Do you personally want the Iraq plan President Bush announced last week to succeed?

[patteeu]

Can I see a show of hands from those of you who hope we fail in Iraq? People around here keep telling me that no one wants us to fail, but the latest FoxNew/OpinionDynamics poll (http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/011807_foxnewspoll.pdf) suggests otherwise. One question from that poll was:

Do you personally want the Iraq plan President Bush announced last week to succeed?

The results:

Overall: 63% Yes 22% No 15% Don’t Know

Democrats: 51% Yes 34% No 15% Don’t Know

Republicans: 79% Yes 11% No 10% Don’t Know

Independents 63% Yes 19% No 17% Don’t Know

38% of those polled aren't sure they want the latest approach to the war to succeed and 22% of them actually want it to fail? WTF? :shake:

[Mr. Kotter]

Success for the debil????

NEVER!!! :cuss:

[tiptap]

Is this like tinkerbell, if we all just wish it would work it will and if we don't it will fail?

Bush has chosen a course, the decision and its execution, as all of this war, lies with him.

The failures so far bodes ill for his judgement here. He has been just as successful in his Iraq endeavor as he was with his baseball team and his oil company.

He is a loser and that greatly colors the public response to his initiatives in Iraq.

[noa]

Absolutely. 100%. I would love for my skepticism in the plan to be wrong.

[patteeu]

Is this like tinkerbell, if we all just wish it would work it will and if we don't it will fail?

Bush has chosen a course, the decision and its execution, as all of this war, lies with him.

The failures so far bodes ill for his judgement here. He has been just as successful in his Iraq endeavor as he was with his baseball team and his oil company.

He is a loser and that greatly colors the public response to his initiatives in Iraq.

Are you saying you hope it fails?

[Laz]

Do you personally want the Iraq plan President Bush announced last week to succeed?


how many people said "fail" because they meant they hoped Bush would fail in his attempt to send more troops over to Iraq.


big difference ... question is written is such a way to make the results meaningless.



Try "Do you want the U.S. to lose the war in Iraq?" and see what happens.

[Sully]

Hope and belief are 2 different things.
That being said, I 100% hope his plan is correct and works.

My belief is only around 50-60%.

[Pittsie]

Not wanting W's plan to succeed isn't the same thing as wanting the U.S. to fail in Iraq. Perhaps they want another plan to succeed.

Loaded question, IMO..

[Laz]

Not wanting W's plan to succeed isn't the same thing as wanting the U.S. to fail in Iraq. Perhaps they want another plan to succeed.

Loaded question, IMO..
exactly ..........

just another way for the right to twist things up so they can cry and scream about how they are the only "true americans"


it's pathetic



need a huge diaper for entire lot of them

[StcChief]

Can I see a show of hands from those of you who hope we fail in Iraq? People around here keep telling me that no one wants us to fail, but the latest FoxNew/OpinionDynamics poll (http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/011807_foxnewspoll.pdf) suggests otherwise. One question from that poll was:



The results:



38% of those polled aren't sure they want the latest approach to the war to succeed and 22% of them actually want it to fail? WTF? :shake:

Where is the question....

If we leave now becuase the plan failed. We will likely have to go back in a year at more cost to would you still want it to fail and leave anyway.

[patteeu]

Do you personally want the Iraq plan President Bush announced last week to succeed?


how many people said "fail" because they meant they hoped Bush would fail in his attempt to send more troops over to Iraq.


big difference ... question is written is such a way to make the results meaningless.



Try "Do you want the U.S. to lose the war in Iraq?" and see what happens.

I think that's quite a stretch.

[patteeu]

Not wanting W's plan to succeed isn't the same thing as wanting the U.S. to fail in Iraq. Perhaps they want another plan to succeed.

Loaded question, IMO..

The President's plan is the reality. If you don't want it to succeed, you don't want the US to succeed. At best, you want failure before a subsequent success under a subsequent plan and that is nearly as reprehensible as hoping for outright defeat.

Do you personally want the Iraq plan President Bush announced a week or two ago to succeed?

[patteeu]

exactly ..........

just another way for the right to twist things up so they can cry and scream about how they are the only "true americans"


it's pathetic



need a huge diaper for entire lot of them

How about you, Laz? Do you personally want the Bush plan to succeed?

[Laz]

The President's plan is the reality. If you don't want it to succeed, you don't want the US to succeed
ROFL ROFL

".... if you don't support the war, you want the troops to die."



once again desperate trying to link things together so that they can basically blackmail people into supporting Bush.

[patteeu]

ROFL ROFL

".... if you don't support the war, you want the troops to die."



once again desperate trying to link things together so that they can basically blackmail people into supporting Bush.

You don't have to support Bush to want the plan to succeed. The question essentially boils down to whether you hate Bush so much that you'd hope the US fails in Iraq just to prove how bad Bush is. Are you going to answer the question or can't you bring yourself to say you want the plan to succeed?

[Laz]

How about you, Laz? Do you personally want the Bush plan to succeed?
of course i want everything in Iraq to succeed for the U.S.


Then we can get the hell out of there and stop losing american lives in the shit hole.


do i think sending another 22k troops over there to be target is a good idea ... hell no.

[SLQ]

I want what is best for my country.

To date I have not seen any alternatives that are viable, I haven't even seen any other plans listed by anyone!


When something is brought up, by anyone, I'll consider what I see as the best plan. It seems as if there are quite a few people willing to poke holes in the current plan but few to offer up other solutions.

[Laz]

You don't have to support Bush to want the plan to succeed. The question essentially boils down to whether you hate Bush so much that you'd hope the US fails in Iraq just to prove how bad Bush is. Are you going to answer the question or can't you bring yourself to say you want the plan to succeed?
in your mind ... maybe


but bottomline is that you and your righty friends have be twisting and pushing for some way to get people to support bush ever since he got office.

There is NOTHING you won't do or say to try and force public support.

[patteeu]

of course i want everything in Iraq to succeed for the U.S.


Then we can get the hell out of there and stop losing american lives in the shit hole.


do i think sending another 22k troops over there to be target is a good idea ... hell no.

There now, see it's not hard to both hate Bush and hope for success. :thumb:

But there are still 22% out there who disgust me. Maybe the anonymity of a poll allows some to say what's in their hearts even though they might not admit it in a public forum. I'll take the word of those who answer in this thread though.

[patteeu]

in your mind ... maybe


but bottomline is that you and your righty friends have be twisting and pushing for some way to get people to support bush ever since he got office.

There is NOTHING you won't do or say to try and force public support.

*I* didn't even support Bush when he got into office. I voted against him although I always recognized the democrats as even worse. :p

[jAZ]

Can I see a show of hands from those of you who hope we fail in Iraq? People around here keep telling me that no one wants us to fail, but the latest FoxNew/OpinionDynamics poll (http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/011807_foxnewspoll.pdf) suggests otherwise. One question from that poll was:



The results:



38% of those polled aren't sure they want the latest approach to the war to succeed and 22% of them actually want it to fail? WTF? :shake:
I agree, that's seems just stupid. Maybe they are weighing the implied costs and expecting they are going to be too high to justify "success".

[patteeu]

I agree, that's seems just stupid.

:thumb:

Maybe they are weighing the implied costs and expecting they are going to be too high to justify "success".

Maybe. That's a pretty generous interpretation, but it's the best I've heard.

[Chief Faithful]

But there are still 22% out there who disgust me. Maybe the anonymity of a poll allows some to say what's in their hearts even though they might not admit it in a public forum. I'll take the word of those who answer in this thread though.

I think there really are a lot of people out there that want both Bush and the US military to fail in Iraq.

[StcChief]

I think there really are a lot of people out there that want both Bush and the US military to fail in Iraq.

the same blinded short sighted people that our news media panders too with sound bits and partial stories. or sensationalism journalistic tactics
that show violence and bad things... What sells news.

[Chief Henry]

I think there really are a lot of people out there that want both Bush and the US military to fail in Iraq.



They're called Liberals...see lambs

[Nightwish]

Do you personally want the Iraq plan President Bush announced last week to succeed?
The question is poorly worded, as it can be interpreted to mean "Do you want it to succeed in Iraq?" or "Do you want it to succeed in Congress so that it is implemented in Iraq?" Without a doubt, Dems and other critics of the plan would answer no if they interpreted it in the second way, which is quite possible. The question would have been much better worded as "Do you personally want the Iraq plan President Bush announced last week, if it is implemented in Iraq, to succeed?"

[banyon]

I'll go on the record.

I didn't want us in Iraq from day -100 and have been against our occupation ever since. If that makes me want the President's plan to "fail" then so be it.

It's actually an example of the fallacy known as the "complex question". It asks 2 questions as if they were one. So the 2 questions are "Are you for the President's plan? and "Do you want that plan to succeed?"

Maybe I could create a poll question that asked "Do you want more American troops to die in Iraq?"

[patteeu]

I'll go on the record.

I didn't want us in Iraq from day -100 and have been against our occupation ever since. If that makes me want the President's plan to "fail" then so be it.

It's actually an example of the fallacy known as the "complex question". It asks 2 questions as if they were one. So the 2 questions are "Are you for the President's plan? and "Do you want that plan to succeed?"

It's not a complex question. The president's plan is a given. The only question is "Do you want that plan to succeed?"

It's funny (in a not so funny way) that so many people here seem to find a need to cover for the 22% who hate Bush so much that they want the US to fail so that Bush won't succeed. Maybe there is a percentage point or two who overthought this simple question or interpreted it incorrectly, but I think it's pretty obvious that the majority of these responses are what they appear to be. The question just isn't that hard to understand.

Maybe I could create a poll question that asked "Do you want more American troops to die in Iraq?"

Why would that question be hard to understand or answer. I would think everyone should be able to answer NO, although I have to wonder about the aforementioned 22%.

[banyon]

It's not a complex question. The president's plan is a given. The only question is "Do you want that plan to succeed?"

It's funny (in a not so funny way) that so many people here seem to find a need to cover for the 22% who hate Bush so much that they want the US to fail so that Bush won't succeed. Maybe there is a percentage point or two who overthought this simple question or interpreted it incorrectly, but I think it's pretty obvious that the majority of these responses are what they appear to be. The question just isn't that hard to understand.



Why would that question be hard to understand or answer. I would think everyone should be able to answer NO, although I have to wonder about the aforementioned 22%.

"Complex question" is a technical term of logic. I mean it that asks 2 questions simultaneously. But perhaps you are right.

"Do you want the plan to succeed? Implies 2 questions that I will resubmit:

1) Do you agree with this plan?

2) Given no alternatives, would you prefer that this plan fail?

[Logical]

Define fail.

If fail means we withdraw instead of surge, then yes I want it to fail.

If fail means I want our troops slaughtered then no of course not.

[Nightwish]

It's not a complex question. The president's plan is a given.
It's not a simple question either. The only thing that is a given about the plan is that it is what Bush wants to do and plans to do ... for now. It isn't a given that Congress will continue to approve the funding for it. That's still up in the air. Everyone knows that the Democrats have been threatening to close the purse strings if he decides on a troop surge, so no matter how official the plan seems, it is certainly not a given that it will absolutely go ahead as planned, especially if Pelosi and her group make good on their threats. With the possibility that the plan won't go forward an everpresent reality, it would not be difficult to interpret that question other than as you have.

[Chief Henry]

It's not a complex question. The president's plan is a given. The only question is "Do you want that plan to succeed?"

It's funny (in a not so funny way) that so many people here seem to find a need to cover for the 22% who hate Bush so much that they want the US to fail so that Bush won't succeed. Maybe there is a percentage point or two who overthought this simple question or interpreted it incorrectly, but I think it's pretty obvious that the majority of these responses are what they appear to be. The question just isn't that hard to understand.



Why would that question be hard to understand or answer. I would think everyone should be able to answer NO, although I have to wonder about the aforementioned 22%.

patteau
Liberals don't like black and white issues=yes or no questions.
Everything shall we say needs shades of gray.

[banyon]

patteau
Liberals don't like black and white issues=yes or no questions.
Everything shall we say needs shades of gray.

Wow, should I make some equally false stereotypical statement about "conservatives"? Like "Conservatives are unable to make even the simplest of distinctions. Everything must be spelled out for them in great big letters."?

[Chief Henry]

Wow, should I make some equally false stereotypical statement about "conservatives"? Like "Conservatives are unable to make even the simplest of distinctions. Everything must be spelled out for them in great big letters."?


Hey, Its a simple yes or no question, and the planet liberals can't answer it without going into some form of gobblety gook about
how its not a clear question. Its CRYSTAL CLEAR.

[Extra Point]

Semantics is for pussies.

[Adept Havelock]

Chief Henry, like Dear Leader, "doesn't do Nuance."

To answer the question: While I oppose the plan, if it's carried through, I would like for the plan to succeed.

Do I believe it will? No.

[Logical]

Hey, Its a simple yes or no question, and the planet liberals can't answer it without going into some form of gobblety gook about
how its not a clear question. Its CRYSTAL CLEAR.

Actually it is not a clear question, read my prrevious post to see the possible distinctions.

[patteeu]

"Complex question" is a technical term of logic. I mean it that asks 2 questions simultaneously. But perhaps you are right.

"Do you want the plan to succeed? Implies 2 questions that I will resubmit:

1) Do you agree with this plan?

2) Given no alternatives, would you prefer that this plan fail?

I understood what you meant and I disagree with your analysis. I don't think your first question is involved at all. I think it is a simple, i.e. single question.

I'm not saying that you can't do mental contortions in order to find a way to rationalize an answer of "NO," but I am saying that that's exactly what you're doing.

I see what you are doing as roughly the same thing as answering a presidential approval question in the negative because you don't like the playlist he has on his iPod even though you are totally happy with his foreign policy, his domestic policy, and the ethical record of his entire administration.

[patteeu]

patteau
Liberals don't like black and white issues=yes or no questions.
Everything shall we say needs shades of gray.

Except when a poll question, far more ambiguously stated than this one, reflects poorly on the administration.

[Bowser]

patteau
Liberals don't like black and white issues=yes or no questions.
Everything shall we say needs shades of gray.

Wow, you really took that "if you're not with us, you're against us" thing to heart, eh?

[banyon]

I understood what you meant and I disagree with your analysis. I don't think your first question is involved at all. I think it is a simple, i.e. single question.

I'm not saying that you can't do mental contortions in order to find a way to rationalize an answer of "NO," but I am saying that that's exactly what you're doing.

I see what you are doing as roughly the same thing as answering a presidential approval question in the negative because you don't like the playlist he has on his iPod even though you are totally happy with his foreign policy, his domestic policy, and the ethical record of his entire administration.

Huh? I think I've been pretty clear that there's only about .02% (or less) of what Bush has done that I do approve of. Sorry If I don't think a plan to increase troop strength by 15% is a significant step in the right direction, but keep at it.

[Chiefnj]

To be accurate shouldn't the question be:

"Can I see a show of hands from those of you who hope we continue to fail in Iraq?

[jAZ]

The President's plan is the reality. If you don't want it to succeed, you don't want the US to succeed. At best, you want failure before a subsequent success under a subsequent plan and that is nearly as reprehensible as hoping for outright defeat.

Do you personally want the Iraq plan President Bush announced a week or two ago to succeed?
Actually, you are ascribing your opinions to the minds of those being polled. You can't do that.

I think it's safer to assume that there are several different underlying assumptions behind the "no" votes in this poll. You seem to be trying to assign all of them (without any evidence at all) to the single most negatively charged assumption possible.

To assume any one assumption was in the minds of the voters... is flawed in an of itself. To assume that one assumption is either the most forgiving or the most judgemental... likely shows the agenda you bring to the discussion.

[banyon]

Here's a good quote:

"We've had four other surges since we first went into Iraq," said Sen. Susan Collins (news, bio, voting record), R-Maine, one of the sponsors. "None of them produced a long-lasting change in the situation on the ground."

[Bowser]

Here's a good quote:

"We've had four other surges since we first went into Iraq," said Sen. Susan Collins (news, bio, voting record), R-Maine, one of the sponsors. "None of them produced a long-lasting change in the situation on the ground."

*insert war profiteering crack here*

[Bowser]

To answer the question - yes, I hope this plan is successful so we can get our people the hell out of that f*cked up region.

But patteeu, this thread is nothing more than a partisan shot, unless you include the thread "Do you think going into Iraq was the right move?"

Yang for the ying, if you will.

[patteeu]

To answer the question - yes, I hope this plan is successful so we can get our people the hell out of that f*cked up region.

But patteeu, this thread is nothing more than a partisan shot, unless you include the thread "Do you think going into Iraq was the right move?"

Yang for the ying, if you will.

The point of the thread isn't really to get planeteers on record with a response to the question, it's to point out the astonishing result that 22% of respondents to this poll are against success in Iraq. There really are people who root against America, as it turns out.

[banyon]

The point of the thread isn't really to get planeteers on record with a response to the question, it's to point out the astonishing result that 22% of respondents to this poll are against success in Iraq. There really are people who root against America, as it turns out.

Of course not. jAZ is right, ascribing that motive (and me) to them is as silly as my saying your being for the plan means you want troops to die.

[patteeu]

Huh? I think I've been pretty clear that there's only about .02% (or less) of what Bush has done that I do approve of. Sorry If I don't think a plan to increase troop strength by 15% is a significant step in the right direction, but keep at it.

I think there are only two kinds of people who answer this question in the negative: Those who want the US to fail when the Bush surge plan is implemented (for whatever reason), and those who have problems interpreting a simple question.

If you've made it clear in this thread that you would have given a NO response to this poll, I missed it, so none of my posts have been intentionally directed at you personally. If it happens that you fit into my target group then I'm sorry if my opinion about that group bothers you.

[patteeu]

Actually, you are ascribing your opinions to the minds of those being polled. You can't do that.

I think it's safer to assume that there are several different underlying assumptions behind the "no" votes in this poll. You seem to be trying to assign all of them (without any evidence at all) to the single most negatively charged assumption possible.

To assume any one assumption was in the minds of the voters... is flawed in an of itself. To assume that one assumption is either the most forgiving or the most judgemental... likely shows the agenda you bring to the discussion.

That might sound like what I'm doing, but it's not. I recognize that there are a small number of people out there who might not understand a question no matter how simple it is and I also understand that there is a group of people out there who will game the question or rationalize an answer. I think my assumption fits the majority of the 22% though.

[memyselfI]

The poll and question are based on a number of false assumptions.

1. that the announced plan is different from previous ones
2. that the announced plan is the ONLY plan available
3. that the plan has been deemed the RIGHT 'only' plan

Therefore, the poll question, to be accurate and BASED ON THE FACTS OF THE STATUS QUO, should be worded as 'do you believe the President should pursue a plan that is more of the same we've done before even if Bush's previous generals and the Iraq study group have advised the course is not the only one or even the right one.'

Simply put, 'do you want a wrong or previously ineffective course of action to succeed and should the President continue to try to make it work?'

I think the overwhelming of Americans would say 'yes' they WANT it to succeed...against all odds. However, the overwhelming of Americans would also say 'no' they don't BELIEVE it will succeed.

[Kraut]

As far as I'm concerned you would have to be nuts to not want it to work. I don't care who is the president, I want this to work. God, where do they find these people to take these polls?

[patteeu]

Here's a good quote:

"We've had four other surges since we first went into Iraq," said Sen. Susan Collins (news, bio, voting record), R-Maine, one of the sponsors. "None of them produced a long-lasting change in the situation on the ground."

That's similar to opposing this war to remove Saddam in the first place because "we attacked Iraq once before and Saddam Hussein remained in power." To suggest that the previous surges were the same as this surge is pretty superficial analysis. This surge may or may not work, but it's a different surge than those others. It is being led by a completely different group of leaders, it is reportedly going to involve a different strategy, it's reasonable to believe that the Iraqis feel a greater sense of urgency this time around and might therefore be more committed to the program, etc.

[Logical]

The point of the thread isn't really to get planeteers on record with a response to the question, it's to point out the astonishing result that 22% of respondents to this poll are against success in Iraq. There really are people who root against America, as it turns out.

I think you are wrong, i think you ignore the potential of the fact that many thinking people polled will respond with the emphasis on being against the plan being successful, in other words they don't want to see the plan implemented. It is certainly how I would have responded because I do not want to see the surge occur.

[patteeu]

Of course not. jAZ is right, ascribing that motive (and me) to them is as silly as my saying your being for the plan means you want troops to die.

You believe that there isn't one person in that 22% that roots against America? I think that's pollyannish. It's not news that there are Americans who root against America, but the size of the group of people willing to answer this poll in the negative is shocking, and IMO, it suggests that the number of people who are rooting against America would be similarly surprising.

[banyon]

That's similar to opposing this war to remove Saddam in the first place because "we attacked Iraq once before and Saddam Hussein remained in power." To suggest that the previous surges were the same as this surge is pretty superficial analysis. This surge may or may not work, but it's a different surge than those others. It is being led by a completely different group of leaders, it is reportedly going to involve a different strategy, it's reasonable to believe that the Iraqis feel a greater sense of urgency this time around and might therefore be more committed to the program, etc.

SH remaining in power was not a matter of failure, it was a matter of choice. Clearly, our prior troop surges failing is not our choice.

[banyon]

You believe that there isn't one person in that 22% that roots against America? I think that's pollyannish. It's not news that there are Americans who root against America, but the size of the group of people willing to answer this poll in the negative is shocking, and IMO, it suggests that the number of people who are rooting against America would be similarly surprising.

There's probably one person in the poll who thinks Bush is the Messiah. So, yeah, I'm talking about the vast majority.

[patteeu]

I think you are wrong, i think you ignore the potential of the fact that many thinking people polled will respond with the emphasis on being against the plan being successful, in other words they don't want to see the plan implemented. It is certainly how I would have responded because I do not want to see the surge occur.

When I see a person whose logic I respect and who supports the surge say that that was their first impression of this question, I'll reconsider my opinion. Until then, I think it's noteworthy that the only people arguing that the question can easily be interpreted as something other than what I think it clearly is are serious Bush bashers.

[Kraut]

You believe that there isn't one person in that 22% that roots against America? I think that's pollyannish. It's not news that there are Americans who root against America, but the size of the group of people willing to answer this poll in the negative is shocking, and IMO, it suggests that the number of people who are rooting against America would be similarly surprising.
I agree with you on this. I may not be for what the president has done over there up to this point, but here is his new plan, and no matter what this is what we are stuck with. Is it the best plan? Who knows at this point. But no matter what the plan is for victory even if the plan is wrong in my eyes I want it to work. Im not sitting back thinking that I want it to fail so American lives can be lost. But the way these questions were asked it seems that some people are doing just that.

[patteeu]

SH remaining in power was not a matter of failure, it was a matter of choice. Clearly, our prior troop surges failing is not our choice.

Our prior troop surges were successful. They were intended to supress violence for the purpose of facilitating a series of votes. They worked very well in that regard. Your point is my point.

[patteeu]

There's probably one person in the poll who thinks Bush is the Messiah. So, yeah, I'm talking about the vast majority.

On that, we will have to agree to disagree then because I don't think that's likely at all.

[patteeu]

I agree with you on this. I may not be for what the president has done over there up to this point, but here is his new plan, and no matter what this is what we are stuck with. Is it the best plan? Who knows at this point. But no matter what the plan is for victory even if the plan is wrong in my eyes I want it to work. Im not sitting back thinking that I want it to fail so American lives can be lost. But the way these questions were asked it seems that some people are doing just that.

Thanks. I completely understand that some people think the surge is going to fail or that the surge is a bad idea or that Bush is the anti-Christ, but to say they don't want it to succeed can't be easily explained away, IMO.

[Kraut]

Thanks. I completely understand that some people think the surge is going to fail or that the surge is a bad idea or that Bush is the anti-Christ, but to say they don't want it to succeed can't be easily explained away, IMO.
Good. I'm glad my point came across clear. I wasn't sure it would.

[Logical]

When I see a person whose logic I respect and who supports the surge say that that was their first impression of this question, I'll reconsider my opinion. Until then, I think it's noteworthy that the only people arguing that the question can easily be interpreted as something other than what I think it clearly is are serious Bush bashers.

With approval rating hovering in the low 40 to high 30% range you don't think that 22% might not approve of this course of action and want the plan to be stopped by Congress? I don't think you are being rationale. It is like anything else when it comes to defending Bush with you, you let your emotional response guide your thinking.

[Logical]

I agree with you on this. I may not be for what the president has done over there up to this point, but here is his new plan, and no matter what this is what we are stuck with. Is it the best plan? Who knows at this point. But no matter what the plan is for victory even if the plan is wrong in my eyes I want it to work. Im not sitting back thinking that I want it to fail so American lives can be lost. But the way these questions were asked it seems that some people are doing just that.

See those bolded words, that is where I feel you go wrong, we now have a new majority in congress who can stifle Bush's plan and force a different direction. I severely hope they do, though I doubt they will have the backbone. This is why I say I hope the plan fails. I don't hope we lose men and women so we can say the US lost, that would be nuts. I am pretty sure that 22% of Americans are not nuts, but see the nuance in the question and answer as I would answer.

[Kraut]

See those bolded words, that is where I feel you go wrong, we now have a new majority in congress who can stifle Bush's plan and force a different direction. I severely hope they do, though I doubt they will have the backbone. This is why I say I hope the plan fails. I don't hope we lose men and women so we can say the US lost, that would be nuts. I am pretty sure that 22% of Americans are not nuts, but see the nuance in the question and answer as I would answer.
You are right about the ability to stifle the plan. I don't think they will be able to unless they have a great plan that we don't know about. They will have to offer some alternative. But none of this would be discussed if we would have let our men actually fight in the first place.

[go bowe]

When I see a person whose logic I respect and who supports the surge say that that was their first impression of this question, I'll reconsider my opinion. Until then, I think it's noteworthy that the only people arguing that the question can easily be interpreted as something other than what I think it clearly is are serious Bush bashers.bush is da debil...

[go bowe]

When I see a person whose logic I respect and who supports the surge say that that was their first impression of this question, I'll reconsider my opinion. Until then, I think it's noteworthy that the only people arguing that the question can easily be interpreted as something other than what I think it clearly is are serious Bush bashers.i don't support the surge...

so does that make me want the president's plan to fail?

as far as the question on the poll, imo it really is open to several interpretations, some of which seem quite plausible to me...

i might have voted no because i want a different plan to succeed more quickly - like having the iraqis come to an immediate political solution and become capable of defending themselves against both domestic and foreign attackers...

so we could get out of dodge beginning right away...

of course, that plan has very little chance of actually happening...

but i don't think the president's plan will succeed either, no matter how much i want it to...

[Logical]

i don't support the surge...

so does that make me want the president's plan to fail?

as far as the question on the poll, imo it really is open to several interpretations, some of which seem quite plausible to me...

i might have voted no because i want a different plan to succeed more quickly - like having the iraqis come to an immediate political solution and become capable of defending themselves against both domestic and foreign attackers...

so we could get out of dodge beginning right away...

of course, that plan has very little chance of actually happening...

but i don't think the president's plan will succeed either, no matter how much i want it to...

You must be ignorant, there is only one way to interpret that poll question. Ask patteeu.ROFL

[patteeu]

i don't support the surge...

so does that make me want the president's plan to fail?

as far as the question on the poll, imo it really is open to several interpretations, some of which seem quite plausible to me...

i might have voted no because i want a different plan to succeed more quickly - like having the iraqis come to an immediate political solution and become capable of defending themselves against both domestic and foreign attackers...

so we could get out of dodge beginning right away...

of course, that plan has very little chance of actually happening...

but i don't think the president's plan will succeed either, no matter how much i want it to...

If this question isn't clear enough, then we should throw out all poll results when the questions don't come with a paragraph of explanatory material to avoid confusion (which they almost never do). I'm sorry, I don't agree that that's a reasonable way to interpret this question. At the very least, a respondent should recognize that a NO response is likely to be mistaken for hoping for failure. At that point, you answer NO at your own peril (in the sense that your answer is likely to be dramatically misinterpreted).

[patteeu]

You must be ignorant, there is only one way to interpret that poll question. Ask patteeu.ROFL

Don't worry, I told him what I thought even though I think he, like banyon, is generally pretty reasonable.

[jAZ]

I think my assumption fits the majority of the 22% though.
Well, if you aren't doing it to 100% of these voters, you are admittedly doing it to a "majority" of them. You can't do that either. Combine that with this statement...
...the astonishing result that 22% of respondents to this poll are against success in Iraq.
... and you put yourself in a very negative light. You seems more willing to distort the survey to align with your stated, preconceived views rather than just be honest about what it says and in particular what it doesn't say.

[patteeu]

Well, if you aren't doing it to 100% of these voters, you are admittedly doing it to a "majority" of them. You can't do that either. Combine that with this statement...

... and you put yourself in a very negative light. You seems more willing to distort the survey to align with your stated, preconceived views rather than just be honest about what it says and in particular what it doesn't say.

Whatever. Polls exist to be interpreted and that's what I'm doing. If you don't agree with my interpretation, fine, but don't try to tell me that poll results can't be interpreted as it's done all the time. In my view, it's the people who are apologizing for the 22% who are distorting the survey. And I have to say that I detect a shift in your own position from your first reaction too, but I understand how powerful ideological interests can be so carry on.

[Logical]

Whatever. Polls exist to be interpreted and that's what I'm doing. If you don't agree with my interpretation, fine, but don't try to tell me that poll results can't be interpreted as it's done all the time. In my view, it's the people who are apologizing for the 22% who are distorting the survey. And I have to say that I detect a shift in your own position from your first reaction too, but I understand how powerful ideological interests can be so carry on.

I have no problem with the bolded part, you can believe the ocean is filled with martians for all I care, it does not make it a fact or that we should believe it. It is you telling us that it can be only interpreted one way that I strongly disagree with.

[chagrin]

As usual most of the freaks aren't actually answering the question because they don't like the way it was presented, typical

[banyon]

As usual most of the freaks aren't actually answering the question because they don't like the way it was presented, typical

Hey, I answered the question and bitched. Credit where credit's due, man.

[jAZ]

Whatever. Polls exist to be interpreted and that's what I'm doing. If you don't agree with my interpretation, fine, but don't try to tell me that poll results can't be interpreted as it's done all the time. In my view, it's the people who are apologizing for the 22% who are distorting the survey. And I have to say that I detect a shift in your own position from your first reaction too, but I understand how powerful ideological interests can be so carry on.
Good thing you didn't address your rewording of the poll question so that you can claim that these results support your belief that Americans hate America.
The point of the thread ... (is) to point out the astonishing result that 22% of respondents to this poll are against success in Iraq. There really are people who root against America, as it turns out.
Yep... that's pretty much it right there. The point of this thread is to "point out" something that you believed all along, but that wasn't ever polled for in the question.

[Adept Havelock]

As usual most of the freaks aren't actually answering the question because they don't like the way it was presented, typical


Then please tell us, do you still beat your wife and kids?

A simple yes or no will suffice. ;)

[Logical]

Let me try another approach at reasoning with patteeu.

Do you really believe that 10% of Republicans don't know if they want the Iraq effort to succeed or that they did not know the plan so they did not know how to answer the poll question. I think that alone would tell you that the emphasis of the question on the plan is the issue people are responding to, not the outcome of Iraq.

Not only that but an amazing 11% of Republicans want the Iraq effort to fail. Using your interpretation that is what you have to believe.

[patteeu]

I have no problem with the bolded part, you can believe the ocean is filled with martians for all I care, it does not make it a fact or that we should believe it. It is you telling us that it can be only interpreted one way that I strongly disagree with.

Heh, I'm only telling you that there's one reasonable interpretation, not that you can't contort and rationalize a way to interpret it in a less personally offensive way. ;)

[Adept Havelock]

Let me try another approach at reasoning with patteeu.

Do you really believe that 10% of Republicans don't know if they want the Iraq effort to succeed or that they did not know the plan so they did not know how to answer the poll question. I think that alone would tell you that the emphasis of the question on the plan is the issue people are responding to, not the outcome of Iraq.

Not only that but an amazing 11% of Republicans want the Iraq effort to fail. Using your interpretation that is what you have to believe.


Dude, don't you know about the RINO's? RINO's are the debbil.

[patteeu]

Let me try another approach at reasoning with patteeu.

Do you really believe that 10% of Republicans don't know if they want the Iraq effort to succeed or that they did not know the plan so they did not know how to answer the poll question. I think that alone would tell you that the emphasis of the question on the plan is the issue people are responding to, not the outcome of Iraq.

Not only that but an amazing 11% of Republicans want the Iraq effort to fail. Using your interpretation that is what you have to believe.

I've seen several people on this message board claiming to be Republicans but saying things that I wouldn't expect a Republican to say. I won't name any names (I don't think any of the ones I have in mind have posted on this thread yet). Maybe it's a reflection of the big tent that the Republicans pulled in in the wake of the Clinton disgrace and two poor Presidential candidates in a row.

[go bowe]

You must be ignorant, there is only one way to interpret that poll question. Ask patteeu.ROFLomfgm, lmfao...

did i say the wrong thing? ::rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[patteeu]

Dude, don't you know about the RINO's? RINO's are the debbil.

And don't forget the real conservatives who hate those damned neocons. :p

FTR, BucEyedPea isn't one of the people I was talking about in my previous post.

[Logical]

I've seen several people on this message board claiming to be Republicans but saying things that I wouldn't expect a Republican to say. I won't name any names (I don't think any of the ones I have in mind have posted on this thread yet). Maybe it's a reflection of the big tent that the Republicans pulled in in the wake of the Clinton disgrace and two poor Presidential candidates in a row.

Now who is rationalizing?

[patteeu]

Now who is rationalizing?

I'm as amazed as you are that there were 11% from the Republican group, but that doesn't make the survey question any less clear. It's far easier to believe that there are Republicans out there who think quite different things than I do (since I've actually heard from them) than it is for me to believe the survey question means something different than it appears to mean.

[go bowe]

stay the course, anyone??

[patteeu]

stay the course, anyone??

I'm in favor.

[mlyonsd]

stay the course, anyone??

That's what the dems seem to want. And if they can make it last another year or better they think it will help them. Unfortunately in the balance are American lives.

In reality we all know they want out yesterday. Politically they are not quite there yet to pull the purse strings. Because of that they too own just as much blood on their hands as Bush. They've taken a political track to protect their asses. Disgusting. Either go along with Bush, say we need more troops, or cut off the money. Anything less is BS. Nothing has changed with the weak minded democrats.

[Dr. Johnny Fever]

I don't like Bush and I don't know if his plan to send more troops is right or not. I don't support our being there in the first place, but now that we are we have to try to make it work or things will probably just get worse later.

I do know one thing though... as much as I can't stand that arrogant SOB... I hope to God that his plan works. My best friends son is joining the military when he graduates this spring. For her sake and the whole family's, I don't want him to have to go over there and possibly not come back. I don't want my friend and her family to go through that. I don't want any family to have to go through that. I understand it's a choice the soldiers make to join the military and fight for our country if called upon. I have nothing but respect and admiration for them for that... but I don't want them to HAVE to go. Especially when the motiavtion for this war seemed contrived to begin with... but that's another issue.

Bush... you've made a huge mess... you better damn well be right that this plan will clean it up.

[Dr. Johnny Fever]

That's what the dems seem to want. And if they can make it last another year or better they think it will help them. Unfortunately in the balance are American lives.

In reality we all know they want out yesterday. Politically they are not quite there yet to pull the purse strings. Because of that they too own just as much blood on their hands as Bush. They've taken a political track to protect their asses. Disgusting. Either go along with Bush, say we need more troops, or cut off the money. Anything less is BS. Nothing has changed with the weak minded democrats.
That's the biggest load of bs I've ever read.

[mlyonsd]

That's the biggest load of bs I've ever read.

Which part? I'd be happy to clarify.

[Dr. Johnny Fever]

Which part? I'd be happy to clarify.
All of it. Your already quite clear. You make it sound like the dems only want to politicize the war... and you politicize the whole thing yourself in the process.

There's no getting away from the war being the central issue in this election. Bush has stunk it up so bad that even his own party is turning on him. It's natural that you're going to like some candidates idea's and not others... but to say all dems or all repubs want anything is just stupid. We want an end to the war. We want people to stop dying. We'd like to take care of our own for once before we worry about policeing the rest of the world... especially when they don't even want us there for the most part.

If he's going to go full guns... then really go full guns and give it everything we've got. Take care of business once and for all and get our soldiers the hell home. The way it's going now is bs.

I'm a democrat and I want to win the war. We have no other choice.

[mlyonsd]

All of it. Your already quite clear. You make it sound like the dems only want to politicize the war... and you politicize the whole thing yourself in the process.

There's no getting away from the war being the central issue in this election. Bush has stunk it up so bad that even his own party is turning on him. It's natural that you're going to like some candidates idea's and not others... but to say all dems or all repubs want anything is just stupid. We want an end to the war. We want people to stop dying. We'd like to take care of our own for once before we worry about policeing the rest of the world... especially when they don't even want us there for the most part.

If he's going to go full guns... then really go full guns and give it everything we've got. Take care of business once and for all and get our soldiers the hell home. The way it's going now is bs.

I'm a democrat and I want to win the war. We have no other choice.

I'm not questioning your patriotism and agree with most of what you say.

I agree that the dems won the election on the Iraq issue. That either means win or get out. Letting it drag on the way it has been is NOT what they got voted in to let happen. Which as near as I can tell is the message they are sending.

Either come up with a plan or get out now. There isn't another option in my view. I can't imagine being the family member of a military person being sent over there in the next few weeks and having congress take a no confidence vote on Bush's plan. All that does is embolden the insurgents. Sorry, but the dems are politicizing it more than I am.

[Logical]

I'm not questioning your patriotism and agree with most of what you say.

I agree that the dems won the election on the Iraq issue. That either means win or get out. Letting it drag on the way it has been is NOT what they got voted in to let happen. Which as near as I can tell is the message they are sending.

Either come up with a plan or get out now. There isn't another option in my view. I can't imagine being the family member of a military person being sent over there in the next few weeks and having congress take a no confidence vote on Bush's plan. All that does is embolden the insurgents. Sorry, but the dems are politicizing it more than I am.

I sort of agree with you but as a practical person I see their problem. To force the admininstrations hand they would have to cut off funds to the troops. Do that and it is like cutting your own throat. They would forever be accused of not supporting the troops, not of stopping the occupation. I am not sure how they force a different plan into effect, but I do wish we would see some creativity from them in their efforts.

[Dr. Johnny Fever]

I'm not questioning your patriotism and agree with most of what you say.

I agree that the dems won the election on the Iraq issue. That either means win or get out. Letting it drag on the way it has been is NOT what they got voted in to let happen. Which as near as I can tell is the message they are sending.

Either come up with a plan or get out now. There isn't another option in my view. I can't imagine being the family member of a military person being sent over there in the next few weeks and having congress take a no confidence vote on Bush's plan. All that does is embolden the insurgents. Sorry, but the dems are politicizing it more than I am.
I don't really disagree with anything you're saying. I'm not sure how the dems can avoid making Iraq political right now. It's the nature of the beast. It just so happens that "they" are the "other" party than that of the one in power. It's gonna happen. Just so long as we get somewhere in the end... that's the important thing.

[Pittsie]

As usual most of the freaks aren't actually answering the question because they don't like the way it was presented, typical

Or because it's a stupid question. Of course I'd like the plan to succeed.

[patteeu]

...but to say all dems or all repubs want anything is just stupid. We want an end to the war. ...

I agree. On over-generalization like that would be uncalled for. My research tells me that most democrats (51%) want the President's plan for victory in Iraq to succeed. It's really only 34% of them who are rooting against success. :p

[SLQ]

38% of those polled aren't sure they want the latest approach to the war to succeed and 22% of them actually want it to fail? WTF? :shake:YES****** NO****** ???
64.1604 ****** 21.55388 ****** 14.28571

THESE ARE THE NUMBERS I CAME UP WITH FROM NUMBERS POSTED.

JUST CURIOUS HOW YOU DERIVED YOUR NUMBERS.

[patteeu]

YES****** NO****** ???
64.1604 ****** 21.55388 ****** 14.28571

THESE ARE THE NUMBERS I CAME UP WITH FROM NUMBERS POSTED.

JUST CURIOUS HOW YOU DERIVED YOUR NUMBERS.

I copied them from the "Overall" line. 22% responded NO and an additional 15% responded I DON'T KNOW for a total of 38% who either didn't want to succeed or they weren't sure.

[SLQ]

I copied them from the "Overall" line. 22% responded NO and an additional 15% responded I DON'T KNOW for a total of 38% who either didn't want to succeed or they weren't sure.

I understood what direction they came from but if I rounded the numbers up, even when they should have been rounded down I didn't get the 38%.

No big deal, just screwing with the math.

[Amnorix]

Can I see a show of hands from those of you who hope we fail in Iraq? People around here keep telling me that no one wants us to fail, but the latest FoxNew/OpinionDynamics poll (http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/011807_foxnewspoll.pdf) suggests otherwise. One question from that poll was:



The results:



38% of those polled aren't sure they want the latest approach to the war to succeed and 22% of them actually want it to fail? WTF? :shake:

I'm a day late to this thread, and don't have time to read through it all, for which I apologize.

I think the question is confusing, or could be. My main concern is that it's not very well stated whether the person being polled supports success in Iraq, or success that Bush's plan is implemented to begin with.

I'd be very surprised, to say the least, if such a high percentage of Americans were saying that they would rather have us fail in Iraq than succeed using Bush's plan, which is what you're saying it says.

Maybe it does, but I think it more likely that a number of people just didn't get what the question was asking.

[patteeu]

I understood what direction they came from but if I rounded the numbers up, even when they should have been rounded down I didn't get the 38%.

No big deal, just screwing with the math.

I'd imagine that there were different numbers of democrats, Republicans, and independents in the survey. Could this be the source of the discrepancy?

[Logical]

I'm a day late to this thread, and don't have time to read through it all, for which I apologize.

I think the question is confusing, or could be. My main concern is that it's not very well stated whether the person being polled supports success in Iraq, or success that Bush's plan is implemented to begin with.

I'd be very surprised, to say the least, if such a high percentage of Americans were saying that they would rather have us fail in Iraq than succeed using Bush's plan, which is what you're saying it says.

Maybe it does, but I think it more likely that a number of people just didn't get what the question was asking.
You are one of several intelligent members to try to point this out to patteeu. For some reason he just cannot accept it or won't accept it for his own purposes.

[patteeu]

You are one of several intelligent members to try to point this out to patteeu. For some reason he just cannot accept it or won't accept it for his own purposes.

I don't think SLQ is talking about what you must think he's talking about. He was trying to figure out where I came up with the 38% number. I told him that I added 22% and 15% and didn't realize until now that that should have been 37%. Doh. I think that's what he was trying to sort out.

[Logical]

I don't think SLQ is talking about what you must think he's talking about. He was trying to figure out where I came up with the 38% number. I told him that I added 22% and 15% and didn't realize until now that that should have been 37%. Doh. I think that's what he was trying to sort out.

Actually I screwed up I meant to quote Ammorix. Duh

[patteeu]

Actually I screwed up I meant to quote Ammorix. Duh

Well, if not for your post, I wouldn't have recognized my math error so some good came of it. :)

[Calcountry]

Can I see a show of hands from those of you who hope we fail in Iraq? People around here keep telling me that no one wants us to fail, but the latest FoxNew/OpinionDynamics poll (http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/011807_foxnewspoll.pdf) suggests otherwise. One question from that poll was:



The results:



38% of those polled aren't sure they want the latest approach to the war to succeed and 22% of them actually want it to fail? WTF? :shake:Yes.

[mlyonsd]

I sort of agree with you but as a practical person I see their problem. To force the admininstrations hand they would have to cut off funds to the troops. Do that and it is like cutting your own throat. They would forever be accused of not supporting the troops, not of stopping the occupation. I am not sure how they force a different plan into effect, but I do wish we would see some creativity from them in their efforts.

From a political point of view you I think you're absolutely correct.

From a moral point of view they are no better than what has been going on the last four years IMO.

If dragging their feet means a consensus plan can emerge I am all for it. I'm just not seeing it right now. Especially the part where they want us to involve Iran in the solution. That's just not acceptable IMO.

[go bowe]

From a political point of view you I think you're absolutely correct.

From a moral point of view they are no better than what has been going on the last four years IMO.

If dragging their feet means a consensus plan can emerge I am all for it. I'm just not seeing it right now. Especially the part where they want us to involve Iran in the solution. That's just not acceptable IMO.acceptable or not, if iran isn't part of the solution, it will continue to be part of the problem...

personally, i think the best plan is to co-opt our opponents...

hell, mcdonalds is taking over china...

[jAZ]

I don't know why, but when I read this thread title just now, my first thought this time was "No, I want a a forced timeline & withdrawl plan to succeed."

I've probably read that thread title a dozen times and we've talked about various possible ways people could interpret the question... but I never interpreted any of these ways myself until just this last time.

Huh.