Poll: Obama Has Little Wiggle Room With Dems On Afghan Strategy

As the White House begins to chart the future of U.S. policy towards Afghanistan, new polling data shows how little wiggle room the president has with his own political party.

Only 38 percent of Democrats said that they believed the U.S. was "doing the right thing" by fighting the war in Afghanistan now. Forty-nine percent of Democrats said America "should not be involved."

Nearly two out of every three Democrats said they thought "increasing American troops in Afghanistan" would "not" make the United States safer from terrorism. Only 26 percent thought it would make the country safer.

Just under 30 percent of Democrats (29 percent) thought that a troop increase in Afghanistan was necessary to win the war. Fifty-seven percent thought it was unnecessary. And, in a related question, only 24 percent of Democrats thought that "the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan should be increased" while 37 percent of Democrats thought the number should be decreased (26 percent where content with current troop levels).

The numbers reflect an increasingly skeptical disposition among Democratic voters when it comes to the Afghan war. What was categorized during the presidential campaign as the forgotten front in the war on terror is now considered a dangerous foreign entanglement. And yet, the souring popularity doesn't seem likely to leave the president all that boxed in when it comes to his Afghan strategy. Congress, for starters, doesn't seem to have the numbers or will to oppose a potential increase of 40,000 troops.

Moreover, when sampling public opinion from across the ideological spectrum, the notion of escalating U.S. military presence in Afghanistan receives much wider support.

Thirty-eight percent of all respondents supported a troop increase while 28 percent wanted the number decreased. Twenty-one said, keep the number of troops at its current level. A slight majority (44 percent to 43 percent) of all respondents said a troop increase in Afghanistan was necessary to win the war.

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

Finally, if the president sells a continued or even enhanced military presence in Afghanistan as a means of "eliminating the threat from terrorists operating" from within that country, he will have wide-ranging support. Sixty-five percent of all respondents supported an Afghan strategy based on eliminating an in-country terrorist threat, including 80 percent of Republicans and 53 percent of Democrats.

Comments

[dfranz]

This is because no one knows what we're doing in Afghanistan or why were there. The original plan, if you could call it that, was to get alQaeda and knock the Taliban out of power because they supported Osama binLadin. Then they let binLadin escape.

Now were stuck with Karzai who is not a factor in the countryside because he is considered illegitiment. Define our goals, make plan that includes an end date. The military needs a concrete mission, not the vague plan that Bush cooked up.

[PublicusOrator]

100% of Dems did not support the war in Iraq, yet Dem majorities granted every request that President Bush asked. Are they going to be any different with a President of their own party. Come on, stop being delusional and get real.

[DavidMcK]

POTUS OBama it is time to pull the troops. It is obvious that this war is going absolutely no where. We have secured the oil in Iraq and there is no way that the US can complete the job in Afghanistan with facing serious consequences. Let the rest of the oil mongers fight for it. Keep our dollars at home and we'll begin to see our country. recover. We have enough oil to sustain us until we design systems that will make us less dependent on it. This is from someone who believes in you but doesn't believe that we should be in another a war.

[watchTVgetSTUPID]

The cost of the unnecessary war is the demise of our dollar. THe reckless spending does not go unnoticed.

The dollar is about to become the pariah currency of the world. Dollars will be flying out of mattresses and create a tidal wave of oversupply. Once it starts, it is a self propagating event with investors, corporations and countries all participating.

[Watain]

End Ob's war. Give the sand and rocks back to the Afghans.

[clearlythinking]

I support our involvement in Afghanistan. If we leave, the Taliban will have beaten 2 Super Powers. That will surely help their recruitment efforts. I think the Bush Administration scr*ew*ed it up, royally. They distracted everyone's attention from Afghanistan and sent too many to Iraq instead. I am bothered by the loss of life in Afghanistan. I don't like seeing so many troops die. I just think there will be many, many more who die if we leave because they will certainly be more emboldened.

[JessWonderin]

Need a ride to the Recruiters?

Afghanistan has been a collection of clans fighting each other and invaders for 2,000 years . . .

If Bush had not pulled our troops OUT to play "war president" we could have gotten the REAL culprit of 9/11 and left the Afgans to continue to attempt to replace Somalia has the least desired tourist destination in the world

. . . .unlike Iraq, Afghanistan has never been a "nation", existing as bandit territories bound together by a semi-common language and lucrative opium trade . . . .

[Stuzzadelic]

Speakers at 911NYC Ballot Initiative March on City Hall

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zYo1bKrCQE

[balancedsolution]

Frank Rich said there are probably about 100 al qaeda representatives in afghanistan

is that worth $10,000,000,000 / a year or more?

we need a more stealth fighting force.

we need to get out!

of course generals want more troops...t­hat's what they are trained in....figh­ting! they want to fight, they are trained to fight.

who states when the fighting is to end.

there are other options besides more and more and more......

let's get the "f" out of there and stop acting like school bullies.

face it OBL has won for now! but we don't need to have hundreds if not thousands of troops die and become disabled because of one jerk.

time to get out.

just my opinion.

lets invest at home.

[loki]

Considering that we are only in Afghanistan thanks to Bush and the Neo Cons, I dont know why people are blaming the President now. He cant just pull out and go home after all the problems Bush created. We are stuck there for a while at least. We really need to go into Pakistan, get Al Qaeda, and go home. But for some reason we wont.

[Watain]

The actual number is lower.

[lungfish]

Never should have gone there to begin with... 911 was an international crime and international policing could have handled it, as it mostly has, without boots on the ground in Afghanistan. Does anyone remember when the Taliban offered to hand over bin Laden if we had proof that he was responsible for 911? Remember how Cheney and Dubya steamrolled over that declaration while ridiculing them? And then, when they didn't get him they declared him "irrelevent" and let the war languish until the Taliban had retaken most of their original ground?

And we are supposed to do what with this? There is no reason to be there. Pull out. Keep our promises to help them put in infrastructure that brings them out of the middle ages...

[RomeoMD25]

Are you afraid of Al-CIA-duh?

Read a book by Obamas foreign policy adviser ZBIG called "The Grand Chessboard"

what happens under darkness will come to light
can't silence freedom even though you try

O=Bush 2.0

[graceland9]

Candidate Obama was perfectly clear on the war - he wanted to stay the course and win. What's the problem?!

Count me in with that 38%. Send in the surge and be done with it.

[underthegun1]

The "surge" is seriously the joke of the year. Just a fancy way of saying "we're going to send even more troops to d.ie"

[clearlythinking]

I agree with you. If we leave what happens to Afghanistan and for that matter Pakistan? How many more are recruited because the Taliban will have defeated two Super Powers? How many more Americans will die in the next attack? How much money will flow into their hands because they defeated us and feel emboldened? I think we need to be in Afghanistan, like it or not. Personally, I want to get the people who brought down those towers, attacked the Pentagon and were responsible for the crash of Flight 93.

[gypsy508]

The Taliban didn't defeat any superpowers.

[gypsy508]

Seeing that it worked so well in Vietnam

[Chernynkaya]

There is a difference between wanting fewer troops in Afghanistan and wanting to defeat AlQaida and the Taliban. The goal doesn't need to change, just the tactics.

[bongstradamus]

Many Americans are very unaware of the political situation in Pakistan. We know a whole lot about John and Kate, but have little details about whats going on in the Swat.

World news is of very little priority to most Americans, but if it was, these poll numbers would be significantly higher. What that poll shows is that most Americans are ignorant as to whats really happening in Afghanistan and Pakistan.