Americans view of Petraeus plummets in poll
By The Washington Post
Published: Wednesday, Nov. 21, 2012, 5:48 p.m.
WASHINGTON — In the aftermath of his resignation as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, nearly a third of all Americans now hold unfavorable views of former Gen. David Petraeus, a once wildly popular public figure, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.
Still, positive views of the general outweigh negative ones (45 to 32 percent), and there is a more unfavorable impression of the FBI and the Obama administration for their handling of the matter than there is for Petraeus himself.
In July 2010, when Petraeus was chosen to lead a big expansion of American military operations in Afghanistan, he had few detractors. Just 9 percent of Americans held unfavorable views at the time, according to Gallup; 56 percent expressed favorable impressions.
Petraeus' resignation was prompted by an extramarital affair he had with his biographer, Paula Broadwell.
About 51 percent of men now hold favorable views of the former general; 30 percent hold unfavorable ones. The split is far more even among women: 39 percent express favorable views, 34 percent unfavorable ones.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Senator: CIA improperly searched computer network
- Obama hams it up for health care on Funny or Die
- Senate OKs bill scrapping ‘good soldier defense’
- Lanza’s father says he wishes son was never born
- D.C. mayor denies he knew of illegal ‘shadow campaign’
- Snowden captivates tech crowd
- Fannie, Freddie profits surprise
- Elephants attuned to human voices
- General’s court-martial is thrown into jeopardy
- Depth, distance reduce impact of quake off California’s northern coast
- Deaths from heroin, pain pills called ‘urgent,’ growing’ crisis