know me about all things Floridian.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Blonde, Cane is on Tuesdays.
October 8, 2007 - 20:09 ET by RJNot a bad show. It's about a Cuban immigrant family that grows sugar and makes Rum. All the usual ingredients: politics, murder, night club, etc.
"Harry Reid is a complete buffoon." -Lou Dobbs
RJ... I love you new
October 8, 2007 - 19:57 ET by bigtimerRJ...
I love you new tag-line for our Fearless Leader in the Senate...
Thanks to Dobbs too in this case, I may not always agree with him but this is a winner.
BT, did you see my post that quoted Dobbs going off on
October 8, 2007 - 20:03 ET by RJthat smarmy political hack, Robert Zimmerman?
Dobbs was on "take no prisioner" fire tonight. Zimmerman looked like he had been pole-axed...
"Harry Reid is a complete buffoon." -Lou Dobbs
Sure did RJ... I am going
October 8, 2007 - 20:07 ET by bigtimerSure did RJ...
I am going to hope to make it later here to see the rerun of the show tonight...you posted a lot I would like to see later.
I despise the arrogant POS Zimmerman...it will be worth it just to see that.
BT...FYI
October 8, 2007 - 20:26 ET by RJLou was smiling the whole time, while he twisted the knife.
"Harry Reid is a complete buffoon." -Lou Dobbs
RJ... I'm grinning like a
October 8, 2007 - 20:32 ET by bigtimerRJ...
I'm grinning like a Cheshire cat!
ya know i've taken triphorgetin
October 9, 2007 - 13:41 ET by jezebellefor years and one day it just stopped working.
hilarious!
lol, jezebelle
October 9, 2007 - 13:55 ET by RJYou need to take it with kool-aid...says so right on Hillary's web site.
Yeah and you're not
October 9, 2007 - 14:01 ET by MightyMouthYeah and you're not supposed to operate a voting booth or heavy machinery afterwards. :-)
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
What a lame-ass response by
October 6, 2007 - 19:22 ET by ckc1227What a lame-ass response by the Democrat strategist. "Duh, we don't know what victory is, therefore, the only conclusion we can come to is that America must lose." So, is he telling us that Democrats are dumber than Republicans and Independents because they can't figure out what victory means, or is it that they hate their country more than Republicans and Independents? Personally, I think it's both.
Like others here, I bet the number is higher than 1 in 5.
I thought this question was
October 6, 2007 - 20:09 ET by LighthouseJI thought this question was pretty much decided already. I've been watching the news for years and the answer to that question falls somewhere between a resounding 'No!' to simply dodging the question because they don't want to admit a 'Yes' in a soundbite. I thought we've all agreed that we need to win.
The picture we aren't seeing is all the people that call for withdrawl never are willing to be honest with themselves with what will Iraq be like when we're gone. The democrats say Bush is in denial, I say the democrats are in denial. They desperately don't want to link their desire to withdraw troops to Iraq breaking down into bedlam. Their discourse ends at withdraw, with no mind paid to what happens a month, a year later.
It's four years later, we have to get past the Michael Moore conspiracy theories about WMD, Bush lying and the broken democratic record about how we got into this war. We need to start fresh and work for the future.
"Boats are safe in the harbor, but that's not what they're made for." -- Maritime quote
Also can't find the US on a map
October 6, 2007 - 20:24 ET by ThisnThatA survey points out that 11% of young people also can't find the U.S. on a map, so it's not surprising that 20% would also want the U.S. (which they can't find) to lose the war. Some people are simply clueless, and will remain so for their entire lives.
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
Mother Jones magazine just
October 6, 2007 - 20:29 ET by balboaMother Jones magazine just released a poll that said 19% of Republicans weren't sure if intentionally running over boxes of kittens was a bad idea.
Mother Jones magazine just
October 6, 2007 - 20:37 ET by SMGalbraithMother Jones magazine just released a poll that said 19% of Republicans weren't sure if intentionally running over boxes of kittens was a bad idea.
And 65% of Democrats polled blamed Bush for causing the kittens to be in the road.
Special commentary by Olbermann to follow: "Mr. Bush, sir, how could you leave those kittens in road to be killed, sir??"
SMG
Hey you talkin' about
October 6, 2007 - 20:42 ET by MidAmericaHey you talkin' about me?
I'm Republican and I've ..uh.... teminated kittens. When you live in the country and them cute little things keep multiplying sometimes nature needs a helping hand to stay in balance.
Although I/we never ran over them.
I would need to know if the
October 8, 2007 - 12:05 ET by MightyMouthI would need to know if the kittens were "materially" supporting terrorism or not.
hmmm... soiled kitty litter = IED. hmmm....
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Victory - What's That?
October 6, 2007 - 20:53 ET by pbthinkerThe only victory Democrats care about is 2008. They don't want anything, even an American victory, to screw that up. They certainly have convoluted reasoning going for them. Barrack doesn't want to wear an American flag, on his lapel, says his actions will speak for him, as he continues with the anti-war rhetoric.
I'm sure those 20% were feeling really great, this week, as the Democrats attacked Limbaugh all week. It's the little things that make their little hearts go pitter patter, not anything like a victory.
Democrats: Specializing in "high tech lynching" since 1987.
Well, I guess the move-on
October 6, 2007 - 21:44 ET by jdhawkWell, I guess the move-on crowd of liberal losers didn't get the word. The present dimocrat presidential top tier candidates in their recent "debate" stated that, if elected, they couldn't ensure that during their first term as president that they would withdraw all troops from Iraq.
But, here is the Q and A that you can read for yourselves -
Question: "Senator Obama, will you pledge that by January 2013, the end of your first term, more than five years from now, that there will be no troops, US troops in Iraq?"
OBAMA: I think it's hard to project four years from now. I think it would be irresponsible. We don't know what contingencies will be out there.
HILLARY: It is very difficult to know what we're going to be inheriting. You know, we do not know, walking into the White House in January 2009, what we're going to find.
EDWARDS: I cannot make that commitment.
What? Didn't view, hear, or see much about the above? I just can't understand it!
Victory in Iraq is a Civil War
October 6, 2007 - 22:52 ET by Daniel BakerA peaceful Iraq will never happen until Muslim extremeists rule the country. The moderates must respond by killing them off.
We are stupid to give all this money to Iraq to rebuild when they don't believe in freedom of religion. Islam only progresses by violence, so trying to fix a county of Muslims is crazy.
_______________________________
Learn about "the best choice for people of faith" http://www.evangelic...
I have believed for a long
October 6, 2007 - 22:58 ET by GregEI have believed for a long time that many US citizens want the US to lose in Iraq. Bill O'Reilly asked Letterman and others. Someone asked Rosie O'Donnell too. I'm sure there are others I don't know about. But the two I mention did not answer O'Reilly's question. That question is one that, as an American, takes very little thought if any to answer with a resounding "yes." The "I don't know" crowd, for the most part, are "no" people who know that's not something that makes much sense to say, so they avoid it. That 19% "yes" is likely higher, as many of the "I dont know" answers actually are "yes" if answered honestly. I myself have also asked a liberal or two, and I also don't get a "yes." I get banter. That's a "yes."
Some in the halls of Congress fall into the "yes" column as well. Very sad. Osama bin Laden is a "yes" too. All his minions are also in the "yes" column. To reveal to our enemies that we have enemies within is quite morale boosting for them.
What I've always said rings true. Many who want our country to lose in Iraq are perpetuating the killing of more of our soldiers. And I don't give a rats a** what anyone thinks about that statement. They hate the statement because it's true and they don't want to be called on it. They're idiots. The very thing they claim to want stopped (our soldiers dying), is the very thing of which they are assisting with the continuance. America won't win because of these morons, we will win in spite of them. But along the way, they'll be a cause of a percentage of soldier deaths that will not be quantifiable, and which will be very easy for them to shrug off as nonsense. The nonsense is their mind.
And I'll stop now before I need to duct tape my head.
The "I don't know" crowd are
October 7, 2007 - 09:35 ET by cleverpigThe "I don't know" crowd are the only people answering the question correctly. They don't know. Neither do you. Will winning the war be better for the U.S? Sure! But that's not what the question asked. Our original idea of victory in Iraq-- democracy, peaceful coexistance, hailed as heros, etc-- is obviously not going to happen. So who the hell knows what it will mean for the world as a whole if we declare victory or defeat?
You're in the Yes column
October 7, 2007 - 09:46 ET by ThisnThatYour comments sure sound a lot like "Yes, I'd like the U.S. to lose" to me, especially if you can't imagine what a defeat would mean to the world!
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
If you actually know what a
October 7, 2007 - 10:03 ET by cleverpigIf you actually know what a defeat for the U.S. in Iraq means, and what effect it would have on the world, tell me and I'll evaluate whether or not I think it's a good thing. I'm betting my answer would be no, but you may propose consequences that I hadn't thought of.
In any case, if you just asked me the poll question straight up, without any further explanation, I'd answer no. I'd then grind my teeth and rant to my boyfriend about meaningless polls asking average Americans to evaluate repercussions our leadership can't even predict!
Clever, defeat in Iraq
October 7, 2007 - 10:06 ET by bassndudeClever, defeat in Iraq would mean and enboldened Iran, a free Iraq would be a dream at this point, for Iran would invade and the blood bath would begin as the shia and sunni begin to eliminate each other, one on the behest of Iran.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
If you are right both
October 7, 2007 - 10:11 ET by cleverpigIf you are right both options sound pretty bad to me!
}}---> Ignoporker
October 7, 2007 - 10:19 ET by Cool ArrowSince when is there ever a problem deciding between a good outcome and a bad one?
Those aren't even decisions.
~LYDSEXICS UNTIE!~
Sorry
October 7, 2007 - 12:16 ET by cleverpigI don't consider bloodbaths good.
Islamasts Extremists
October 7, 2007 - 10:18 ET by ThisnThatJust two things, out of many. Can you imagine the propaganda victory the Islamast Extremists would make out of an American defeat, and the encouragement it would provide to prevail in any of their other world-domination activities? And can you imagine the damage done to other countrys' confidence that we would fight for freedom anywhere in the world?
Of course, you wouldn't understand any of this, because the socialist disease has infected you way beyond any hope of cure. So basically, I'm not answering your questions here -- I'm just stating the obvious for everyone else.
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
If you actually know what a
October 7, 2007 - 10:22 ET by SMGalbraithIf you actually know what a defeat for the U.S. in Iraq means, and what effect it would have on the world, tell me and I'll evaluate whether or not I think it's a good thing.
I'll admit that I don't actually know how a defeat for the US will affect the world. But I don't actually know what I will have for breakfast tomorrow either.
Using your standard, the answer to any question that involves conjecture or supposition about future consequences would always be "I don't know".
This is why they are called "opinion polls" that measure the "opinions" of people.
We can try and make educated guesses. They are, admittedly, guesses. But that is what the question is asking, our thoughts about the consequences of a US loss.
If the US loses militarily in Iraq - after all, we're engaged in a war - then the "other" side will win. One side wins, the other side loses. We know what constitutes that "other" side; a mix of radical Islamists, Sunni Baathists and Shi'a radicals mostly aligned with Iran.
It is my supposition - I don't actually know - that a victory for any one of these groups over the US will be bad, bad, bad for the world. It is never good for international peace and a just order (however one measures those) for anti-democratic, anti-western, anti-US dictatorial groups whose goal is to kill anyone who doesn't embrace their views to attain power over pro-democratic, pro-western ones.
If you can cite an instance where it was good, I'll withdraw my statement.
SMG
I don't have a problem with
October 7, 2007 - 12:22 ET by cleverpigI don't have a problem with people who do have an opinion. As I said, I do too. I just think that it is disingenuous to lump people who say they don't know into the "Yes" category.
My point isn't that pro-democracy, pro-western views are ever bad, just that they don't always go together. Democracy is a tricky thing: once you give it to people you can't force them to be pro-west or pro-US after that point. I don't think it is going to be as simple as US win = democracy + a new ally.
I agree with you. My take
October 7, 2007 - 22:57 ET by GregEI agree with you. My take on the "I don't know" group comes from conversations I've had with people who can't, for the life of them, say they want America to win. And seriously, I've asked the question only to get nothing but banter and dancing in response. That's a sad thing, and also a dangerous thing, in my opinion. They do everything they can to deflect the question by asking other questions and moving away from it as quickly as they can. Maybe you've not run into that, but I surely have.
Several months before the 2004 election, I asked someone if they would want Bush to win in 2004 if it meant that we'd definitely win in Iraq, or if they'd want Bush to lose in 2004 if it meant that we'd definitely lose in Iraq. She wouldn't answer. She couldn't put America first, so she skirted the question.
Why goodmorning clever one
October 7, 2007 - 09:49 ET byhonestly is the world better of with a weak or no USA?
Support our Troops
The "I don't know" crowd
October 7, 2007 - 09:52 ET by SMGalbraithThe "I don't know" crowd are the only people answering the question correctly.
But that wasn't the question. The question was whether "The world would be better off it the US loses the war".
Not wins the war. But loses it.
The US is fighting against essentially three separate groups inside Iraq: Al-Qaeda in Iraq, Sunnis Baathists who wish to re-gain the power they lost after their removal, and Shi'a radicals who wish to establish a Shi'a dictatorship aligned with Iran. There are regional outside powers supporting some of the above.
None of these groups wish to create a trans-sectarian democratic pro-western or pro-US government. They all wish to have, in some ways, an anti-Western, anti-democratic dictatorship where they rule from the end of a barrel of a gun.
If the US loses in Iraq, one of the above will win.
And anyone thinking that the US losing to any one of these groups would be good for the world is either not thinking logically or has a dark view of the US involvement in the world.
Or both.
The correct answer is that it would not be good for the world to have a radical anti-western dictatorship aligned with terrorist groups or countries sitting on billions of barrels of oil and strategically located next to the main shipping channels of much of the world's oil supplies.
Among other things.
SMG
I agree with you. But so
October 7, 2007 - 10:17 ET by cleverpigI agree with you. But so far no one has come up with a way in which we win and manage to create a government that doesn't just immediately get taken over by one of those three groups. Will the difference between victory and defeat just mean that they take over their government politically instead of militarily? How do we stop that from happening? Keep in mind what happened in Palestine when we pushed for democracy there: we weren't exactly pleased with who they decided to elect.
My point is that it isn't a simple question, which is why polls like this infuriate me. I can't defend the people who answered that they thought a U.S. defeat would be good. I think they're wrong. But I think "I don't know" is a very reasonable answer and it is unfair to lump all of those people who might actually have a more nuanced understanding of the complexities involved into the 19%.
So you don't know if our
October 7, 2007 - 22:53 ET by GregESo you don't know if our losing in Iraq will be good for the world, and you berate me for thinking that it will not be good for the world, telling me I don't know either? Interesting.
If you prefer to be petty, allow me to step into your realm for a moment. If you want to be petty, the question wasn't "do you personally KNOW the world will be better off if America loses?" but instead the question was "do you personally THINK..." it? If you answer in the petty manner you prefer, your answer is "I don't think."
And it's interesting that you can't answer that question yes or no, yet you're saying, as factual, that our "original idea of victory in Iraq" is "obviously not going to happen." How is this so easy for you to state, yet answering the poll question in a way other than "I dont know" brings out riducule from you? "Obviously not going to happen" in this case is your opinion.
If my words were too
October 8, 2007 - 00:21 ET by cleverpigIf my words were too strong, then I apologize. I honestly didn't intend to ridicule anyone for having an opinion. I have one myself, as I stated earlier. "No." What I objected too was discounting the opinions of those who said "I don't know," and presuming you know what they really meant. That is a valid and realistic answer to an incredibly complicated question. It is a stupid, stupid poll.
And yes, it is my opinion that our original concept of victory is now impossible. Do you remember how you felt when you watched the statue of Saddam tumbling down, Iraqi's cheering and waving American flags? I think if we are honest with ourselves, that is exactly what we were all hoping for when we started this war, and I think that moment is lost. We can redefine victory, and maybe we can acheive it, but if we do I think we'll all find that it looks a little different than what we expected.
Again, my intent was not to discourage opinions, just to point out that the opinions of others, even if they sound non-commital, are not yours to do with as you please!
Point taken.
October 8, 2007 - 08:01 ET by GregEPoint taken.
I disagree on the poll question being stupid. I think it's telling. We'll just agree to disagree on that.
Agreed!
October 8, 2007 - 11:54 ET by cleverpigAgreed!
Hannity's Insanity
October 7, 2007 - 00:27 ET by KeithLiberals hate this country right? I mean, that's what you people have been saying since time began, right? They sucked up to the communists during the cold war and they're busy gettin' lawyers and protecting habeaus corpus for terrorists now, right? So is it really a surprise that the people you've been saying hate us, really HATE US? Do you people not believe the things you claim? Sean Hannity, racist enabler and best buddy of genocidal maniac Mark Furhman, CONTINUES to miss the FOREST for all the TREES!
The surprising number, the completely FLABBERGASTING number is the FIVE PERCENT OF REPUBLICANS THAT WANT US TO LOSE!!!! Fake Christians, Bathroom Stalkers, Perverted E-mailers, Log (eww)Cabin "Republicans", what's next Transgendered Republicans? LMAO, now you got the "traitor" Republicans, too? Good to know the "family values" party (ROFLMAO), is doing so well. No wonder I'm an INDEPENDANT.
"Sean Hannity, racist
October 7, 2007 - 02:15 ET by ckc1227"Sean Hannity, racist enabler and best buddy of genocidal maniac Mark Furhman"
No, you're not unbalanced at all, are you? Or maybe it's me. When exactly did Furhman commit genocide again?
If you represent Independents, I'll stay Republican. Let's drop the charade though. You aren't Independent at all, are you? Your rant sounds a bit too "left", if you get my drift.
ckc, Keith says he's a Hollywood actor
October 7, 2007 - 10:42 ET by RJI suspect he's just trying out for the part of "independent"....and not doing it very well.
Speaking of rants, in one of his first posts he first claimed to be conservative, and then he went BDS (that's like "going postal"), dredging up every whacko anti-Bushism out there.
Uh-huh, he's "independent" like Chrissy Matthews is independent.
Way to get it all
October 7, 2007 - 07:16 ET by LighthouseJWay to get it all completely wrong and looking like a fool.
Look at the bills democrats have introduced lately and what they've been preaching -- it's socialism. Hillarys little $5k "baby bond" IS socialism. It goes on and on.
These socialist ideals are contrary to the capitalist system and thus one of the main cornerstones of the United States. The liberals don't hate the US (maybe crazies like Sean Penn do) but they definitely want to fundamentally change and thus destroy what built the United States.
"Boats are safe in the harbor, but that's not what they're made for." -- Maritime quote
The key word in this poll is "world".
October 7, 2007 - 00:59 ET by Dave RRemember, many of our friends on the left are "globalists." The fate of this country matters not.
Of course, in the event we should actually lose, their precious "globe" is going to turn into a mass burial ground for infidels.
I wonder at which point these same "globalists" will finally realize that the Islamic barbarians consider them to be infidels themselves.
When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.
13% of Republicans did too - that bothers me.
October 7, 2007 - 07:02 ET by VinniejoeI haven't seen this mentioned, so I'll add this to this thread.....
Sorry guys, I think you are missing a more important point here. Sure, 39% of Dimmocrats thought losing was a good idea (or didn't know). But it bothers me lots more that if 87% of Republicans wanted to win, then the other 13% didn't think so. 13% is not that far from 39% in this scenario. Aren't you bothered that 1 out of 8 Republicans can't bring themselves to say to a pollster that winning is good?
Hopefully these 13% represented the RINO contingent, or were less than honest about their party affiliation. But it still bothers me to think that there are a small but significant number of people calling themselves Republicans that could think this way.
Or is it that there are always 13% of any group that are stupid? (More so where I work)
13% are stupid
October 7, 2007 - 07:28 ET by ThisnThatRead my post above about how 11% can't even find the U.S. on a map. There are always going to be a certain percentage of people that simply shouldn't show up in the morning.
And unfortunately, a certain percentage of these people are used to pad the numbers of pollsters whenever they report their results. Not saying they do this on purpose, but the most reliable numbers always come from "likely voters" not "adults". When you poll likely voters, these are the ones that actually try to do things in their lives, which completely eliminates the 13% faction.
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
How to read this
October 7, 2007 - 08:31 ET by JDWLibs and news media sell the negative side of anything, reverse it. If 19% of libs want out then 4 out of 5 feel just the opposite, they are looking for an Iraq victory.
JDW
Sen Clinton: Founder of Media Matters
&nbs