Poll: 57% disapprove of Obama handling of ISIS

Mevater

Tue, Feb 17 2015, 9:33 am

With the recent discussions here and elsewhere of how Obama is handling the ISIS issue, I was wondering what polls would tell us. Any poll Fox would do or report would be seen as anti-Obama, but this poll was done by CNN.

***On my poll, wording should have read .....with how Obama is handling the issue, instead of .....with the Obama is handling the issue.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/16/.....oval/

The CNN/ORC poll found 57% of Americans disapprove of how Obama is handling the threat posed by ISIS, a significant decline in support for the President over the past few months. In late September, that number was 49%.

Fifty-seven percent disapprove of his handling of foreign affairs more broadly, and 54% disapprove of how the President is handling terrorism. Another 60% rate Obama negatively on his handling of electronic national security.

The declining approval ratings for Obama on national security come as a weekend of international turmoil further underscores the growing threats abroad.

Last edited by Mevater on Tue, Feb 17 2015, 9:53 am; edited 1 time in total

MagentaYenta

Tue, Feb 17 2015, 9:52 am

And your point? As an average type citizen I don't presume to know the underpinnings of our foreign policy. Nor am I privy to the international relations aspects of that happen out of public view. Meh, its a poll.

marina

Tue, Feb 17 2015, 10:01 am

I am not happy with his handling of ISIS. As I wrote in other threads, I feel we should be more proactive and aggressive. What he is doing now should have been done long ago.

Mevater

Tue, Feb 17 2015, 10:06 am

MagentaYenta wrote:

As an average type citizen I don't presume to know the underpinnings of our foreign policy. Nor am I privy to the international relations aspects of that happen out of public view.

No, no one has invited anyone into the smoke filled rooms where real political decisions are made. BUT

1. we read the papers and see that ISIS is widening their territory,
2. getting lots of recruits, and
3. carrying out new atrocities every few days, and

most everyone (except potential ISIS recruits and ISIS members, who are happy that ISIS is gaining strength) are shivering about the thought of ISIS recruits returning from training abroad and carrying out atrocities any place near them. Not good.

MagentaYenta

Tue, Feb 17 2015, 10:19 am

Mevater wrote:

My views on how to fight ISIS will be quite unpopular here. If the US were to devote more funding to fighting ISIS abroad I would like to see foreign aide reduced in to those nations who are experiencing ISIS terrorism abroad. If that means reducing aid to Israel or other countries so be it.

FWIW I'm not going to argue my position, it is what it is.

DrMom

Tue, Feb 17 2015, 10:30 am

The poll can be confusing because the answers that start with YES are those that express disapproval.

Also, the choices aren't mutually exclusive. One can be satifsied/dissatisfied with Obama's handling of ISIS and still think that poll numbers are inaccurate in either direction.

DrMom

Tue, Feb 17 2015, 10:32 am

MagentaYenta wrote:

I don't understand your reasoning. Money for fighting ISIS should come at the expense of countries who are being terrorized by ISIS?

I think I will make a ridicuous statement and then refuse to discuss it:

Money for fighting ISIS should come from duck-hunting.

I refuse to defend that statement. It is what it is.

marina

Tue, Feb 17 2015, 10:46 am

DrMom wrote:

Money for fighting ISIS should come from duck-hunting.

I refuse to defend that statement. It is what it is.

I guess she means that the US should not expend additional moneys on ISIS wars. To the extent the US spends money on ISIS for a particular country, the US should decrease the general funding to that country to the same extent - making it a wash.

I totally disagree with this suggestion, but that's how I understood what she said.

MagentaYenta

Tue, Feb 17 2015, 11:01 am

DrMom wrote:

Money for fighting ISIS should come from duck-hunting.

I refuse to defend that statement. It is what it is.

Each of the nations who are being terrorized by ISIS receive billions in international aid from the US. If these nations want military assistance, minus that cost from their current aid on a dollar for dollar basis. Exempt funding for global health initiatives, food security, education and climate change, put contingency funding in the pot to get debited since it's largely gray money.

Mevater

Tue, Feb 17 2015, 11:02 am

DrMom wrote:

The poll can be confusing because the answers that start with YES are those that express disapproval.

The CNN poll says 57% disapprove, not 43% approve. Their question must have been worded similarly. They must have asked do you disapprove, and the answer in 57% of the cases was YES, or the headlines wouldnt be what they are.

Barbara

Tue, Feb 17 2015, 11:08 am

How many anti-Obama posts are you going to make?

But I'm curious. What is your solution to the problems posed by ISIS. How many American lives are you willing to risk in order to accomplish that (and does that include yourself -- women serve, you know -- your husband and your children)? What is the financial cost, and how will you finance it? Estimate the additional risk to the US and to Israel as a result of any such action, and explain how you intend to protect against those risks.

It's so easy to say that something should be done. I just don't know what.

Edited to add missing parenthesis.

Last edited by Barbara on Tue, Feb 17 2015, 11:15 am; edited 1 time in total

Barbara

Tue, Feb 17 2015, 11:11 am

Mevater wrote:

The CNN poll asked, "Do you approve or disapprove of the way Barack Obama is handling ..." (1) Terrorism (2) ISIS (random order). The response was "approve" "disapprove" or "no opinion."

Your "poll" put the cart before the horse. It asked if people agreed with the CNN poll, rather than asking people's opinions.

Mevater

Tue, Feb 17 2015, 11:24 am

Barbara wrote:

Sort of like 62% of scientists claim XYZ, do you agree? Either youre on the same train of thought or you arent. If you agree with those who have that opinion, how is that different than having that opinion?

MagentaYenta

Tue, Feb 17 2015, 11:33 am

Barbara wrote:

I'm addressing the bold.

Your point is well made. We have a volunteer Army, no mandatory draft anymore. I'm just about empty of tears from crying every time one of my DDs peers comes home from the middle east missing and arm(s), leg(s) or genitalia. (Not to mention mental health issues.) These men and woman are were all under the age of 30. I was naive to think that I saw the end of it when Saigon fell.

Mevater

Tue, Feb 17 2015, 11:40 am

MagentaYenta wrote:

Yes thats all very very saddening. Terrible to the extreme! Easy for someone to sit in their armchair and say go there to defend us, to others. But, what else can we do, sit back til ISIS comes to kill and torture us all over the world?

Barbara

Tue, Feb 17 2015, 11:46 am

Mevater wrote:

So I take it that you're ready and willing to volunteer to fight.

I'm impressed. In fact, I hope that Yael would allow me to appeal here for funds to help your family during your enlistment and service in the Middle East.

Now the second part of the question. What would you have the US do?

southernbubby

Tue, Feb 17 2015, 11:56 am

Mevater wrote:

That is why I was so excited when Jordan decided to retaliate for the burned pilot and I hope that Egypt will retaliate for the 21 murdered Coptic Christians. Some Americans have been killed too but America does not want another ground war.

southernbubby

Tue, Feb 17 2015, 11:57 am

Barbara wrote:

If someone volunteers to serve in the military, doesn't that mean that they are prepared to fight? Is ISIS a threat to America or only the rest of the world?

Barbara

Tue, Feb 17 2015, 12:05 pm

southernbubby wrote:

If someone volunteers to serve in the military, doesn't that mean that they are prepared to fight? Is ISIS a threat to America or only the rest of the world?

Yes, it means that they're prepared to fight.

But how do you successfully fight ISIS or other terrorists?

I don't know the answer to that. I do know that before the rise of ISIS, there was a lot of chatter about how Obama's policy of not singling out Muslims as terrorists was actually hurting recruitment. Now, obviously, not so much.

I don't want the US to do "something" unless that "something" is going to help. There's too much risk of making things worse, here and abroad. So that's what I want to know -- what would Mevatar have the US do?

southernbubby

Tue, Feb 17 2015, 12:07 pm

Barbara wrote:

Here is one suggestion for every country to follow: if someone is discovered trying to join ISIS, they are convicted immediately of high treason and immediately executed.