Issues & Insights
Ukraine President Volodomyr Zelensky and aide Andriy Yermak view damage in war-ravaged Bucha shortly after Russian invasion of Ukraine. Photo: Oleksandr Ratushniak. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license (

Majority Of Voters ‘Not Satisfied’ With Biden’s Efforts On Russia-Ukraine War: I&I/TIPP Poll

With the world’s attention still riveted by Hamas’ terrorist attacks against Israel, the death and destruction of the Russia-Ukraine war, now in its 21st month, goes on. During the conflict, President Joe Biden has put the U.S. forward as a potential peace broker. Do average Americans believe his plan is working?

To find the answer, the October I&I/TIPP Poll asked voters: “How satisfied are you with the Biden administration’s efforts to find a settlement to the Russia-Ukraine conflict?”

The response, after more than $113 billion in U.S. military and humanitarian aid, is not much. Among those responding to the I&I/TIPP Poll, conducted from Sept. 27-29 among 1,378 adults, just 34% said they were either “very satisfied” (11%) or “somewhat satisfied” (23%).

More than half of respondents — 53% — described themselves as either “not very satisfied” (22%) or “not at all satisfied” (31%). Another 12% said they were “not sure.” The poll has a margin of error of +/-2.7 percentage points.

As is usually the case in these days of highly partisan politics, the major parties and independents show sharp differences over Biden’s efforts to end the Russia-Ukraine war. Democrats (61% “satisfied,” 27% “not satisfied”) strongly support Biden, while Republicans (12% “satisfied,” 83% “not satisfied) overwhelmingly reject Biden’s efforts so far.

Independents again represented a kind of middle ground between the two parties, with 29% “satisfied,” but 53% calling themselves “not satisfied.”

Indeed, among all possible responses, “not at all satisfied” was No. 1 at 31%.

Biden’s support among voters appears to be very thin. Just two groups showed a majority or plurality backing his Russia-Ukraine efforts: Blacks, at 47% “satisfied” and 38% “unsatisfied,” along with self-described liberals, at 62% “satisfied” vs. 24% “unsatisfied.” All other groups had more “dissatisfied” responses than “satisfied” ones.

Hispanics, in general, are a bit more “satisfied” at 38% than the overall average of 34%, but are still mostly “not satisfied” at 42%.

There are regional differences, as well. In the blue states of the West (37% “satisfied,” 51% “not satisfied”) and Northeast (41% “satisfied,” 48% “not satisfied”), voters on the whole consider Biden’s policies as positive. In the Midwest (29% “satisfied,” 57% “not satisfied”) and South (32% “satisfied,” 57% “not satisfied”), doubts about Biden’s policies in the Russia-Ukraine conflict are higher.

As far back as May 2021, Biden and his advisers offered to talk to Russian leader Vladimir Putin about preventing an all-out war, vowing “unwavering U.S. support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity in the face of Russia’s ongoing aggression.”

So far, Biden’s efforts haven’t worked. In a few months, the conflict will enter its third year, with Russia just launching yet another offensive in a war that has already claimed an estimated half a million dead or wounded, according to U.S. officials.

It’s important to note that in Congress, Biden has so far enjoyed bipartisan support, with Republicans backing most of the president’s initiatives in Ukraine.

Since Russia’s invasion in February 2022, “Ukraine has become far and away the top recipient of U.S. foreign aid. It’s the first time that a European country has held the top spot since the Harry S. Truman administration directed vast sums into rebuilding the continent through the Marshall Plan after World War II,” according to the Council on Foreign Relations.

But there are major concerns with this. While many Americans are sympathetic with Ukraine, issues of endemic corruption in President Volodymyr Zelensky’s government have been raised both here and abroad.

Former European Commission President Claude Juncker recently said Ukraine couldn’t possibly join the European Union because it is, in his words, “corrupt at all levels of society.” That is a sentiment shared by many.

A leaked memo from the Biden administration echoes that concern.

“Perceptions of high-level corruption,” according to the memo, which Politico obtained, could “undermine the Ukrainian public’s and foreign leaders’ confidence in the war-time government.”

It’s also undermining U.S. support. TIPP Insights polling data show that support for financial aid to Ukraine has fallen from 56% in March to 45% in October, while backing for military support has dropped from 62% in April to 49% this month.

Even so, Biden has been steadfast this year. Last February, while visiting Poland, the president had this to say: “Our support for Ukraine will not waver. NATO will not be divided, and we will not tire.”

But a top-secret memo that leaked not long after Biden’s comments showed far less internal optimism within the administration, predicting only “modest territorial gains” against the Russians this year. So far, despite some ground gains, that pessimistic outlook appears to be holding up.

Americans have hoped that the David vs. Goliath story of a smaller country beating a much bigger one would become a reality. But right now, Russia is in the middle of yet another offensive in Donbas, Ukraine, marked by “very heated” fighting between the two sides.

Meanwhile, tensions between the U.S. and Russia are growing, with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov saying late last month: “You can call this whatever you want to call this, but they (the U.S. and NATO) are directly at war with us. We can call this a hybrid war, but that doesn’t change the reality.”

He added, “They are effectively engaged in hostilities with us, using the Ukrainians as fodder.”

Americans are clearly uneasy about the conflict, when it will end, and who will come out on top, as this month’s I&I/TIPP Poll demonstrates. While U.S. voters remain angry over Russia’s invasion of a neighboring country, they also remain concerned about instability in Eastern Europe as the war goes on, not to mention the ongoing cost of the war to U.S. taxpayers, which continues to grow.

I&I/TIPP publishes timely, unique, and informative data each month on topics of public interest. TIPP’s reputation for polling excellence comes from being the most accurate pollster for the past five presidential elections.

Terry Jones is an editor of Issues & Insights. His four decades of journalism experience include serving as national issues editor, economics editor, and editorial page editor for Investor’s Business Daily.

We Could Use Your Help

Issues & Insights was founded by seasoned journalists of the IBD Editorials page. Our mission is to provide timely, fact-based reporting and deeply informed analysis on the news of the day -- without fear or favor.

We’re doing this on a voluntary basis because we believe in a free press, and because we aren't afraid to tell the truth, even if it means being targeted by the left. Revenue from ads on the site help, but your support will truly make a difference in keeping our mission going. If you like what you see, feel free to visit our Donations Page by clicking here. And be sure to tell your friends!

You can also subscribe to I&I: It's free!

Just enter your email address below to get started.


Terry Jones

Terry Jones was part of Investor's Business Daily from its inception in 1983, working in a variety of posts, including reporter, economics correspondent, National Issues editor and economics editor. Most recently, from 1996 to 2019, he served as associate editor of the newspaper and deputy editor and editor of IBD's Issues & Insights. His many media appearances include spots on the Larry Kudlow, Bill O’Reilly, Dennis Miller, Dennis Prager, Michael Medved and Glenn Beck shows. He also served as Free Markets columnist for Townhall Magazine, and as a weekly guest on PJTV’s The Front Page. He holds both bachelor's and master's degrees from UCLA, and is an Abraham Lincoln Fellow at the Claremont Institute


  • I would note that a major problem is the West’s inability (or should I say cowardice in the face of the enemy) to want to win this war. Just enough is given to Ukraine to survive but not enough, in timely fashion, to win the war. Having spent 15 months in the Vietnam War the parallels are frightening. For those that demand a land for peace exchange with Russia I remind them of Neville Chamberlain and his “peace in our time” agreement with Adolf Hitler. Did not work out well at all.

  • Knowledge of the history of US led persistent NATO aggressions against Russia since 1991, particularly the timing and severity of the events occurring during and after the CIA/Victoria Nuland orchestrated “Maidan Revolution,” a coup d’état in Ukraine in February 2014 that ousted Victor Yanukovych – a duly elected President who declined to sign a political association and free trade agreement with the E.U., and opted to maintain Ukrainian neutrality rather than joining NATO – and installed a brutal, extraordinarily corrupt and autocratic, US financed neo-Nazi government, is an important but neglected population parameter for this survey:

    The status of the survey-participant’s knowledge of such history is essential to understanding and assessing the meaningfulness of the participant’s answer to the question, “How satisfied are you with the Biden administration’s efforts to find a settlement to the Russia-Ukraine conflict?”

    In 1991 the Soviet Union disbanded. In post collapse negotiations with Russia, President George H.W. Bush and Sec. State, James Baker, promised Gorbachev that NATO “would not expand 1 inch eastward“ if Russia withdrew militarily from western Europe. Since 1991, with U.S. assistance and at its urging, NATO has expanded eastward such that NATO members now abut Russia’s border by more than 1,000 miles. Based on review of archival US State Department documents housed at George Washington University, Joshua R. Shifrinson concludes that the U.S. “misled the Soviet Union and violated the spirit of the negotiations.” Joshua R. Shifrinson, Deal or No Deal? The End of the Cold War and the U.S. Offer to Limit NATO Expansion, J. of International Security, Vol 40, No. 4 at pps. 7-44 (Spring 2016).

    Since 1991, the US has placed in Poland, Lithuania, and Romania Lockheed-Martin Aegis IV missile launchers capable of firing nuclear tipped cruise missiles with a +1,500- mile range – sufficient to strike Moscow in less than 10 minutes. The 1963 Cuban missile crisis confronting President J.F. Kennedy conclusively defines the US response to a similar western hemisphere “existential threat.”

    The US has not wasted +$113 bn. attempting to “protect democracy” in Ukraine, a klepto-oligarchic autocracy. No, the investment’s intended ROI is four-fold: (1) preventing a growing trade relationship between Germany and Russia; (2) preserving US corporate agribusiness and financial interests in Ukraine (e.g., Cargill, ADM, AGCO Corporation, Blackrock, Vanguard, Clinton Foundation); (3) destabilizing and “balkanizing” Russia; and (4) facilitating US acquisition and control of Russia’s vast natural resources from the Baltic Sea to the Pacific Ocean. See, e.g., Rand Corporation’s 4-10-2019 brief titled “Overextending and Unbalancing Russia;” CRS Report #R44891, “U.S. Role in the World: Background and Issues for Congress,” (01-19-2021 update).

    Nations enjoying mutual trade relationships to not wage war against each other. But such mutual trade relationship today between Germany and Russia would render NATO and any further US presence in western Europe wholly superfluous. It would further stress the already grossly unstable US dollar and its current hegemonic “global reserve” status – the status that sustains US lifestyle.

    As Mr. Biden promised, the US destroyed Nord Stream 1, evidently to prevent a developing trade between Russia and Germany.

    Anyone knowledgeable of the details of the history of the US led persistent NATO aggressions against Russia since 1991 will objectively conclude that the US and NATO are primarily responsible for the US/NATO war against Russia, and that the “Biden administration’s efforts to find a settlement to the Russia-Ukraine conflict” is an obscene fiction.

About Issues & Insights

Issues & Insights is run by the seasoned journalists behind the legendary IBD Editorials page. Our goal is to bring our decades of combined journalism experience to help readers understand the top issues of the day. We’re doing this on a voluntary basis, because we believe the nation needs the kind of cogent, rational, data-driven, fact-based commentary that we can provide. 

We Could Use Your Help

Help us fight for honesty in journalism and against the tyranny of the left. Issues & Insights is published by the editors of what once was Investor's Business Daily's award-winning opinion pages. If you like what you see, leave a donation by clicking on donate button above. You can also set up regular donations if you like. Ad revenue helps, but your support will truly make a difference. (Please note that we are not set up as a charitable organization, so donations aren't tax deductible.) Thank you!
%d bloggers like this: