We haven't received enough votes with gender data to show this graph yet.
We will show the graph as soon as we have enough votes!
Results by Country
Results by Voter Type
Community votes are collected from you and other visitors to Ask500People. Independent votes are collected from visitors to hundreds of other websites around the world.
Sign Up or Login
Sorry, this data is only available to users with an account.
Yes this is true but only because Congress doesn't have the spine to stand up to Bush and do what they were elected to do -- pull the troops out of Iraq.
The Democrats may want to tuck tail and run, but the majority of the American people want our troops to succeed in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is for that reason the demos have been unable to pass their troops withdrawal (read that retreat) legislation.
Who is talking about tucking tail and running?? Our troops won the war almost four years ago. Overwhelmingly. This is now an occupation of another country while we wait for the natives to follow our guidelines to set up the government we want: One that will allow, unequivocally, foreign corporations to own Iraq's oil without letting Iraqis in on their only national asset. Tucking tail! You should tuck your tail in shame for the "freedom" we pretend to have given them. Do you remember the original name for the operation? - Operation Iraq Liberation - or OIL - like we didn't know....
Besides, leaving Iraq IS what the majority of Americans want. TRUE. It is what the majority of Iraqis want. TRUE. (SO much for the Democracy we are trying to spread!) It is what the world wants. TRUE. Why do you want to stay?
Don't forget that Congress is 49% Republican and the disapproval of Congress collectively is, when you look at the polling questions which reflect the disapproval, indicative of dissatisfaction with the lack of progress on issues of concern to the majority of Americans.
yea how is that war going by the way? Last thing I heard we were beating the snot out of a country that doesn't even contain the group we're after. It does have something else we want though...
I'd bet the last you heard from was from a source like the New York Times. If all we wanted was oil, we'd have just taken it and gotten our butts out by now.
It's going pretty good ace and if you think the Al Queda is not in Iraq then you have your cranium firmly inserted in your anal cavity. Their base may be in Pakistan, but they cross into Iraq and Afghanistan to do their dirty work.
Wrong my friend. Bin Laden had consultation in Iraq in March 1988. His people received training and instructionsf rom military and intelligence people at the al-Nasiriyah training camp in Iraq in June 1998. Bin Laden convinced Saddam Hussein the best way to protect his regime was to wage a terrorist war upon the USA and other western countries. The record reveals numerous time when al Queda operated with Iraq.
that doesn't make sense. bin laden hated saddam for keeping his state secular, and both the 9/11 commission and the pentagon have disproved the bush administration's claims that hussein had anything to do with al-qaeda's attacks. you have to at least admit that iraq had nothing to do with 9/!1.
If you exclude the training of al Queda personnel, and the furnishing of intelligence to al Queda agents, and the furnishing of moral and financial support to the al Queda movement, then I will concede that there were no Iraqi personnel physically involved in the 9-11 attack.
An interesting definition of a good man you have, ncboy1969. Drunk, cocaine using, draft-dodging, silver-spoon sucking frat boy who cheated his way to a C-average in college. A businessman who was given 3 companies by his family and ran 2 of them into bankruptcy and was fired from the third. Is it his professed rebirth as a Christian that makes him good in your eyes? He isn't even faithful to the Methodist doctrine he professes to believe! How strange are the conceptions of those loyal to this person of low distinction.
United States
likely
There are people who still support socks they should have changed weeks ago....
More people approve of him than of congress!
Yes this is true but only because Congress doesn't have the spine to stand up to Bush and do what they were elected to do -- pull the troops out of Iraq.
The Democrats may want to tuck tail and run, but the majority of the American people want our troops to succeed in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is for that reason the demos have been unable to pass their troops withdrawal (read that retreat) legislation.
Who is talking about tucking tail and running?? Our troops won the war almost four years ago. Overwhelmingly. This is now an occupation of another country while we wait for the natives to follow our guidelines to set up the government we want: One that will allow, unequivocally, foreign corporations to own Iraq's oil without letting Iraqis in on their only national asset. Tucking tail! You should tuck your tail in shame for the "freedom" we pretend to have given them. Do you remember the original name for the operation? - Operation Iraq Liberation - or OIL - like we didn't know....
Besides, leaving Iraq IS what the majority of Americans want. TRUE. It is what the majority of Iraqis want. TRUE. (SO much for the Democracy we are trying to spread!) It is what the world wants. TRUE. Why do you want to stay?
Don't forget that Congress is 49% Republican and the disapproval of Congress collectively is, when you look at the polling questions which reflect the disapproval, indicative of dissatisfaction with the lack of progress on issues of concern to the majority of Americans.
On the war on terrorism yes, on immigration no.
Right ON Mike
yea how is that war going by the way? Last thing I heard we were beating the snot out of a country that doesn't even contain the group we're after. It does have something else we want though...
I'd bet the last you heard from was from a source like the New York Times. If all we wanted was oil, we'd have just taken it and gotten our butts out by now.
It's going pretty good ace and if you think the Al Queda is not in Iraq then you have your cranium firmly inserted in your anal cavity. Their base may be in Pakistan, but they cross into Iraq and Afghanistan to do their dirty work.
interesting point there mike. even more interesting: al qaeda as only been in iraq since the US invasion.
Wrong my friend. Bin Laden had consultation in Iraq in March 1988. His people received training and instructionsf rom military and intelligence people at the al-Nasiriyah training camp in Iraq in June 1998. Bin Laden convinced Saddam Hussein the best way to protect his regime was to wage a terrorist war upon the USA and other western countries. The record reveals numerous time when al Queda operated with Iraq.
that doesn't make sense. bin laden hated saddam for keeping his state secular, and both the 9/11 commission and the pentagon have disproved the bush administration's claims that hussein had anything to do with al-qaeda's attacks. you have to at least admit that iraq had nothing to do with 9/!1.
If you exclude the training of al Queda personnel, and the furnishing of intelligence to al Queda agents, and the furnishing of moral and financial support to the al Queda movement, then I will concede that there were no Iraqi personnel physically involved in the 9-11 attack.
aw heck mike. let's just call it quits. i'll stick with the 9/11 Commission Report and world opinion, and you stick with Bush.
It's a deal.
110%
I do and history will also, he may not be the most well spoken but he is a good man.
An interesting definition of a good man you have, ncboy1969. Drunk, cocaine using, draft-dodging, silver-spoon sucking frat boy who cheated his way to a C-average in college. A businessman who was given 3 companies by his family and ran 2 of them into bankruptcy and was fired from the third. Is it his professed rebirth as a Christian that makes him good in your eyes? He isn't even faithful to the Methodist doctrine he professes to believe! How strange are the conceptions of those loyal to this person of low distinction.
I think you misunderstood the comment. He was talking about Bush, not Teddy. And talk about "strange are the conceptions" ... Sigh...
Now is here is a Bush-hater than subscribes to Move-On Org and is an avid fan of Michael Moore. Get a life Bub!
Are you asking if I support Bush, or if I think other people do? This question is ambiguously worded.