IOWA CAUCUSES

Iowa Poll: Parties deeply divided on national security

Jason Noble

jnoble2@dmreg.com

On matters of national security and Middle East policy, Iowans likely to participate in the Democratic or Republican caucuses could hardly be further apart.

Across a range of questions pertaining to ISIS, Islam, refugees and terrorism, respondents to the latest Des Moines Register/Bloomberg Politics Iowa Poll widely agree with members of their own party, but share precious little common ground with their neighbors across the aisle.

Republican caucusgoers are more hawkish on Iraq and Syria than their Democratic counterparts, more skeptical of Muslims and the Islamic faith and far less confident in the military and national security policies of Democratic President Barack Obama.

The results speak to a sharp partisan divergence on foreign policy and national security that has been evident since the beginning of the Iraq war in 2003, but that has grown more strident as ISIS has gained power and launched attacks beyond the Middle East.

Iowa Poll: Democrats, Republicans at odds on guns

MORE POLLS:

“It’s not that surprising to see a huge partisan divide on foreign policy given where the leaders of the parties are in terms of their perceptions on what went wrong and rhetoric on what we need to do,” said Brian Lai, a University of Iowa political scientist who studies domestic politics and international relations.

More than half of Republican respondents — 55 percent — call the fight with ISIS “a battle for civilization versus barbarism” and agree the United States should “commit whatever military forces are necessary to eradicate the Islamic State.”

“We need to give the military powers complete decision-making authority to completely annihilate ISIS,” said Republican poll respondent Joy Gibson, a 55-year-old office manager from Burnside who's supporting Texas U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz in the caucuses. “It needs to be a military function, not a political function. The whole world will benefit if and when ISIS is completely annihilated.”

Just 20 percent of Democrats, by contrast, agree with that view, while 49 percent say the U.S. should take a more limited role focused on training, supporting and providing intelligence to allies in the region.

“We don’t want to throw our troops into something that we have to do alone,” said poll respondent John Rinde, an 85-year-old Lutheran pastor from Council Bluffs who supports the candidacy of former secretary of state Hillary Clinton. "I’m in favor of engaging more of the surrounding people who have a stake in the territory and not engaging our troops to do all the dirty work.”

INTERACTIVE: Compare the candidates on the issues

The parties are even more divided on whether the United States is secure against a terrorist threat akin to last month’s ISIS-sponsored attack in Paris.

While two-thirds of Democrats are “mostly confident” that the U.S. has done enough to protect the homeland against an attack, more than three-quarters of Republicans say the opposite. They’re “mostly not confident” in the country’s security preparations.

“I think a lot of what’s going on right now is essentially fear-mongering,” said Democratic poll respondent Nick Janiczek, 28, of North Liberty, a supporter of Vermont U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders. “I really do think the Republican nominees right now are pushing this fear agenda and basically scaring people into thinking that things are a lot worse or that a terrorist attack could happen tomorrow.”

But Republican Steve Mathis, a retired economics professor from Emmetsburg who's backing candidate Donald Trump in the caucuses, said he sees gaps in the screening process for immigrants and visitors that terrorists could easily slip through. He’s bracing for more attacks like the one in San Bernardino this month.

“It’s a difficult situation,” Mathis said. “You don’t like keeping people out, but on the other hand, you do have to protect your own citizens. And I don’t think we’re doing a very good job of it.”

Iowa Poll pollster J. Ann Selzer noted that Republicans’ pessimism on national security reflects a lack of confidence in just about everything government does in this seventh year of the Obama presidency.

“Any time Republicans — and Iowa GOP caucusgoers are no different — are asked about confidence in the way things are going, they resoundingly say they are not confident,” Selzer said. “That applies to measures of the economy, the direction of the nation, and so on. In this poll, it applies to concerns about an attack on the homeland.”

The Iowa Poll, conducted Dec. 7-10 for The Des Moines Register and Bloomberg Politics by Selzer & Co. of Des Moines, is based on telephone interviews with 400 registered Iowa voters who say they definitely or probably will attend the 2016 Republican caucuses and 404 registered voters who say they definitely or probably will attend the 2016 Democratic caucuses. The margin of error is plus or minus 4.9 percentage points.

Partisans are similarly at odds over the reasons for destabilization in the Middle East and the rise of ISIS.

A strong majority of Republican poll respondents place the blame with President Barack Obama: 54 percent blame his administration’s removal of U.S. troops from Iraq in 2011, and another 18 percent think the administration's minimal support for Syrian rebels did the most to destabilize the region and enable ISIS.

MORE:

But most Democrats think it’s the fault of former Republican President George W. Bush. Sixty-three percent of respondents view the 2003 invasion of Iraq as the root cause of current problems.

“We came in and disrupted their politics and their government,” said Democratic poll respondent and Sanders supporter Amy Jardon, 40, of Cedar Falls. “We didn’t really have any clear-cut plan for why in we were in the country, and we didn’t have a real clear-cut understanding of the populations and religious populations that were there.”

Shifting blame to one’s political opponents is not uncommon or particularly surprising, Selzer said.

“We see this phenomenon a lot: Each party wants to blame the other party’s most recent president for things that have gone wrong,” she said.

The partisan divide is clearly evident on issues related to Muslims and the Islamic religion as well.

An 83 percent majority of Democratic respondents say Iowans “should welcome and resettle” Syrian civil war refugees who have passed federal screening.

“If people will take all the needed tests and so forth, they should be able to move into our society and have a place for safety and care and, I say, as a pastor, love,” said Rinde, the Democratic poll respondent. “It’s not always easy, but it has to be done carefully and without prejudice.”

Nearly three-fourths of Trump's supporters (73 percent) want to fight resettlement, but just 50 percent of Cruz's supporters do. Among Republicans, just 28 percent share that view. Indeed, almost half — 47 percent — say Iowans should “fight against” any Syrian resettlement, and another 18 percent support resettling only Christian refugees.

Majorities from both parties view Islam as an “inherently peaceful” religion, although there’s still a wide gulf between Democratic and Republican views.

Eighty-seven percent of Democratic respondents believe Islam is inherently peaceful, but that some “twist its teachings to justify violence.” Fifty-six percent of Republicans share that view, but a sizable minority, 38 percent, say the religion is “inherently violent.” Indeed, a majority of Cruz supporters, 53 percent, hold that view.

Poll respondent Crissy Kooker, 44, a Ben Carson supporter and nurse from Ankeny, said she feels like there’s a war underway against Christianity.

“I do think that the war is against Christianity,” she said. “I do think it is against Christians, and with that being the predominate religion in the United States, like it or not, I do feel like we are being targeted. … And that certainly involves us in the fight.”