David, I wanted to expand on what you wrote. You cite the key numbers of the poll (done by the Israel Project with Public Opinion Strategies and Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research), those numbers that made the headlines reporting: 55% of Americans might support a U.S. strike on Iran and 63% will support an Israeli strike.
But there’s more to this study. The Israel Project is a bipartisan organization, and does not care to highlight all findings in its press releases. It’s often careful in discussing the differences between voters of the two parties. Thus, we do not know how Democrats and Republicans are split regarding the strike question–an important question on the eve of the general elections.
However, in one question we do get a glimpse at the different approaches of voters to the seriousness of the Iranian threat. Is Iran an “immediate and serious threat” to the U.S.? One might assume that such question has a fact-based answer: either it is, or it isn’t. But the differences in answering this question can’t be of more partisan nature than what this study shows. Proving–and not for the first time–that the analysis of strategic questions can hardly be separated from political tendencies.
The writers of this study (I suspect deliberately) create the impression (as the Jerusalem Post reported) that the important finding related to this question is the one pointing to the fact that all Americans–from “strong Democrats” to “strong Republicans” and all options in between–see Iran as a threat:
The threat of Iran is apparently felt across the political spectrum, with 85% of Democrats and 97% of Republicans believing the Islamic Republic represents a serious threat to the US.
This is true, but not the whole truth.
While 74% of “strong GOP” (the poll’s term) supporters say that yes, Iran is both a “serious” and an “immediate” threat to the US, only 43% of “strong Democrats”–a 31% gap–answer the question similarly. Democrats, both “strong” and “soft,” generally believe Iran is a “serious” but not an “immediate” threat.
It is important to have all American believe Iran is a threat. But one can argue that there’s also real importance to the distinction between the two “threatened” camps. An “immediate” threat is usually what makes people support an “immediate” action. This means–for better or worth, depends on ones strategic analysis–that among rank-and-file Democrats only a minority will consider such action as crucial as their Republican rivals.