The “unless you’re a MAGA voter” stuck out to me. As a Jew and human I’d like the Iranian regime to be overthrown and depowered, as an environmentalist I’m glad the price of oil is up (basically a less effective carbon tax and prompts alternative energy growth, though don’t love the Russian advantage angle, and I know this war is not a long term strategy), and as a Democrat I’m glad it will probably help Dems in the midterms (though unfortunately probably because people don’t agree with me on the first 2 points)
I can't imagine the war is a net positive from an environmental standpoint. Sure the price of oil going up means less is burned in cars and for heating, but the war itself is massively wasteful and uses huge amounts of fossil fuels. Only US carriers & subs are nuclear powered, the rest of the fleet burns diesel. Fighter jets and support aircraft burn jet fuel. Rockets and missiles burn fossil fuels. Any fires burning from explosions pollute the air and soil with a toxic mess of substances. And of course, should even one oil tanker get hit in the straight of Hormuz and start leaking oil or sink, the environmental toll would be catastrophic.
If you have a broken finger and chop off your hand at the wrist, the finger's not a problem any more, but hard to say it's an improvement. Cheap oil is the broken finger here, and the war is cutting off the hand.
I’m not advocating for war just to raise oil prices, though I would be curious how exactly the increased oil prices weigh out vs direct war activities from an emissions perspective
Most non-MAGA people agree with your first point about wanting the regime gone, they just don't think that's what is actually happening. The trump admin has no plan to accomplish that, and doesn't seem to be stumbling into one.
Suddenly bombing cities and threatening to destroy all civilian power and other infrastructure is a terrible way to foment a popular uprising; I'm not sure an approach like that has ever worked historically.
Just one minor suggestion: the graph might be read slightly more intuitively if you make the x-axis at 50% darker or bolder, similar to the 50% line on the Trump Approval graphs.
I hope you'll do some kind of update or article on Adults vs voters vs likely voters as more numbers come in. Just glancing at the current polls, there seems to be a clear and significant gap between the all adults scores, which are much worse, and the RV and LV scores, which get better as you add an LV screen. That would jive with past polling too.
I am more interested on the change of polls when we finally have boots on the ground in coming days. It looks more and more likely they are going to physically secure the strait now.
The “unless you’re a MAGA voter” stuck out to me. As a Jew and human I’d like the Iranian regime to be overthrown and depowered, as an environmentalist I’m glad the price of oil is up (basically a less effective carbon tax and prompts alternative energy growth, though don’t love the Russian advantage angle, and I know this war is not a long term strategy), and as a Democrat I’m glad it will probably help Dems in the midterms (though unfortunately probably because people don’t agree with me on the first 2 points)
I can't imagine the war is a net positive from an environmental standpoint. Sure the price of oil going up means less is burned in cars and for heating, but the war itself is massively wasteful and uses huge amounts of fossil fuels. Only US carriers & subs are nuclear powered, the rest of the fleet burns diesel. Fighter jets and support aircraft burn jet fuel. Rockets and missiles burn fossil fuels. Any fires burning from explosions pollute the air and soil with a toxic mess of substances. And of course, should even one oil tanker get hit in the straight of Hormuz and start leaking oil or sink, the environmental toll would be catastrophic.
If you have a broken finger and chop off your hand at the wrist, the finger's not a problem any more, but hard to say it's an improvement. Cheap oil is the broken finger here, and the war is cutting off the hand.
I’m not advocating for war just to raise oil prices, though I would be curious how exactly the increased oil prices weigh out vs direct war activities from an emissions perspective
Most non-MAGA people agree with your first point about wanting the regime gone, they just don't think that's what is actually happening. The trump admin has no plan to accomplish that, and doesn't seem to be stumbling into one.
Suddenly bombing cities and threatening to destroy all civilian power and other infrastructure is a terrible way to foment a popular uprising; I'm not sure an approach like that has ever worked historically.
Thank you for providing this.
Just one minor suggestion: the graph might be read slightly more intuitively if you make the x-axis at 50% darker or bolder, similar to the 50% line on the Trump Approval graphs.
[Edit: appears to be fixed now; double thanks!]
I hope you'll do some kind of update or article on Adults vs voters vs likely voters as more numbers come in. Just glancing at the current polls, there seems to be a clear and significant gap between the all adults scores, which are much worse, and the RV and LV scores, which get better as you add an LV screen. That would jive with past polling too.
I am more interested on the change of polls when we finally have boots on the ground in coming days. It looks more and more likely they are going to physically secure the strait now.
It would be good to correlate this to the overall POTUS approval rating
I support the war 100% IF Barron Trump leads the boots onto the ground!