September 9th, 2013
07:00 AM ET
8 months ago

CNN poll: Public against Syria strike resolution

WASHINGTON (CNN) - As President Barack Obama presses his case for a strike on Syria, a new national survey shows him swimming against a strong tide of public opinion that doesn't want the U.S. to get involved.

The CNN/ORC International poll released Monday shows that even though eight in 10 Americans believe that the Bashar al-Assad regime gassed its own people, a strong majority doesn't want Congress to pass a resolution authorizing a military strike against the regime.

More than seven in 10 say such a strike would not achieve significant goals for the U.S. and a similar amount say it's not in the national interest for the U.S. to get involved in Syria's bloody two-year long civil war.

The poll comes at the start of a pivotal week for the president. The Senate is expected to take up the resolution after returning from its month-long summer recess on Monday and Obama does a round of interviews with the major broadcast and cable news outlets. Wolf Blitzer's interview with Obama will air Monday on "The Situation Room" at 6 p.m. ET.

FULL STORY

Filed under: President Obama
soundoff (11 Responses)
  1. jpmichigan

    American people DO NOT want this!!!! What is wrong with people on the Hill do they work just for the President or for they Americans who put them there. NO one is listening to the American people. Seats will be emptied by those who sit in them if this happens.

    September 9, 2013 07:48 am at 7:48 am |
  2. bassman

    I guess Sarah Palin was right...again.

    September 9, 2013 08:02 am at 8:02 am |
  3. ST

    Oh! please! making every citizen Commander-in-Chief? What do civilians know about war? This is like asking everybody in my household to go out and shoot the bugler outside. Everyone will scream: it is dangerous, he might kill you, you do not know what weapon he has, leave him alone etc. etc. while I know he will come back the next day to finish us all.

    September 9, 2013 08:03 am at 8:03 am |
  4. Southeast

    If he used gas on his own people , he will have no problem using nukes on us.

    September 9, 2013 08:30 am at 8:30 am |
  5. Data Driven

    I'm curious if the poll numbers would change if Obama was talking full neocon and threatening complete regime change. Is it the limited strike that's putting off folks, or just intervention in general?

    September 9, 2013 09:08 am at 9:08 am |
  6. Fair is Fair

    I had time to reflect on Syria over the weekend.

    To me, this action clearly falls under the foreign policy umbrella of the United States, and as such, falls primarily under the executive branch of our government. Lobbing missiles into a soverign nation IS an act of war. It is also true that only congress can delcare war, and Obama has asked for the advice and consent of congress. Under the war powers act, Obama can technically take this action. He IS the President, and as President, he apparently decided this action is in the best interests of the United States. He has done everything above-board and followed the law.

    As citizens, we have the freedom to disagree with this decision. As citizens, we have the freedom to dislike this decision. But as citizens who enjoy these freedoms, we have the DUTY to respect the decision of the President.

    I've been a vocal critic of the President. I do not agree with the majority of his policies. He's in a terrible position with this mess. We've got to support him on this, and as a citizen (and the mother of a soldier), I do.

    Godspeed to our Armed Forces.

    September 9, 2013 09:17 am at 9:17 am |
  7. Sandy Collins

    Why aren't any other countries supporting our bombing Syria? Why isn't the UN joining us to fight Syria? This is crazy!

    September 9, 2013 09:21 am at 9:21 am |
  8. JRTaylor

    I don't see what attacking Syria would help other than to start the beginnings of World War 3. I mean seriously people how many times to we have to stick our noses in and send our people to be killed and spend billions of dollars that are necessary to rebuild our country to pound some bully into dust? Russia has been our ally for a long time but they are threatening to act AGAINST us if we attack, forget CHINA I am MORE worried about Russia, they are close enough to wipe our American tails off the map. Someone in charge needs to wake up BEFORE it is too late. Time should be spent trying to find a better solution other than violence the US government shout take the time and make the effort to reach out and find a better solution. I though that was what the government was supposed to do? But all it seems they want to do is strike first then ask questions later.. How can we teach our kids that violence isn't the best answer if we don't follow that same advice? We haven't even tried to find a solution and the first words uttered by our government is ATTACK.. Mr. President I beg you don't kills all and start WW3....

    September 9, 2013 09:22 am at 9:22 am |
  9. Judith Locklear

    Yes President needs to strike Syria. What Americans need to realize is if Assads house (country) was across the street in America and was abusing children and women we would not sit by and say that's not any of our business. We would handle it and let him know you or anybody else will not get by with this type of action. Only difference is his house is not across the street but across the ocean. No matter how far or how close president Obama should after two years take action to stop Assad. It breaks my heart to know that neighboring countries do not have the heart, morals,or guts to stop him.

    September 9, 2013 09:29 am at 9:29 am |
  10. Rick McDaniel

    Absolutely. Precisely why Congress should say NO!

    September 9, 2013 09:31 am at 9:31 am |
  11. just me

    It's a sad day in America when a vast majority acknowledge civilians, including hundreds of children, were gassed to death, but just don't want to get involved. I. Suppose if syria had oil then it might be worth it.

    September 9, 2013 09:41 am at 9:41 am |