Pew Research Center poll tracking public support for a five-year war.
by Mark Silva
Five years into the war in Iraq, a majority of Americans surveyed say the United States made a mistake in using military force there.
Support for the war has eroded during the past two years, surveys show -- even though more Americans today than last year say that thiings are "going well'' in Iraq. And Americans are evenly divided on the question of bringing troops home.
The latest national national survey of the Washington-based Pew Research Center, conducted Feb. 20-24, found that 54 percent of Americans surveyed believe "the U.S. made the wrong decision in using military force in Iraq,'' while 38 percent called it the right decision.
This compares with 49 percent calling the invasion the wrong decision last March and 43 percent then calling it the right course. "During the third and fourth years of the conflict public opinion on this question was divided, while in the war's first two years clear majorities backed the decision to use force in Iraq,'' Pew reports.
Support has faded despite a public perception that conditions are improving in Iraq. In the latest survey of 1,500 adults, people were evenly divided over the question of whether the military situation is going well -- 48 percent on both sides of the answer. In February 2007, fully two-thirds (67 percent) had said the war in Iraq was not going well - "the largest percentage expressing this view since the war began,'' Pew reports.
"The current division on this question is comparable to public perceptions through most of the second and third years of the conflict,'' Pew notes, "while evaluations turned decidedly negative during the fourth year.''
Americans remain divided on the question of keeping troops in Iraq or bringing them home. A slim plurality (49 percent) now supports bringing the troops home as soon as possible, while 47 percent favor maintaining troops in Iraq until the situation there is stabilized
That, of course, is within the margin of error. See the poll.
• 
• 
• 
• 
Comments
So is someone suggesting we make our war and foreign policy decisions based on the ever changing breeze of public opinion?
Posted by: Steve Hussein S | March 19, 2008 11:33 AM
Well that would be bad news for Mr. McBush. He has said over and over how Iraq was a good idea. Heck...he still sings that little ditty about bombing Iran. Do we need 4 more years of this wrong kind of thinking? Be prepared to have the rhetoric raised as this is all McBush has. He said he was clueless as to economics.
Posted by: bill "Hussein" r. | March 19, 2008 11:34 AM
Since Mr. Silva is on the subject of polls, will us Swamp readers ever see him acknowledge the latest Reuters/Zogby Poll, which shows John McCain beating both Democrats Obama (46%-40%) and Clinton (48%-40%)?
Mark Silva loves to report on polls--at least, the polls the DNC would wish to be publicized.
Posted by: Bruce | March 19, 2008 1:01 PM
Who are these 38% who think invading Iraq was a good idea? I can understand being torn on the quandary we now find ourselves in as a result of the folly, but really, 38% would do it all over again EVEN IF they knew how it would turn out?
That is pretty pathetic.
Let me frame it this way: in 2003, George W Bush tells you that he wants to spend $3 trillion BORROWED from foreigners (13% of the national debt was held by foreigners when Bush took office, it is now 55%) to attack a country that did not attack us on 9/11, that has no conventional or non-conventional means of threatening us (WMD's) and has no relation whatsoever with Al Qaeda. That war will cost 4,000 American lives and counting, will result in a significant degradation of American prestige, a significant increase in disdain and hostility toward the United States, a military as broken as its been since Vietnam, and an occupation that will likely last for a generation or more. The man who attacked us on 9/11 will still be free, and the nation that attacked us would be falling back into the hands of the Taliban we ostensibly ousted.
After hearing ALL OF THAT, 38% WOULD DO IT ALL OVER AGAIN?
I'm starting to think that is even more depressing than the ridiculous controversy over Jeremiah Wright.
Posted by: Everything Looks Like a Nail | March 19, 2008 1:04 PM
Steve:
No, but once the decision was determined to be a mistake, they should correct it.
Remember "Mission Accomplished"??
Brucie:
So now that the polls agree with you, then they are valid.
If they don't they don't count.
Like we say, let's see the polls once the Democrats have a candidate.
Posted by: BobHusseininATL | March 19, 2008 2:39 PM
Bruce, the Tribune wouldn't report on a poll that shows their candidates losing. Remember, the Tribune's Washington Bureau at the least is in the tank with the DNC and at worst on its payroll.
Posted by: John D | March 19, 2008 2:56 PM
Brucie and Johnny, begging for more polls even after they railed on the Tribune and the MSM in general for relying on such polls. And, of course, we get obligatory media bias claims. What a bunch of one-note whiners.
Would you like more polls like these, boys?
Since Mark Silva is spending time looking at the Gallup poll, one wonders how Mr. Silva managed to avoid seeing the latest Gallup Poll which shows Republican Rudy Giuliani beating the leading Democrats, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.
The numbers the "Swamp" doesn't want you to see, but which anybody can find, are:
Giuliani 49%, Clinton 46%
Giuliani 49%, Obama 45%
Posted by: Bruce | July 24, 2007 12:26 PM
And, from the ever prescient, Johnny Delusional:
Prediction: Guiliani defeats the Queen B and it won't even be that close. Half the country doesn't like her and that will not change, certainly not after 16 years of her being in the spotlight.
Posted by: John D | October 31, 2007 10:56 AM
Oh, whinabies, this is from Monday's USA Today/Gallup Poll:
USA TODAY/Gallup Poll: Clinton up 5 points on McCain; Obama up 2
If the election were held today (and yes, we know it won't be), Democratic contender Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton would get 51% of the vote to Republican candidate Sen. John McCain's 46%, the latest USA TODAY/Gallup Poll estimates. In a match-up between Democratic Sen. Barack Obama and McCain, Obama comes out ahead 49%-47%.
Both Democrats have overtaken McCain since the last USA TODAY/Gallup survey. In that Feb. 21-24 poll, McCain led Clinton 50%-46% and he led Obama 48%-47%.
Posted by: dt | March 19, 2008 4:07 PM
Thanks, "dt", for making our case (that the Swamp avoids polls showing Republicans doing well, in favor of the same polls when they show Dems doing well) even stronger--though I'm sure that wasn't your intention.
Posted by: Bruce | March 19, 2008 5:05 PM
Go McBush! Run on GWB's economy and Iraq war record! It's a real winner! Toss in some Jesus talk!
Gawd, The Base will buy anything. The agreement seems to be; I (McCain) will lie to you about my past positions, you (The Base) will vote for me.
Posted by: TheReamer | March 19, 2008 6:31 PM
John D'Mime is out of his glass box again.
The Trib will endorse John McCain. They would have endorsed any of the Republics except Ron Paul.
Posted by: C.Morris | March 19, 2008 6:47 PM
When you consider a large percentage of people couldn't find Iraq on a map, couldn't name our Vice President, or place the time frame of our Civil War in the correct century, their opinions beyond "American Idol" are worthless.
Posted by: whatnow | March 19, 2008 7:18 PM
It's all the fault of liberal media bias! Thank God for liberal media bias!
Posted by: rncbs | March 19, 2008 8:11 PM
[quote]
Remember, the Tribune's Washington Bureau at the least is in the tank with the DNC and at worst on its payroll.
Posted by: John D | March 19, 2008 2:56 PM
[/quote]
Geographically Ignorant Dumb Dumb Little Johnnie Dyslin, "the Joseph Stalin of Streamwood", either post a link to PROOF of your allegation or STFU.
Posted by: BC | March 19, 2008 9:14 PM
"Gawd, The Base will buy anything. The agreement seems to be; I (McCain) will lie to you about my past positions, you (The Base) will vote for me.
Posted by: TheReamer | March 19, 2008 6:31 PM"
Reamer,
That sounds like the perfect definition of 'Mime Theory' politics.
Posted by: TheLeninSisters | March 19, 2008 9:28 PM