Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Presidents war hurting senate chances? (Original Post) mgcgulfcoast Sep 2014 OP
I call that bullshit bigdarryl Sep 2014 #1
Yes - war for revenge. How noble. Maedhros Sep 2014 #5
Try again frazzled Sep 2014 #2
Governing by polls isnt leadership mgcgulfcoast Sep 2014 #3
Who's governing by polls? frazzled Sep 2014 #8
+1,000,000 Dawson Leery Sep 2014 #7
Similar argument, different rationale, could be made if he had NOT taken us back to war. . . Journeyman Sep 2014 #4
i disagree mgcgulfcoast Sep 2014 #6
So where did you get that he said anything about polls? President Obama has much more info earlier jwirr Sep 2014 #9
In a word, "no." Chan790 Sep 2014 #10
 

bigdarryl

(13,190 posts)
1. I call that bullshit
Fri Sep 26, 2014, 05:27 PM
Sep 2014

If he did nothing I could see that but these fuckers beheaded two Americans.I blame some of these crying ass Progressives like Rosy O'Donnell and Micheal Moore for there constent bashing of the Presieent

frazzled

(18,402 posts)
2. Try again
Fri Sep 26, 2014, 05:35 PM
Sep 2014
Almost two-thirds of respondents in a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll believe it is in the nation's interest to confront the group, known as ISIS and as ISIL, which has swept through Syria and northern Iraq. Only 13% said action wasn't in the national interest.

The survey also found indications that more people were coming to believe the U.S. should play a more active role on the world stage, a shift from Journal/NBC surveys earlier this year that found war-weary Americans wanting to step back from foreign engagements.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/wsj-nbc-poll-finds-that-almost-two-thirds-of-americans-back-attacking-militants-1410301920

mgcgulfcoast

(1,127 posts)
3. Governing by polls isnt leadership
Fri Sep 26, 2014, 05:43 PM
Sep 2014

we have been killing people in the middle east for years, and what has it got us?

frazzled

(18,402 posts)
8. Who's governing by polls?
Fri Sep 26, 2014, 06:48 PM
Sep 2014

And your OP was about potential effects on the election, not about the rectitude or efficacy of military operations against ISIS. My answer was a response to whether people will abandon Democrats because of the new policy. The answer is no.

But keep trying to change the subject.

mgcgulfcoast

(1,127 posts)
6. i disagree
Fri Sep 26, 2014, 06:01 PM
Sep 2014

he needed to lead us and not follow polls. war by poll? no thanks. can anyone here say how killing more people now will result in something good when all the other bombing didnt?

jwirr

(39,215 posts)
9. So where did you get that he said anything about polls? President Obama has much more info earlier
Fri Sep 26, 2014, 07:05 PM
Sep 2014

than we ever do. What info he uses to make decisions comes from many different sources. Polls may be one of those sources but definitely not the only one.

 

Chan790

(20,176 posts)
10. In a word, "no."
Fri Sep 26, 2014, 10:58 PM
Sep 2014

If anything, it helps.

What you have to take into consideration is that, to the eternal shock and chagrin of pacifist DUers, the American public--liberal, conservative or otherwise--is not so unilaterally anti-war. Generally, being at war tends to favor incumbents...and Democrats more than Republicans: voters don't need to be reminded that the GOP can be hawkish; they do tend to forget that elected Democrats can be tough on terror, staunch on national security and bellicose to America's enemies.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Presidents war hurting se...