Rasmussen: McCain more like to win in Iraq, but do voters care?

[Tex]

The Powerline guys drew some interesting conclusions from these Rasmussen results:

How likely is it that the U.S. would win the War in Iraq if _____ is elected president:
McCain: 49%
Obama: 20%

How likely is it that virtually all troops will be home in 4 years if _____ is elected president:
McCain: 43%
Obama: 59%

What do you care most about:
Getting troops home in 4 years: 52%
Winning the war: 39%

John Hinderaker thus concludes:

These data are mixed, to say the least, but they may suggest an opportunity for McCain. Most Americans have figured out that if they want to prevail in Iraq, McCain is their man. As voters learn more about Obama, that sentiment is likely to grow. Rasmussen's data suggest that if McCain can convince voters that success is not only possible but more nearly at hand than they think, the Iraq issue can be a winner for him. In fact, at the rate conditions are improving in Iraq, it is reasonable to expect that our troops will be more or less entirely out of combat roles, and most of them will come home, in far less than four years. If more voters get that message, it may become hard to explain why they should vote for the candidate whose election means failure.

Indeed. To capitalize on these emotions, McCain simply needs to convince the American people that they can have their cake and eat it too: win the war AND be home in 4 years.

Obama can't sell the former. He's not even trying.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/

[MikeWaters]

remind me, what is the war we are fighting, and who is the enemy?

[exUte]

the end result is what matters. Monday morning quarterbacking doesn't really work in geopolitics. We have to be viewed as having won.

Trust me, and you can book mark this. If Obama is the president, we will be back in Iraq (like to poetry?) within 2 years with even a bigger disaster.

[Ma'ake]

Originally Posted by exUte

Trust me, and you can book mark this. If Obama is the president, we will be back in Iraq (like to poetry?) within 2 years with even a bigger disaster.

How would leaving Iraq result in a some kind of emergency where we'd have to quickly return?

[MikeWaters]

At some point you declare victory and leave. Iraq will never be a shining city on a hill.

Or better yet, do it like Israel. Give all the power to either the Sunnis or Shiites, declare one of those tribes as chosen, and then allow them to subjugate and oppress the other tribe.

[BYU71]

I wished they would have asked the question.

Is Iran more likely to have a nuclear bomb at the end of an Obama 4 years or a McCain 4 years?

Right now though, most Americans probably don't care if Iran gets the bomb if preventing it would require a continuation of the war in Iraq or possible war with Iran.

Americans just don't have the stomach for war, unless provoked. I saw a documentary on FDR. He really wanted to go to war with Germany. He couldn't rally the support though until we were attacked by Japan.

Sadly, I think the real reason this war is unpopular has to do with what it is costing us in dollars.

[MikeWaters]

What if taking out a nuclear development facility meant that 1000 missiles would be lobbed at Israel. Would you destroy that facility?

And I am not talking about mini-rockets from the Hezbollah that can destroy a home. I am talking, real missiles.

There is a reason Bush has not attacked. There is no scenario where there is a clean win.

[BlueK]

Originally Posted by Tex

The Powerline guys drew some interesting conclusions from these Rasmussen results:

How likely is it that the U.S. would win the War in Iraq if _____ is elected president:
McCain: 49%
Obama: 20%

How likely is it that virtually all troops will be home in 4 years if _____ is elected president:
McCain: 43%
Obama: 59%

What do you care most about:
Getting troops home in 4 years: 52%
Winning the war: 39%

John Hinderaker thus concludes:



Indeed. To capitalize on these emotions, McCain simply needs to convince the American people that they can have their cake and eat it too: win the war AND be home in 4 years.

Obama can't sell the former. He's not even trying.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/

the war part is over. What we're doing now is the nation building part. The war part was well planned for and executed well. The aftermath was clearly not planned for well and has been a headache. And no, I don't know what the answer is. But as far as "winning" the war goes, what does that even mean?

[Tex]

Originally Posted by BlueK

the war part is over. What we're doing now is the nation building part. The war part was well planned for and executed well. The aftermath was clearly not planned for well and has been a headache. And no, I don't know what the answer is. But as far as "winning" the war goes, what does that even mean?

It means whatever the average American polled by Rasmussen thinks it means.