Less than 1 in 3 Americans support U.S. pullout from Iran deal

[Morch]

On 5/9/2018 at 6:20 PM, dunroaming said:

In full agreement with that but unfortunately the 29% see the 42% as the enemy thanks to trump's poisonous rhetoric.  The vast majority of Americans, who see this pulling out of the Iran Deal as a massive mistake, have about as much chance of convincing the Trump apologists of their folly as I have of winning the Eurovision Song Contest!

 

Without co-opting undecided answers, a "vast majority" how?

[bushdoctor]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

Without co-opting undecided answers, a "vast majority" how?

 

A c

[tropo]

Fake news again.

 

Out of 1277 people polled online, 370 were for the pullout, and 536 people were against it.

 

Big deal! It's meaningless nonsense.

[AYJAYDEE]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

That's entirely possible. Perhaps even probable. I'd venture that the above does not result from Trump's stance vs. the Iran Deal, but reflects a possible strategy by the NK regime predating it.

and his wise decision verified by american behaviour. never trust america

 

[bushdoctor]

2 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Without co-opting undecided answers, a "vast majority" how?

 

Not even a majority. A majority has more than 50%. 

[lannarebirth]

14 hours ago, buick said:

well said !!!  it is hard to understand, if i recall correctly, 90% of americans believe the members of congress are doing a horrible job (i think it was a CNN poll done last summer).  yet many get re-elected year after year.

 

the average american has some understanding on most major issues (as i said before, healthcare, immigration, gun control).  these are things they deal with somewhat regularly (they see their healthcare costs go up, immigrants moving into their cities, gun violence all over the nation, etc...).  but they've got no clue on the iran deal.  that is why this poll is just a reflection of 'do you like trump', it is really nothing about the iran deal.

 

edit:  i wonder what would happen if the media outlets began to focus on congress instead of the president.  what if CNN, BBC, and FOX took half the time they use to talk about trump (bad and good, depending on the network !!)and, instead, talked about the failures of congress.  that might help give the average american a clue to what is going on and they'd finally turn the page and vote some new people in.

 

The fact that I'm the only one that liked your insightful and spot on post should tell you the state of the American electorate.

[lannarebirth]

8 hours ago, Credo said:

Well, when you are at the circus, the choice is limited.  

 

It really isn't. The fact that Trump was elected and somehow the Earth keeps spinning on its axis should tell you that there probably a lot of people who could do just as good or far, far better at the job than him. They don't need to come from the two parties everybody has been trained to choose from.

[bushdoctor]

2 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

It really isn't. The fact that Trump was elected and somehow the Earth keeps spinning on its axis should tell you that there probably a lot of people who could do just as good or far, far better at the job than him. They don't need to come from the two parties everybody has been trained to choose from.

 

It’s not the electorate and it doesn’t matter what party is voted in, the politicians are either corrupt, or soon become corrupted. Many of them make campaign promises that sound good but aren’t kept, and many with good intentions later sell out. Get rid of the grip of the deep state, the shadow government, what ever you like to call it, but  drain the swamp and things should change.

[simple1]

26 minutes ago, bushdoctor said:

 

It’s not the electorate and it doesn’t matter what party is voted in, the politicians are either corrupt, or soon become corrupted. Many of them make campaign promises that sound good but aren’t kept, and many with good intentions later sell out. Get rid of the grip of the deep state, the shadow government, what ever you like to call it, but  drain the swamp and things should change.

Considering Trump claimed he would clean up 'the swamp', but he has taken the exact opposite position by appointing people who perfectly match the criteria why on earth do Trump's base continually shower him in accolades. With the 'deep state', a term beloved by his base, Trump has been heavily engaged in and promoting conspiracy theories for years, accordingly Trump is a representative of the "deep state". If in fact you are talking to the bureaucracy that implements government policy, again Trump has proven he is a member of the "deep state" and as an executive manager an abject failure.

[bushdoctor]

You’re welcome to your opinion about Trump, but it sounds like we do agree on where the real problem is. And this problem is not only in the USA, it’s in nearly all of the major powers of the world.

[Watchful]

6 hours ago, AYJAYDEE said:

and his wise decision verified by american behaviour. never trust america

 

America?  What did America have to do with the Iran "arrangement"?

 

America has a process for ratifying treaties.  This "deal" is strictly lying Obama's and Kerry's... two lying politicians the world is far, far better off without.

 

Both knew the people of the US would never approve this "arrangement".

 

Trump never hid his disdain for the deal.  He promised during the campaign to end our participation. Yet, people still voted for him!

[lannarebirth]

6 hours ago, AYJAYDEE said:

and his wise decision verified by american behaviour. never trust america

 

 

I wouldn't say that. If the US, South Korea, Japan and the US came to some understanding regarding a nuclear disarmament , I wouldn't necessarily expect that agreement to stand up if NK then makes war against a third party not included in the agreement as Iran has done. I think a more broad "cessation of hostilities" will be what is argued for.

[AYJAYDEE]

Just now, lannarebirth said:

 

I wouldn't say that. If the US, South Korea, Japan and the US came to some understanding regarding a nuclear disarmament , I wouldn't necessarily expect that agreement to stand up if NK then makes war against a third party not included in the agreement as Iran has done. I think a more broad "cessation of hostilities" will be what is argued for.

Iran has done!! hahahaha America would be a fine one to talk about that!

 

[lannarebirth]

55 minutes ago, bushdoctor said:

 

It’s not the electorate and it doesn’t matter what party is voted in, the politicians are either corrupt, or soon become corrupted. Many of them make campaign promises that sound good but aren’t kept, and many with good intentions later sell out. Get rid of the grip of the deep state, the shadow government, what ever you like to call it, but  drain the swamp and things should change.

 

Cut off the money supply. It is like oxygen to "the swamp" (Congress) which should be an anaerobic environment.

[lannarebirth]

41 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Considering Trump claimed he would clean up 'the swamp', but he has taken the exact opposite position by appointing people who perfectly match the criteria why on earth do Trump's base continually shower him in accolades. With the 'deep state', a term beloved by his base, Trump has been heavily engaged in and promoting conspiracy theories for years, accordingly Trump is a representative of the "deep state". If in fact you are talking to the bureaucracy that implements government policy, again Trump has proven he is a member of the "deep state" and as an executive manager an abject failure.

 

It is important to keep in mind that the bureaucracy is the biggest lobbyist of all. And not necessarily for the interests of the American people, but to maintain and expand their own budget and power base. 

[metisdead]

Off topic posts and the replies have been removed. 

[lannarebirth]

14 minutes ago, AYJAYDEE said:

Iran has done!! hahahaha America would be a fine one to talk about that!

 

 

Point taken, but I'm not sure what new engagements America has entered into since the signing of the agreement with Iran that would justify them becoming our defacto opponent in a proxy war.

[AYJAYDEE]

6 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

It is important to keep in mind that the bureaucracy is the biggest lobbyist of all. And not necessarily for the interests of the American people, but to maintain and expand their own budget and power base. 

Not a chance. all countries have bureaucracies but few have the kind of bought and paid for politicians america has.

[AYJAYDEE]

2 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Point taken, but I'm not sure what new engagements America has entered into since the signing of the agreement with Iran that would justify them becoming our defacto opponent in a proxy war.

new engagements? lol. its a never ending engagement.

[lannarebirth]

Just now, AYJAYDEE said:

Not a chance. all countries have bureaucracies but few have the kind of bought and paid for politicians america has.

The bureaucracy is not the same as the political class. And as an aside, MOST countries have a bought and paid for political class AND bureaucracy.

[AYJAYDEE]

3 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

The bureaucracy is not the same as the political class. And as an aside, MOST countries have a bought and paid for political class AND bureaucracy.

not even close to the level of american politicians sell outs.

 

[Morch]

7 hours ago, AYJAYDEE said:

and his wise decision verified by american behaviour. never trust america

 

 

Point made was that Kim's stance on this probably predates Trump withdrawing from the Iran Deal, rather than being one of it's by products. And that's assuming NK would indeed covertly retain military nuclear capability.

[Morch]

18 minutes ago, AYJAYDEE said:

Not a chance. all countries have bureaucracies but few have the kind of bought and paid for politicians america has.

 

10 minutes ago, AYJAYDEE said:

not even close to the level of american politicians sell outs.

 

 

Would probably be futile expecting any actual support for such statements....

[lannarebirth]

23 minutes ago, AYJAYDEE said:

not even close to the level of american politicians sell outs.

 

 

I'll believe that if you can tell me how Canada, a country that was chiefly populated by Red Green and Trailer Park Boy clones a generation ago, became a country where upwardly mobile Indians and Chinese hold much of the countries wealth. It is almost as embarrassing as London has become.

[ezzra]

How easy we forget. On November 19, 2015, the State Department sent a letter to then-Representative Mike Pompeo that severely undercuts the notion that the Iran deal represents any form of binding American commitment. It turns out that the Obama administration not only acknowledged that the deal wasn’t a treaty (obvious enough), but it also admitted that it wasn’t “an executive agreement” or even a “signed document.” Here are the key paragraphs:

The Iran deal was no sacred American commitment. This was the action of one administration, working with allies and other nations who were fully aware of American domestic skepticism and fully aware of the nature of the “political commitment” they were making.

President Obama didn’t require Iranian leaders to sign the nuclear deal, In short, there was nothing truly binding about this deal. From its inception it existed only so long it was politically or strategically expedient for the relevant parties. The only thing truly concrete that came out of the JCPOA was the substantial financial benefit to the world’s most dangerous jihadist state....

 

 

[lannarebirth]

7 minutes ago, ezzra said:

How easy we forget. On November 19, 2015, the State Department sent a letter to then-Representative Mike Pompeo that severely undercuts the notion that the Iran deal represents any form of binding American commitment. It turns out that the Obama administration not only acknowledged that the deal wasn’t a treaty (obvious enough), but it also admitted that it wasn’t “an executive agreement” or even a “signed document.” Here are the key paragraphs:

The Iran deal was no sacred American commitment. This was the action of one administration, working with allies and other nations who were fully aware of American domestic skepticism and fully aware of the nature of the “political commitment” they were making.

President Obama didn’t require Iranian leaders to sign the nuclear deal, In short, there was nothing truly binding about this deal. From its inception it existed only so long it was politically or strategically expedient for the relevant parties. The only thing truly concrete that came out of the JCPOA was the substantial financial benefit to the world’s most dangerous jihadist state....

 

 

 

I'd agree with most of that but I think our ally, Saudi Arabia, may be an even more dangerous jihadist state, and if they're not, it is only because they are more incompetent than the Iranians. It is not for lack of trying.

[maximillian]

On 12.5.2018 at 11:32 AM, bushdoctor said:

We know the Iran Deal was not a treaty and was never ratified by congress. 

It should probably be called the Iran Nuclear Suggestions. It was never a binding agreement. 

 

Meanwhile, North Korea is talking about the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. 

 

For the almighty empire there is no such thing like sticking to their words, treaties, agreements. Only thing you can believe them is their threads.

[maximillian]

On 12.5.2018 at 3:59 AM, bushdoctor said:

 

Your getting very emotional. You are now calling millions of Americans idiots, simply because they don’t agree with your way of thinking. 

 

No, bc they vote either for GOP or the crooked Dems. Either Trump or Hillary.

A choice between pest and cholera.

 

[maximillian]

On 12.5.2018 at 10:44 PM, AYJAYDEE said:

a spoiled ballot sends a message

 

Do not underestimate the influence of the main stream media on consumers and voters.

(Even RT can help to get Hillary not elected. Sarcasm warning !)

[AYJAYDEE]

On 5/11/2018 at 12:35 AM, Jip99 said:

 

 

Tell that hat to the voters?......

 

..same as Thailand, they think they make a difference.

the voters dont deserve to know