Poll: Americans distrustful of ‘Petraeus report.’
By on Aug 16th, 2007 at 5:45 pm
Poll: Americans distrustful of ‘Petraeus report.’
According to a CNN poll released today, 53 percent of Americans said they suspect that the military assessment of the situation will try to make it sound better than it actually is. Forty-three percent said they do trust the report.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
45 Responses to “Poll: Americans distrustful of ‘Petraeus report.’”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
Reports
In depth studies on select topics
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bailout
Big Oil
Bolton
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Earmarks
Economy
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
GI Bill
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Health Care
Immigration
Iran
Iraq
Justice
Kristol
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
McCain
McClellan
Media
Military
O'Hanlon
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Politics
Race
Radical Right
RNC Convention
Rove
Terrorism
Third Bush Term
Torture
Veterans
Wiretapping
Women's Rights
ArchivesBlog Roll
Americans are wising up to this game. :)
August 16th, 2007 at 5:48 pmAnd its not even the Petraeus report.
Its the Bush Report.
We found that out yesterday.
August 16th, 2007 at 5:49 pmWho are these 43%. What are they drinking.
August 16th, 2007 at 5:51 pmPetraeus, spoken so much these days, sounds like ‘betray us’.
August 16th, 2007 at 5:51 pmNo shit sherlock. A majority of American’s aren’t going to buy anything the White House has to say. They are making a big mistake by issuing the report themselves. They have totally done away with any credibility people will give to the report. At least if it came from Petraus, people might be more inclined to believe it. But the combination of the fact that the White House is writing the report and that they do not want to have Petraus testify for Congress sure sends the message that this report is a load of hooey.
August 16th, 2007 at 5:52 pm47% of America now wear rose tinted spectacles
August 16th, 2007 at 5:55 pmIts really a red herring, the Petraeus report that is. I said so 3 months ago.
Now we find out its being written BY THE WHITE HOUSE.
Bush is pissiin on our heads and calling it rain.
August 16th, 2007 at 5:56 pmBUT WILL CONGRESS FUND MORE WAR ????? The bigger question
August 16th, 2007 at 5:56 pmThe point is, no matter what the report says this administration will use it to their advantage. If Petraeus says that there is no stability, security, or measurable success, Bush will simply say that he needs more troops and more time. If Petraeus says that the escalation is working, Bush will say “super, it’s working, send in more troops to help it work more.”
August 16th, 2007 at 5:56 pm100% of me distrusts this entire sham of the White Hou, er, uh, lessee, oh yeah, Petraeus report.
August 16th, 2007 at 5:57 pmnow that Bush has Classed the Iranian Republican Gurad as terrorists does this mean he can attack Iran without Congresses permission
August 16th, 2007 at 5:57 pmAt least if it came from Petraus, people might be more inclined to believe it. But the combination of the fact that the White House is writing the report and that they do not want to have Petraus testify for Congress sure sends the message that this report is a load of hooey.
Comment by bilbobaggins — August 16, 2007 @ 5:52 pm
#
Agreed.
August 16th, 2007 at 5:57 pmOK, who ya gonna believe, Bush/Petraeus or the body parts laying all over the street?
August 16th, 2007 at 5:58 pmWas the poll taken before or after the revelation that the WH would write the report?
And even if it was taken after the revelation, how many of the 43% saw the headline, much less read the story that revealed the report would ultimately come fromt he WH?
Anyway, if you need a report to know if you’re making any progress four years into a war, you aren’t…
August 16th, 2007 at 5:58 pm#
now that Bush has Classed the Iranian Republican Gurad as terrorists does this mean he can attack Iran without Congresses permission
Comment by Tobey Tall — August 16, 2007 @ 5:57 pm
Ya know, Tobey, I was wonderin’ the exact same thing myself.
August 16th, 2007 at 5:59 pmYou can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.
Bush cannot fool the public any more… he has destroyed his credibility all by himself, and has no one else to blame … he is the lamest of lame ducks, he is done, he is toast.
August 16th, 2007 at 6:00 pmGeorge W. Bush, 4/9/99:
“Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is.â€
George W. Bush, 6/5/99
“I think it’s also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn.â€
August 16th, 2007 at 6:00 pmChris L,
August 16th, 2007 at 6:02 pmIt’s interesting isn’t it - how the standards for a diffferent president are so much higher than they are for him.
Who the hell trusts polls from CNN (Commie News Network)? I mean, besides traitorous, anti-American and propaganda-believing libs and progressives, both of whom are invested in a US loss in Iraq and a strengthening of Al-Qaeda in Iraq. People must not forget that CNN’s credibility on polling is so beneath contempt that trusting a poll from them isn’t an option. After all, CNN’s the same network that, last year, proudly broadcast footage of a US soldier being killed by a terrorist in Iraq; they did this heartlessly with no conscience to spit on US soldiers. Further, the poll also confirms that mainly libtards were asked because of the majority of respondents saying that they wouldn’t trust the military’s independent review in Sept. People must remember that the LAT lied that the White House would have a hand in writing the Patraeus report; in fact, this lie was based on an ANONYMOUS source, so impossible to verify.
August 16th, 2007 at 6:02 pmFundings runs out in September - - Will the democrats give him another shot and more money ???????
August 16th, 2007 at 6:03 pmIt’s interesting isn’t it - how the standards for a diffferent president are so much higher than they are for him.
Comment by Marie — August 16, 2007 @ 6:02 pm
#
It is also interesting how he consistently relies on that different president as an alibi for himself.
August 16th, 2007 at 6:03 pm#
Fundings runs out in September - - Will the democrats give him another shot and more money ???????
Comment by Tobey Tall — August 16, 2007 @ 6:03 pm
#
Honestly, I hate to say it, I wish it weren’t so, but … yes, they will.
August 16th, 2007 at 6:04 pmI’m more interested in seeing what effect the Petraeus report has on the Iraq MNF.
August 16th, 2007 at 6:06 pmFundings runs out in September - - Will the democrats give him another shot and more money ???????
fool me once shame on you , fool me twice shame on me
August 16th, 2007 at 6:06 pmTo Be honest I see Petraeus moving to the permanent military bases ,
nobody can stay on course, they have to change direction a LITTLE bit somehwre to justify staying in the eyes of America
bet you
August 16th, 2007 at 6:10 pmThis is the perfect time for a “push poll”, question: “Will you tend to trust the White House report on progress in Iraq knowing that it may or may not include Petraeus’ actual words, and that the White House is trying to prevent Petraeus from actually testifying before congress?”
August 16th, 2007 at 6:15 pm“propaganda-believing libs and progressives, both of whom are invested in a US loss in Iraq and a strengthening of Al-Qaeda in Iraq.”
August 16th, 2007 at 6:19 pmI hear this kind of rhetoric all the time from people, and I wonder if they can answer this: exactly what does anybody stand to gain from a loss in Iraq? What do they gain from a strengthening of Al Queda? Can the idiot who wrote this explain?
I think the better question should be: Is Congress going to let the admin get away with writing the report and not have betrayus appear before them?
August 16th, 2007 at 6:20 pm“And even if it was taken after the revelation, how many of the 43% saw the headline, much less read the story that revealed the report would ultimately come fromt he WH?”
It’s doubtful that many of the respondents knew that the White House was writing the report. It received very little play in the news. And then we have the Faux Noise idiots who ever watch anything else. You know that Faux Noise did not tell their viewers that the White House was writing the report.
August 16th, 2007 at 6:26 pmI suspect that a lot of 43% simply don’t know yet that the White House will write the report and restrict Petraeus’s testimony. But a lot of them are simply 28%ers who believe whatever the White House tells them.
August 16th, 2007 at 6:28 pm“Fundings runs out in September - - Will the democrats give him another shot and more money ???????
fool me once shame on you , fool me twice shame on me
Comment by Tobey Tall ”
The first thing Congress needs to do when they get back from vacation is to tell Bush that he isn’t getting another penny for Iraq unless it is submitted through a regular “on the books” bill with corresponding cuts in the budget to pay for the funding. Then they need to tell Bush that they will NOT be authorizing any more funding for the Contractors in Iraq. Then let Bush stew in it. The Republicans can’t say that the Democrats aren’t supporting the troops. What are they going to say to that?
August 16th, 2007 at 6:29 pm)? I mean, besides traitorous, anti-American and propaganda-believing libs and progressives, both of whom are invested in a US loss in Iraq and a strengthening of Al-Qaeda in Iraq.
Comment by Makeallprogressiveshumanshields — August 16, 2007 @ 6:02 pm
You’re confusing progressives with your type again. Neocons like you are the folks that put party before country. We put country before party, that’s why so many of us are unhappy with congress for not ending the war like they were hired to do.
What would we gain from losing in Iraq or strengthening al Qaeda anywhere. We already won in Iraq, remember. Nothing is being gained by occupying another nation, are you too blind to see how bad things are for the people of Iraq with us drawing in insurgents from all over the middle east. Did you not hear about the bombings yesterday..
Where is your humanity and why are you blind to everything but the “winning” by Republicans at all costs.
August 16th, 2007 at 6:32 pmTobey Tall: “fool me once shame on you , fool me twice shame on me”
Our leader has revised that old saying. Now it’s “Fool me once, shame on… shame on you. Fool me…. foolma can’t get fooled again!”
August 16th, 2007 at 6:59 pmAn accurate report from:
Ambassador Crock and General Betrayus
August 16th, 2007 at 7:01 pmThe Bush administration keeps pointing to the Petraeus report as the primary guide for whether or not progress is being made in Iraq and thus justifying the surge and our continued presence there. But Petraeus can really only comment on the military situation.
Any military progress is irrelevant if there is no progress politically in Iraq. So, regardless of what Petraeus says— or distorts, fabricates, spins— about military progress, we are missing the main issue if we are not first and foremost evaluating the political progress in the country. Leave it to the Bush administration to send out straw men to divert us from the real issues.
I just hope the American people are wise enough to discriminate between the Petraeus report and the critical criteria for determining progress in Iraq, that the MSM will offer a critical evaluation of the issue instead of just mouthing the Administration’s spin on things, and that Congress will have the cajones to challenge the absurdity of basing everything (or anything) on the Petraeus report.
August 16th, 2007 at 7:02 pmdid the dems not approve of Petraeus?
August 16th, 2007 at 7:05 pmIt’s not the “Petraeus Report,” it’s the White House Report.
C’mon….
August 16th, 2007 at 7:25 pmShane..I hear ya but I don’t see too many people calling out Congress just the “neo cons and the fascists”
August 16th, 2007 at 7:27 pmSo if he came out with a report that progress is going okay but we need to invoke a more political stand within the Iraqi govt and then slowly remove soldiers out of Iraq by Jan. 2008 to turn it over to the Iraqi military, you will believe him. Otherwise he is a puppet to Bush? Just curious
August 16th, 2007 at 7:31 pmThe White House is writing the report, it’s going to be full of rainbows and unicorns.
August 16th, 2007 at 7:42 pmI’m with you Zooey. Congress, not to mention the American people, will never hear his “real” conclusions. And he sure as Hell won’t ever be questioned in public. Generals have a nasty habit of telling the truth; even when it doesn’t follow Party lines.
August 16th, 2007 at 8:06 pmif he came out with a report that said ice cream doesn’t melt in Iraq, would you believe it, mizuno? Bush credibility is non-existent, and all that support him bathe in the flop-sweat of lies and fear. that especially includes Betrayus, a cheap whore, and the last resort for Bush to try to look like he hasnt screwed the pooch. it’s far too late. Betrayus can only give credence to his report by telling the entire truth and then resigning.
August 16th, 2007 at 10:36 pmThis is no longer the Petraeus report. This is a White House report. Bush has a history of not dealing with reality and this report will be no different. Once again they will ignore the facts to promote the surge that has failed. The Crocker report will also ask for more time. 6 more months will make no difference to the surge. It’s a bad strategy.
August 17th, 2007 at 1:29 amWe have already been lied to repeatedly from this White House. Now that we know this “report” will come from the White House instead of the guy who’s had his hands on the project, there’s no reason for us to believe it — as there is never any reason to believe liars.
Why is it so hard for Bush and Cheney to believe they have lost the trust of the American people?
August 17th, 2007 at 7:25 amWhy is it hard for Republicans to interpret things within their respective context. Their attack on MoveOn.org is simply another example from the far right to twist perceptions by taking the statements of MoveOn.org out of context in order to further manipulate blind straight ticket voting republican sheep of America. Given Ronald Reagan’s eagerness to give weaponse to fanatics in Afganastan as well as sell weapons to Iran to fund militants in South America, it would seem that Republicans are doomed to repeat the mistakes of history. Republicans see the wasteful spending of our tax dollars in illegal war efforts in Iraq as sound policy but they see the spending of our tax dollars on our citizens and national infrastructure as socialism.
September 10th, 2007 at 2:35 pm