Minimal discussion. As a poll report, it encompasses many viewpoints.

The piece is short and objective, citing complete polling data (including margin of error) without overtly choosing a side in the debate.

This piece is a snapshot into an important topic that will really come into play during the general election. This piece needs to be expanded upon but the raw data is quite informative.

A shor to the point story of importance but limited in scope regarding voters opinion on talks with enemies the answers are strong and of interest.

The story covers important information that needs to be reported on throughout the upcoming election. The debate will try to portray the Democrats as being out of touch with what patriotic Americans want and believe. The average American knows that diplomacy is important and we want our politicans to be able to discuss differences with other nations and work out peaceful solutions.

Unlike the Gallup.com version, the initial paragraph gets right to the point about why this story is important now. It also does a good job of condensing the salient information.

Well, for a short piece, it makes the point, and has the numbers to back it up.. I give it an 8, good beat, easy to dance to.. Seriously though, there's not much to get worked up over, most folks know these numbers and understand that there's hardcore holdout's of The Right that won't talk to anyone regardless if it would do any good. The number of 51 percent opposed is a bit sad though..

And yet again, it clearly shows just how out of touch Bush, McCain and the GOP are in understanding the basic psyche of their fellow Americans, not to mention the rest of the world, have evolved in the last few years.

Completely Documented... if you believe in polls.

Not much here on McCain. For balance, the article needed maybe one sentence from McCain or a surrogate, summarizing the case against talking to "enemy" leaders. The article and the poll it reports on both assumed too easily that talking with Iran meant talking with Ahmedinijad.

There's no harm in talking. The only way to resolve disputes is by communication. The road to undrestanding starts with dialogue

The article was informative, truthful, objective and honest.

consider what history has show us, high level talks with Russia and no pre-conditions, Nixon's triumph in talks with another sworn enemy China. And, today, Israel holding talks with Syria. Isn't anyone in the McCain camp familiar with history and current events?

Straight reportage, with no opinion component.

Succinct and to the point. Democrats and Independents favor diplomacy, while Republicans favor killing.

show me the Gallop survey data!

I think McCain is in for a big surprise this fall, on how Americans feel about this subject. McCain does not own the National Security issue.

this is such a weak conversation on the issue of presidential abilities..McCain will find like most people that you can not approach a problem without interacting, understanding and in some way deal with the perspectives of others... ..the real conversation should be on why we are so dedicated to not acknowledge the corporate coup that took place under cheney and company. this coup continues to not serve the core values or the humanity of the America we value.

I'd like to hear more about why the three groups mentioned feel the way they do.

The piece was unbiased, and informative.

Yes, just so long as the editors and writers use this data whenever reporting on charges or countercharges that relate to diplomacy and future foreign policy planning.

Short, concise, with link to source.