Choose Your Battle

Ilan Goldberg says this was the most important result from yesterday's ABC Iraq poll:

Do you think the U.S must win the war in [Country] in order for the broader war on terrorism to be a success, or do you think the war on terrorism can be a success without the U.S. winning?

Iraq: 34% must win. 60% can succeed without it
Afghanistan: 51% must win. 42% can succeed without it

Frankly, I'm skeptical that expressed public opinion on such fine-grained questions as these is all that significant. John McCain will argue that we can "win" (whatever that means) both if only we put our faith in his leadership. The question is how credible do people find that.

Comments

Winning for McCain means staying, and I'm having none of it.

Posted by David W. | July 16, 2008 1:28 PM

Because there is no such thing as a War on Terrorism, its can't be won.

Posted by rea | July 16, 2008 1:31 PM

That is excellent framing for McCain with respect to Iraq (how exactly is the United States supposed to "win" a civil war in Iraq?), and yet the result is still terrible for him, as Goldberg points out. So I think it is significant in a message-testing sense.

Posted by DTM | July 16, 2008 1:44 PM

John McCain will argue that we can "win" (whatever that means) both if only we put our faith in his leadership. The question is how credible do people find that.

Both John McCain's "budget" and his responses to questions on the economy change the subject to the war. Asked about his economy, he changes the subject to the threat of Islamic extremism. His "budget" is "balanced" (w/out numbers) by winning the war.

None of this has anything to do with policy, even should McCain win in November. It's merely a sensible response by the McCain campaign to two facts: the economy is upper-most on voters' minds, and Obama beats McCain on the economy by nineteen points.

So, it's not enough that people believe. It is sufficient that they are distracted.
.

Posted by Grand Moff Texan | July 16, 2008 1:45 PM

Follow-up question, to either ABC pollsters or anyone who responded "must win:" "Please specify a quantitative description of conditions that would constitute 'victory.'"

Because without such a description, the question is completely and utterly meaningless.

Posted by James Gary | July 16, 2008 1:47 PM

"Asked about his economy" should read "asked about the economy," of course.
.

Posted by Grand Moff Texan | July 16, 2008 1:49 PM

I don't know that this is necessarily all that fine-grained. Our country is currently fighting two wars, and this poll suggests the public thinks one is significantly more important than the other. If I were a candidate, I would look at this and think that I better start emphasizing the one that's perceived as important. And lo and behold, that's what's happening in both campaigns (though not triggered by this specific poll, obviously).

Posted by Jake H. | July 16, 2008 1:52 PM

What constituted victory in May of 1864 or March of 1942? I mean, like who cares?

Posted by wondering | July 16, 2008 2:07 PM

I'd like to poll the candidates. (Well, just McCain, actually)

"What does 'victory' in Iraq amount to?"

It's a simple question.

And, "That sounds like 'status quo ante' except for the removal of Saddam. Was the death of a tin-pot dictator really worth +4000 American lives, tens of thousands of Americans injured, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi dead, millions Iraqis in exile, and $1,000,000,000,000 in American wealth?"

Posted by Jeffrey Davis | July 16, 2008 2:20 PM

wondering,

The American Civil War ended in 1965 when the Confederate Generals commanding armies surrendered to the Union forces, starting with Lee surrendering the Army of Northern Virginia at Appomattox.

Victory in Europe occurred in May of 1945 after the German Generals on both fronts and in Berlin surrendered to the Allies.

Victory in Japan occurred in August of 1945 when Emperor Hirihito announced Japan was accepting surrender terms.

That is how real wars end in victory--the opposing forces surrender to the victors. So who exactly has the authority to surrender to the United States in Iraq?

Posted by DTM | July 16, 2008 3:03 PM

The American Civil War ended in 1965

The Voting Rights Act signed by Lyndon Johnson. It begat, of course, the Southern Strategy that has led more BS than you can shake a stick at.

No good deed goes unpunished.

Posted by Jeffrey Davis | July 16, 2008 3:35 PM

This shows how stupid the public is.

Given the failure in Iraq, they want to reproduce it in Afghanistan AND Pakistan.

Smart.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | July 16, 2008 5:33 PM

James Gary is right: "without such a description, the question is completely and utterly meaningless." Could we please have a rigorous, methodical analysis of poll questions and the ways they always-- always!-- use loaded language, undefined buzzwords, and unexamined assumptions? And that therefore their results are completely and utterly meaningless?

Wouldn't it be nice if every news article about a poll were required to print the poll questions verbatim, so that we could see how specious they are?

Posted by KSinMA | July 16, 2008 11:17 PM

James Gary is right: "without such a description, the question is completely and utterly meaningless." Could we please have a rigorous, methodical analysis of poll questions and the ways they always-- always!-- use loaded language, undefined buzzwords, and unexamined assumptions? And that therefore their results are completely and utterly meaningless?

Wouldn't it be nice if every news article about a poll were required to print the poll questions verbatim, so that we could see how specious they are?

Posted by KSinMA | July 16, 2008 11:18 PM