Poll: Concerns about terrorist attacks at lowest level since 9/11

Link

(CNN) -- Concerns about an impending terrorist strike are at the lowest point on record since the attacks of September 11, 2001, according to a new CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll.

Furthermore, only about one in 10 Americans says terrorism is the most important issue in deciding their vote for president, the poll found.

Seven years after the attacks of September 11, just 30 percent of Americans said they think an attack on American soil is likely over the next several weeks, down 11 points since this time last year and down 30 points since the first anniversary of September 11.

Only 14 percent of Americans say an impending terrorist attack is likely in their community. And Americans do appear to be more confident that Osama bin Laden will eventually be captured or killed: Just about half say the U.S. will ultimately find the September 11 mastermind, up 7 points from this time last year.

But in frustrating news for the White House, Americans appear to give little credit to President Bush for the lack of a terrorist strike over the last seven years: Only 37 percent believe that the president and his policies are the chief reason there has not been a strike on U.S. soil. Overall, he has a 28 percent approval rating, tying his all-time low in CNN/ORC polling.

Opinions on the war in Iraq, on the other hand, have changed slightly, with a slight majority (52 percent) now saying that the war is an essential part of the war on terrorism. That represents a shift from 2006, when a majority of Americans said the war in Iraq was a distraction.

I am one of those who give the credit for the US not being attacked to Bush, rather he deserves it or not. The precedent always gets the blame or credit.

But what about the "millions of terrorists" we have created due to the wars 🙁

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I am one of those who give the credit for the US not being attacked to Bush, rather he deserves it or not. The precedent always gets the blame or credit.

That's sort of silly, isn't it. If we were attacked again today, would you still blame Clinton? If not, where is your cut-off date when the blame shifts from the former President to the current?

Your statement also assumes that a terrorist attack(s) was planned (which would be Clinton's fault by your rational) and was prevented by Bush.

Originally posted by KidRock
But what about the "millions of terrorists" we have created due to the wars 🙁

Not sure about "millions", but don't you think a young guy who's lost his family and home is an easier recruit for terrorist groups?

Don't you think a young guy who sees "invaders" in his homeland more likely to leave his family and home and join up with a terrorist group who claim they're fighting we repel the invaders?

I love how some people seem to think Bush single handedly ceased terrorism as though there was never any military generals or C.I.A. operatives involved. Bush is just the face man. Any President will get the same attention; praise or blame.

Originally posted by =Tired Hiker=
I love how some people seem to think Bush single handedly ceased terrorism as though there was never any military generals or C.I.A. operatives involved. Bush is just the face man. Any President will get the same attention; praise or blame.

The stuff after is without a doubt a shit hole he built.

If the reps go down in the polls I bet we'll see a big terror "alert".

Originally posted by =Tired Hiker=
I love how some people seem to think Bush single handedly ceased terrorism as though there was never any military generals or C.I.A. operatives involved. Bush is just the face man. Any President will get the same attention; praise or blame.

Originally posted by KidRock
But what about the "millions of terrorists" we have created due to the wars 🙁

Try abbreviating "the war against terror" T.W.A.T.

This is disgraceful. How is it that trash like this is still finding it's way on the General Discussion forum? Take this trivial crap elsewhere,people, like the off topic forum. The General Discussion forum is reserved for important and relevant issues, like the Biggie and 2pac beef.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I am one of those who give the credit for the US not being attacked to Bush, rather he deserves it or not. The precedent always gets the blame or credit.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
I have a tiger-repelling rock you may be interested in.

Hahahaha.

Originally posted by Kinneary
Yet he bears the blame any time something negative happens. While obviously it's not all his doing, his policies surely were a huge impact, no?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Dunno, even after 9/11 I was kinda not convinced that there would be day to day terrorist attacks now.

😆 Yeah, 7 years is long enough to make that joke

Originally posted by Robtard
That's sort of silly, isn't it. If we were attacked again today, would you still blame Clinton? If not, where is your cut-off date when the blame shifts from the former President to the current?

Your statement also assumes that a terrorist attack(s) was planned (which would be Clinton's fault by your rational) and was prevented by Bush.

There is no rationalization, and Clinton does share some of the responsibility. However, things changed on 9-11. Before 9-11 it was appropriate to treat the terrorists like criminals, but after, it required a different tact. Bush gets the credit for the out come of that tact. If the US was attacked today, then Bush would get the blame.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
I have a tiger-repelling rock you may be interested in.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I have no idea what you are talking about.

There is a bear in the city and it eventually gets captured. Homer pushes all he can to get an anti-bear strike team which includes a fighter jet and all.
In a discussion Lisa points out there never was a bear prior to the recent event, she says that his actions won't attract/distract bears for the reason that bears are extremely rare and such and points out that the little rock she's holding is repelling tigers. Homer asks how she knows this to which she replies it doesn't: it's just a rock but you don't see any tigers around.
In the end Homer bus the rock, btw.

Originally posted by Jovan
it's from The Simpsons.

There is a bear in the city and it eventually gets captured. Homer pushes all he can to get an anti-bear strike team which includes a fighter jet and all.
In a discussion Lisa points out there never was a bear prior to the recent event, she says that his actions won't attract/distract bears for the reason that bears are extremely rare and such and points out that the little rock she's holding is repelling tigers. Homer asks how she knows this to which she replies it doesn't: it's just a rock but you don't see any tigers around.
In the end Homer bus the rock, btw.

Tigers can't fly airplanes into buildings.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Tigers can't fly airplanes into buildings.