The Numbers
A Run at the Latest Data from ABC's Poobah of Polling, Gary Langer
Gary Langer is director of polling at ABC News, where he's covered the beat of public opinion for nearly 20 years - conducting and analyzing ABC News polls, evaluating data from other sources and setting the news division's standards for poll reporting. Langer has won two Emmy awards for ABC's reporting of public opinion polls in Iraq, and The Numbers blog was honored this year as winner of the 2008 Iowa Gallup Award for Excellent Journalism Using Polls.
ARCHIVES
SUBJECT INDEX
RECENT POSTS
- Views on the Terror Trials
- Sarah Palin: Rogue for President?
- Chasing Feathers
- Tomorrow's Elections: An Obama Referendum?
- Schwarzenegger's Nastygram: One in 10 Billion?
- Executive Pay? Cut Away
- Pols, Polls and Pushback
- On Nuclear Iran, Diplomacy and Sanctions are Preferred to Hostilities
- Polling, Politics and Nobels
- The War in Afghanistan: Reassessment, Eight Years On
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
On Nuclear Iran, Diplomacy and Sanctions are Preferred to Hostilities
October 19, 2009 12:01 PM
With talks underway in Vienna today, a new ABC News/Washington Post poll finds that Americans overwhelmingly suspect Iran of trying to produce nuclear weapons – but by wide margins prefer diplomacy or economic sanctions to a military response by the United States.
Despite its denials, 87 percent think Iran is trying to develop nuclear arms. The most popular U.S. responses are direct diplomatic talks, favored by 82 percent; and international economic sanctions, backed by 78 percent.
Those far exceed support for U.S. air strikes against Iran’s nuclear development sites, favored by 42 percent of Americans, with 54 percent opposed; or for invading Iran to overthrow its government, with 33 percent in favor, 62 percent opposed.
A carrot approach also is unpopular: Just 30 percent favor offering Iran financial incentives, such as foreign aid or more trade, in exchange for its abandoning any nuclear weapons program.
Diplomacy’s being pursued, with the International Atomic Energy Agency holding talks today with representatives of Iran, the United States, Russia and France. The world powers have proposed that they process nuclear fuel for Iran in a way that deters its weaponization. The United States is pushing for sanctions at some point if a deal fails.
Preference vs. Iran
Support Oppose
Direct diplomatic talks 82% 18
Int’l economic sanctions 78 18
Bomb nuclear sites 42 54
Invade/overthrow gov’t 33 62
Offer aid/trade 30 67
Even among those who do suspect that Iran seeks nuclear weapons, fewer than half (46 percent) favor air strikes, and fewer still, 34 percent, support an invasion.
Large majorities across political and ideological groups support diplomacy or sanctions, but there are differences on military action, particularly air strikes; they hold much more support from conservatives, 56 percent, than from moderates or liberals, 40 and 24 percent, respectively.
For his part President Obama has 52 percent approval for his handling of the situation with Iran, with 39 percent disapproving, similar to last spring and summer. Roughly equal numbers “strongly” approve and disapprove, 24 and 27 percent respectively.
While this poll underscores the extent to which military action is not the preferred approach, it doesn’t predict support for hostilities if other, more popular measures first are tried and fail, and if military action is plausibly presented as the only alternative to a nuclear-armed Iran. Ultimate support also can depend on factors such as nature of military involvement (e.g., air strikes vs. a ground war) and the presence or lack of international consensus.
Click here for full results, and check back for more on this new ABC/Post poll later, with findings on health care reform and the president’s popularity at 5 p.m. and further results all week
October 19, 2009 | Permalink | User Comments (4)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
So why does the GOP and some in the media persist in trashing the Obama administration's stance on Iran as "soft" and "extreme"?
Posted by: matt | Oct 19, 2009 12:11:38 PM
Yes, please don't bomb anyone else. Let cooler heads prevail. Besides if Iran ever tries anything, they will be wiped out. With the constant threats from Israel towards Iran, one needs not wonder why Iran wants some sort of parity. Deterrence is a good thing I suppose.
Posted by: Huh | Oct 19, 2009 1:24:07 PM
Almost every single day Iran says something extremely offensive, cruel and hateful about our president and those representing the US. The American people just need to grow up and realize that pleasing other countries should not be our priority. I am fine with direct talks although I can see it from both sides. Direct talks means you elevate the enemy which might boost the internal approval of the small man from Iran. However I always felt keeping your enemies closer was a good thing. Maybe there isn't a right or wrong, but meeting with a person can tell the other side a lot.
I think Clinton and Obama have yet to understand their enemies. I hope they learn soon. I hope their egos don't get in the way feeling it necessary to always take the opposite approach from the previous administration. It may turn out long term that many that Bush felt betrayed him, will do the same with this administration if they haven't already.
Posted by: Susan | Oct 19, 2009 6:43:19 PM
Diplomacy with Iran Sanctions anyone that belives this is too stupid to breath air.
Giving up our nuclear weapons agian anyone that would like to see this happen is too stupid to breath air.
I'm agianst war but want to be able stop it or pervent it from starting in the first place and giving up our Nuclear weapons will start a war of all wars.
Posted by: Albert Duncan | Oct 19, 2009 7:44:28 PM
Post a comment
