Let me start out by saying I am NOT a big fan of polls, because the questions can have you saying that Hitler was a great man, depending on how they are worded.
But this is an interesting poll, because it seems to contradict what so many people seem to think.
http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1379
Quote:A majority of likely voters - 52% - would support a U.S. military strike to prevent Iran from building a nuclear weapon, and 53% believe it is likely that the U.S. will be involved in a military strike against Iran before the next presidential election, a new Zogby America telephone poll shows.
Quote:When asked which presidential candidate would be best equipped to deal with Iran - regardless of whether or not they expected the U.S. to attack Iran - 21% would most like to see New York U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton leading the country, while 15% would prefer former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani and 14% would want Arizona U.S. Sen. John McCain in charge. Another 10% said Illinois Sen. Barack Obama would be best equipped to deal with Iran, while Republican Fred Thompson (5%), Democrat John Edwards (4%) and Republican Mitt Romney (3%) were less likely to be viewed as the best leaders to help the U.S. deal with Iran. The telephone poll of 1,028 likely voters nationwide was conducted Oct. 24-27, 2007 and carries a margin of error of +/- 3.1 percentage points.
So, while I am not a big believer in polls, this one is interesting.