CNN Instant Poll: 6 in 10 speech-watchers back Obama on Syria

[Tx4obama]

CNN Instant Poll: 6 in 10 speech-watchers back Obama on Syria

Washington (CNN) – A majority of Americans who watched President Barack Obama's prime time address to the nation said they favor the approach to Syria that the president spelled out in his speech, according to an instant poll.

But a CNN/ORC International survey of speech watchers conducted immediately after the conclusion of Obama's Tuesday address also indicates that those who tuned into the address were split on whether the president made the case for military action against Syria.

According to the poll, 61% say they support the president's position on Syria, with 37% saying they oppose his response to the Syrian government's alleged use of chemical weapons against its own citizens.

-snip-

The poll indicates that nearly two-thirds of those who watched the speech think that the situation in Syria is likely to be resolved through diplomatic efforts, with 35% disagreeing.

-snip-

Full article with more numbers here; http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/09/10/cnn-instant-poll-6-in-10-speech-watchers-back-obama-on-syria/

[RetroLounge]

1. Well, since most smart people stopped watching CNN years ago...

RL

[VanillaRhapsody]

2. OOOOOH that will leave a mark...

Oh well for those spewwing the "the people weren't with Obama" tripe...wrong AGAIN!

[1awake]

4. Not sure if a CNN instant poll is all that indicative of all Americans lol. n/t

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

5. What people are we talking about? Percentages of viewing audience would

be appreciated.

Do you have those numbers?

[Union Scribe]

6. They aren't with him on war

Two-thirds believe it can be handled diplomatically. That's what people are responding positively to. They aren't so much "with Obama" as they are "with any resolution that doesn't involve another goddamn war".

[VanillaRhapsody]

8. Is that what they said?

thats not what this poster said...

[Union Scribe]

11. "The poll indicates that nearly two-thirds

of those who watched the speech think that the situation in Syria is likely to be resolved through diplomatic efforts..."

Like I said, they're responding to the hope of avoiding war. The numbers throughout this mess have clearly indicated that the people have NOT supported using the military. They want a diplomatic solution, and their pressure is why that solution became the only viable option to pursue.

[VanillaRhapsody]

57. noooo...that is not what the poll said...that is your interpretation...

logic twisting is not your forte

The poll indicates that they agree with the President on this one...why don't you admit that and be done with it.

[sandalwood]

29. This

[Logical]

7. Lol, you must be desperate! n-t

[Hell Hath No Fury]

9. I support his new approach --

I don't know many American who wouldn't want the diplomatic approach we are now focused on.

What Americans didn't want -- overwhelming -- was a military attack on Syria.

[Brewinblue]

55. Oh FFS!

Who the hell do you think watched the speech and participated in CNN's shitty poll!

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

3. How many overall tuned in to watch PBO's speech?

[Marr]

10. He's an excellent speaker.

But I'd be more interested in a real poll of public opinion. This is as much a poll of Obama's effectiveness at public speaking as support for his policy on Syria.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

12. Isn't CNN one step above dog shit? I don't understand why anybody would

listen to that crap shack of a news outlet.

[Historic NY]

13. Only DU Polls mean anything.

[delrem]

14. The president's position hasn't been to back diplomacy.

Even in this speech he gives kudos and shout outs to so-called "moderate Syrian rebels", painting everything offensive out of the picture. It was an absurdity, but one that can get by on TV.

He made the claim that he doesn't need congressional approval to initiate military action against a country that, he also says, presents no threat whatsoever to the vast US war machine, which doesn't deliver "pinpricks". So he's saying that *whatever*, he can initiate open war at will.

He said that he doesn't think the US should be the world's police force, that isn't his idea of the US role.
But he immediately contradicts this.
He made the claim that since WW2, 70 yrs, the US has been the worlds enforcer of *some* kind of moral code, and he spoke nary a word about how the US also has a rather spotty record. Along with the good there have been a lot of bad choices, bad results in the record, and Obama didn't address that.

[Tx4obama]

15. President Obama has been working for a diplomatic solution for over a year

-snip-

According to a senior Senate aide, Obama told Democrats that he had asked Kerry to reach out to Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and offer the diplomatic solution.

"He mentioned that that occurred during the G-20 meeting (a year ago), when he met with (Russian President Vladimir) Putin -- that he would assign Kerry to discuss diplomatic alternatives," added Sen. Dean Heller (R-Nev.).

A senior administration official confirmed to The Huffington Post that Obama and Putin first discussed the concept in Los Cabos at the G-20 in June 2012. After the first plenary session, while world leaders were mingling, Obama and Putin went to a corner of the room and spoke for nearly half an hour about Syria.

-snip-

Full article here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/10/john-kerry-syria-solution_n_3901863.html

[delrem]

17. I don't believe that anonymous "senior Senate aide".

But I do believe that the US is currently in a proxy war over Syria, and could give a shit about "The Syrian People", any more than not giving a shit about "The Libyan People", or "The Iraqi People", or "The Afghani People", or "The Pakistani People", or "The Yemeni People", or "The Somalian People".

So I do believe that the US/Saudi/Israeli goal is regime change, and this isn't over.

[leftynyc]

38. Of course you don't

I'm sure you're quite disappointed you can't have your little temper tantrum about bombs falling in Syria. And of course, only YOU know what is really going on and know more than the President and the SOS. You've become quite the joke.

[delrem]

47. You could say the same about GWB. You've become quite the joke.

eta: your argument, such as it is, is for blind obedience, whoever is in power and whatever is the issue.

[leftynyc]

64. Yawn

Your agenda is right out there for everyone to see. I don't need to waste my time with you.

[delrem]

66. So is your "agenda" - sheee, using the same argument as the W's fans did.

That's pretty out there.

[leftynyc]

67. Ooooh - calling me a right winger

The true mark of someone with a weak argument - keep lashing out, I've always found childish temper tantrums amusing.

[delrem]

69. I'm noting the fact that you use the *identical* argument as used by Bushbots to sell Iraq war.

Nothin more to say, leftynyc

[HumansAndResources]

60. Why Didn't He Begin With Starting Down Diplomacy Road Then??

Why would this diplomacy be kept "secret"? I'm not saying it didn't happen - I AM saying it certainly appears it wasn't the Preferred Option, given the goal of "removing Assad" was stated years ago - by the Busy team who began the Syrian Civil War Plans, initially - plans which the Obama-team very unfortunately continued, to the tune of 100K dead people.

The vote for President Obama was intended, by the voters, to translate to ENDING Bush-era policies and prosecution of the war-criminals / torturers. In most matters of utmost importance - like trade, unions, social-security, and foreign-policy - this didn't happen. There is no getting around that. Did we get a "slightly milder version" of those Transnational-Corporate Rethuglican policy agendas? At best, perhaps.

[Summer Hathaway]

27. Diplomatic avenues

have been pursued at all times, especially amidst the saber-rattling, when it comes to that. That's how these things work.

Obama's stance was been strong and unequivocal. He was cautiously optimistic about diplomacy winning in the end - but made it clear that should push come to shove, he was more than ready to shove back - and then some.

His "We don't do pin-pricks" remark was directed at Assad and Putin - lest they be under the delusion that "the limited strategic strike" being weighed would be something of insignificance in terms of damage that could be done.

"He spoke nary a word about how the US also has a rather spotty record."

How truly shocking! Surely he understands that nothing fills a country with confidence like being reminded of all the wrongdoing we've done in the past. Can't believe he wouldn't have gone with that tack.

[delrem]

28. Well yah, OK, , , so what's next on the afternoon soaps?

[Summer Hathaway]

30. Just the kind of contribution

to the discussion I've come to expect from you.

And in that regard, I am never disappointed.

[delrem]

31. well.. like, harruph! hehe

[sandalwood]

32. Syria's use of chemical weapons poses a direct threat to the US

and Syria does not have the capability to strike back at the US.


lol


Which is it?

[woo me with science]

48. All we know is it warrants a punishment bigger than a "pinprick" but still "unbelievably small" nt

[Cha]

16. Thanks for the report, Tx

But, only DU polls count. lol

[Scurrilous]

18. K & R

[FarCenter]

19. Here Is A Deceptively Brutal Instant Poll For Obama On His Speech Tonight

According to the poll, 61% of respondents said that they supported the president's "position on Syria" — a statement that's ambiguous, considering the amount of dramatic developments in the situation over the past two days.

But only 47% of respondents said that Obama made a "convincing case" about the need for military action in Syria, compared with 50% who said he didn't.

Moreover, Americans seem to be putting hope in to the prospects for a diplomatic solution. About two-thirds of respondents said that they thought the situation in Syria would "likely" be resolved diplomatically, while 35% disagreed.

...

The poll, also, split more Democratic than the general electorate. Its sample size was 37% Democrat, 43% Independent, and only 20% Republican. So it's likely that boosted the President somewhat.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-syria-speech-poll-cnn-assad-chemical-weapons-airstrikes-2013-9

[truedelphi]

33. And given that CNN is an arm of the CIA -

Who cares what they say?

Of course they are of the mindset that if you repeat a lie enough times, it can become true.

That worked for them getting us into Iraq.

[morningfog]

20. Catapulting the propaganda works! He should have played the videos of the gassed children

in the backdrop.

[alcibiades_mystery]

22. Ah, the fickle People...one day They are your best friends, warranting all your claims

The next They are back to being brainwashed imbeciles.

Democracy is hard, n'est ce pas?

[morningfog]

23. At least he followed McGovern's advice to withdraw the request from Congress.

He was about to lose big.

[alcibiades_mystery]

21. I heard 95% think Obama is a clueless warmongering jerk

I heard it on DU.

[Iliyah]

24. guns in America as well

[truedelphi]

34. In Vermnt, 95% is just about right:

"The president reiterated the points he has been making in recent weeks," said Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

"The dangers of the spread of chemical weapons, I think that's something that everybody in the room agrees with. The debate comes down to whether or not, long-term, we feel that getting involved in a Syrian civil war, which is bloody and complicated, the view that I expressed is that, one of the reasons there is so much opposition to this war -- and in the state of Vermont, 95 percent of the calls and e-mails I'm getting are in opposition -- that the American people are very, very angry at the Congress and the White House for not focusing on the collapse of the middle class, high unemployment, low wages and income and wealth inequality. So the American people are saying, 'Yeah, it's terrible what's happening in Syria, and yeah, the international community is going to have to address it, but we elect you people to make sure we have a decent standard of living and yet we're falling further and further behind. Please pay attention to the needs of the American people.' "

[davidn3600]

26. They probably still think the Biden-Ryan debate was a tie

[BlueStreak]

35. This just in. 8 of 9 viewers have no idea what the man was trying to say

I think it was something about the children. Did I get that part right?

[tblue]

63. If confusion lasts longer than 4 hours,

seek medical attention. 4 out of 5 doctors agree. Help! I've fallen and I can't get up.

[MNBrewer]

36. How many of them already backed the military strike option?

[Yandorio]

37. Has any presidential speech ever had support of less than 60%?

Regardless of his party?

[PoliticAverse]

39. This is an example of a 'self-selected sample'...

and self-selection bias...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-selection_bias

[Number23]

40. And in light of how bad the US's relationship with Russia has been for DECADES which was

exacerbated with the Snowden foolishness, this is a major diplomatic coup for Kerry and Obama.

No wonder the home page of DU is absolutely AWASH with wailing and angst right now as well as hilarious ego-stoking of the "liberal anti-war left" who should have been the first ones offering their congratulations to both of these men.

[Fuddnik]

41. 10 people watch CNN?

The last time it ever came on my TV was the night the tsunami hit Fukushima.

They were as full of shit that night as they are now.

[ctsnowman]

42. X2

[Cali_Democrat]

43. It was not a poll of CNN viewers. It was a poll conducted by CNN/ORC International. n/t

[Fuddnik]

49. An Orca conducted the poll?

I guess Wolfie was busy.

[azurnoir]

44. the poll numbers are just about as decisive as the speech :)

Last edited Wed Sep 11, 2013, 02:54 PM - Edit history (1)

The poll indicates that nearly two-thirds of those who watched the speech think that the situation in Syria is likely to be resolved through diplomatic efforts, with 35% disagreeing.

............................................


According to the poll, those who watched the president were divided on whether Obama made a convincing case in his speech for U.S. military action in Syria, with 47% saying he did and 50% saying he didn't.

The survey indicates that the speech didn't move the needle very much on whether U.S. air strikes against Syria would achieve significant goals for the U.S. Thirty percent of speech-watchers questioned before the address said yes. That number edged up to 36% following the address. And 39% said it was in the national interests of the U.S. to be involved in the conflict in Syria, edging up from 30% before the speech. Sixty percent said it was not in the national interests to get involved, down just five points from before the speech.

Fifty-two percent said following the speech that they were more confident of the president's leadership on military and international issues, with 16% saying they were less confident. But 52% said the speech did not change their opinion.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/09/10/cnn-instant-poll-6-in-10-speech-watchers-back-obama-on-syria/

[Maedhros]

45. I'm a pretty vocal critic of the President's policies,

but I fully support his diplomatic efforts to defuse the Syrian crisis.

[Motown_Johnny]

46. I back Pres. Obama on this but that poll is not scientific

and shouldn't be used for anything other than entertainment purposes.


The very fact that the poll is limited to people who watched the speech is telling. Many Cons won't even watch him speak and oppose everything he says or does.

[PoliticAverse]

51. Yes, it's an example of 'self-selection bias'. n/t

[Vashta Nerada]

50. 6 in 10???

That's bad reporting.

3 out of 5, people, 3 out of 5.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

52. so all fractions must be reduced? new journalistic standard? was unaware.

[Vashta Nerada]

53. Fractions always need to be reduced!

[Safetykitten]

54. Six out of ten fellow citizens think the moon is made of cheese.

[Tx4obama]

56. Poll: 69% of Americans Viewed Obama’s Syria Speech Positively, 61% Favor His Approach

Poll: 69% of Americans Viewed Obama’s Syria Speech Positively, 61% Favor His Approach

President Obama has been fighting an uphill battle to win support for an authorization to strike Syria in retaliation for an Aug. 21 Sarin gas attack, but a CNN/ORC poll taken following Tuesday night’s East Room address shows good news for the President’s Syria policy. In that speech, Obama made the case for the necessity of a limited strike, but also for allowing time to let a burgeoning diplomatic solution play out. CNN’s poll found that 61% of Americans favor “the approach to Syria that Barack Obama described in his speech.”

Additionally, 69% of respondents said they felt “very positive” or “somewhat positive” about the speech. If you drill down on the poll results, though, it appears that approval for the President’s approach relies heavily on the possible success of the diplomatic solution that suddenly became possible on Monday.

-snip-

http://www.mediaite.com/online/poll-69-of-americans-viewed-obamas-syria-speech-positively-61-favor-his-approach/

[Cryptoad]

58. The Obama Haters and Demhadist don't like this poll at all,,,,,,,,! nt

[Scurrilous]

59. Boink.

[CakeGrrl]

61. And it was watched by 32 Million U.S. viewers

Not bad for a failed disappointment of a president.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

62. Who watches CNN?

[JoeyT]

65. An excellent example of self-selection bias.

In other news, the poll I took of attendants at a Cradle of Filth concert concluded that 100% of Americans like black metal.

60% is really low when you specifically and intentionally exclude the majority of the people that are going to disagree.

[Snake Plissken]

68. Since when do people who watch cable new have an opinion?

They tune in to get an opinion spoon fed to them.