Bell Curve The Law Talking Guy Raised by Republicans U.S. West
Well, he's kind of had it in for me ever since I accidentally ran over his dog. Actually, replace "accidentally" with "repeatedly," and replace "dog" with "son."

Saturday, June 21, 2008

Talking to Hostile Governments

We've blogged about an earlier poll that said something similar to this but I like this one too. I especially like how the question is set up to make clear the pros and cons of each option. This is from an ABC/Washington Post poll that I found on Polling Report.Com.


America's Role in World Affairs
ABC News/Washington Post Poll. June 12-15, 2008. N=1,125 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3. Fieldwork by TNS.
.
"Some people say a president should NOT meet with leaders of foreign countries that are hostile toward the United States, because it could reward their behavior and make the U.S. look weak. Others say a president SHOULD be willing to meet with leaders of foreign countries that are hostile toward the United States because talking can improve relations and avoid confrontation. Which of these views comes closer to your own?"

Should Not Meet: 27%
Should Be Willing to Meet: 77%
Unsure: 3%

That's pretty bad news for McCain. He was hoping to be able to beat Obama on the head with his "naive" approach to diplomacy. But it looks like most Americans already agree with Obama. We're all just so sick of the way Bush has represented us to the world!

3 comments:

Bob said...

Apologies for the following:

Bob's non sequitur plea:

Citizens, please post about the horrible retroactive telecom immunity/warrantless surveillance bill, and Obama's complicity in its passage so far!

-------------

Regarding the actual post at hand:
"We're all just so sick of the way Bush has represented us to the world!"

No doubt if the questions were whether "President Bush" should/should not meet with leaders of foreign countries, there'd be more "should not meet" sentiments, for fear of further embarrassment.

Raised By Republicans said...

"No doubt if the questions were whether "President Bush" should/should not meet with leaders of foreign countries, there'd be more "should not meet" sentiments, for fear of further embarrassment."

Good point. We should consider the causal mechanism here.

History Buff said...

According to Glen Greewald at Salon.com Obama voted against this bill. There were 19 democrats who voted for it:

"Final passage in the Senate of the Cheney/Rockefeller bill was 68-29. 19 Democrats joined all Republicans to vote in favor of warrantless eavesdropping and telecom amnesty: Conrad, Rockefeller, Baucus, Webb, Kohl, Whitehouse, Bayh, Johnson, Bill Nelson, Mikulski, McCaskill, Lincoln, Casey, Salazar, Inouye, Ben Nelson, Pryor, Carper, and Landrieu. Neither Obama nor Clinton voted on final passage."
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greewald/2008/02/12/amnesty_day/