D.C. Dispatch January 9, 2007

Opinion polls show that Americans have one big priority; resolving the situation in Iraq.

by William Schneider

from National Journal

A Message About Priorities

Article Tools

E-mail Article
Printer Format

The voters' message in November was loud and clear. Since then, it's been getting louder and clearer. In a December poll by Opinion Research for CNN, only 28 percent of Americans said they approved of the way President Bush is handling Iraq. Disapproval reached 70 percent, a new high.

Bush seems to have four options. Some anti-war critics want the United States to withdraw immediately. Just 21 percent of Americans support that approach. The Iraq Study Group recommended withdrawing within a year. Thirty-three percent of Americans favor that. Combine those two options, and you have a majority of Americans in favor of withdrawing within a year.

The third option is Bush's long-standing policy: Keep U.S. troops in Iraq as long as necessary to turn control over to the Iraqis. Thirty-two percent of poll respondents

favor the status quo. Finally, there's the option advocated by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and endorsed by the U.S. commander in Iraq: Send more troops. That has the least public support. Only 11 percent of Americans favor additional troops.

Over the past six months, the one option that has lost ground is the status quo. Support for the view that the United States should take as long as necessary to turn control over to the Iraqis dropped from 42 percent in June to 32 percent in December. Every alternative has gained support, including sending more troops (which went from 6 percent to 11 percent). The message to Bush is: Do something different.

The president has been given that message twice. In November, the voters expressed no confidence in his leadership. In December, a bipartisan committee of the national establishment, the Iraq Study Group, issued a similar vote of no confidence. It gave Bush a list of 79 recommendations for changing course in Iraq—with instructions to follow them all. "I hope we don't treat this like a fruit salad and say, 'I like this, but I don't like that,' " Co-Chairman James Baker said.

After receiving the study group's report, Bush put off announcing a new course for several weeks while he sought further advice on what to do. Freelancers rushed in to fill the vacuum. Four senators went to Iraq to complain about weak leadership. In Baghdad, Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., said, "There has to be leadership from political leaders here and, frankly, from political leaders in the U.S. as well."

Another four senators—Democrats Christopher Dodd of Connecticut, John Kerry of Massachusetts, and Bill Nelson of Florida, and Republican Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania—went to Damascus to meet with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad over White House objections. They got political cover from the Iraq Study Group, which recommended that the United States negotiate with Syria and Iran because both countries can help resolve the situation in Iraq.

The public strongly favors negotiations with Iran and Syria even though it has no illusions about either country. Most Americans brand Iran and Syria as either unfriendly nations or enemies.

Bush has made it clear that in dealing with Iran, the United States has other priorities besides Iraq. "If they verifiably suspend their [nuclear] enrichment, we will come to the table," the president said at his December 20 news conference. The same with Syria—other priorities ("They've got to leave democratic Lebanon alone," Bush said).

The Iraq Study Group had one big priority: resolving the situation in Iraq. If Iran and Syria can help, why not bring them in? "Talking to an enemy is not appeasement," Baker said. Democrats have one big priority: resolving the situation in Iraq. "President Assad indicated that he was willing to seek common ground and explore issues of mutual interest," Kerry and Dodd said after meeting with the Syrian president.

Why is the American public open to negotiations with countries it doesn't like or trust? Because Americans have one big priority: resolving the situation in Iraq.

Bush has a different priority. He continues to promise "victory" in Iraq. In the CNN poll, only 27 percent of Americans said they think victory is likely. Twenty percent predicted defeat. The prevailing view? Stalemate (50 percent). The Iraq Study Group report never mentions a U.S. victory in Iraq. It dismisses the president's priority. And that explains why Bush has treated the report dismissively.

William Schneider is the Cable News Network's senior political analyst. He is also a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C., and a contributing editor for the Los Angeles Times, National Journal, and The Atlantic Monthly. His column appears every week in National Journal, a weekly magazine covering politics and government published in Washington, D.C.

Article Tools

E-mail Article
Printer Format

Discuss this article in Post & Riposte.

More from National Journal

Subscribe to our e-mail newsletter.

Recent commentary from National Journal

August 7, 2007

Innocents in Prison

Many thousands of wrongly convicted people are rotting in prisons and jails around the country.

August 7, 2007

The Candidates' Four Detention Camps

Deciding what to do with jihadist operatives is the country's most urgent legal question. But there's little sign that the presidential candidates have given it much thought.

August 7, 2007

Crowd Control

Everybody's buzzing about citizen journalism. But the "journalism" could use some editing.

August 7, 2007

Democratic Slugfest

An exchange of blows between Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama was bound to happen.

July 31, 2007

Shortsighted on Judges

Senate Democrats are playing a dangerous political game in opposing confirmation of Leslie Southwick, a wellqualified judicial nominee from Mississippi.

July 31, 2007

Beyond Trade Adjustment Assistance

Workers who lose their jobs because of trade are no more deserving than workers whose jobs disappear for other reasons.

July 31, 2007

The Poverty Candidates

John Edwards made poverty an issue in his 2004 campaign for the White House. This time around, he has company: Barack Obama is also working to put poverty back on the political agenda.

July 24, 2007

Are the Democrats Serious?

Both sides deserve to lose the brewing battle between the White House and Congress over executive privilege.

July 24, 2007

Of Church and State

Religion now looms larger than economic class as a source of political division.

July 17, 2007

Flying Blind in a Red-Tape Blizzard

Based on spending, President Bush appears to be the biggest regulator since the Nixon-Ford years.


Name

Address 1

Address 2

City

State Zip

Email

Atlantic Voices

The Surge Caused Everything! Read more

24 July 2008 02:42 A.M.

Thought of the Day Read more

23 July 2008 10:50 P.M.

Obama In Berlin Read more

23 July 2008 3:13 P.M.

Gored! Read more

23 July 2008 1:17 P.M.

No Orleans Read more

23 July 2008 5:54 P.M.

I'm not there, so I can't say so first hand, but... Read more

23 July 2008 11:15 P.M.

Marc Ambinder, Blogging Hero Read more

23 July 2008 8:31 P.M.

The CBO on Fannie and Freddie Read more

24 July 2008 08:23 A.M.