American opinion has indeed shaped politic consequences, political interests, and policymaking.  Even with little or no interest in policymaking and politics, the assumption of democracy gives the citizens the power to freely air out their issues and give their opinion in matters of political concern. Taking the war in Iraq, it posed a significant economic and political imbalance. However, support from the politicians was negligible. And because a majority of the Americans opposed the war in Iran, they voted for a Democratic congressional candidate. Their opinion played a great deal in making concrete policies in response to the war in Iraq.
Public opinion is a reflection of the citizens’ view on how the government responds to national politics. Political actions are driven by the citizen’s opinion (Erikson, & Tedin, 2015). It sheds light on the outcomes of specific policies and helps the political candidates identify the characters demanded of them by the citizens. Political scholars argued that the perception of old public opinions was changed because of ambiguity and inaccuracy (Dür, 2019). Modern theories came to identify public opinion as either latent or a broad expression. Latent opinions are formed on the spot, while broad expressions are opinions that had earlier been formed and remained stable (Cantril, 2015).
When convincing policymakers, it proves difficult, interest groups may indirectly influence public opinion. They can achieve this through the media, holding rallies, or handing out leaflets to the public (Dür, 2019). Because the citizens have little or no information on policymaking, they can easily be swayed by interest groups. Interest groups can, therefore, successfully source their support from public opinion or not.
Public opinion remains relevant in American politics. Journalists, politicians, and political scientists should focus on getting the public’s opinion on state affairs. In as much as views might differ or change, establishing a common ground will help in policymaking (Dür, 2019). For the war in Iraq, the Democratic gained power over the senate and House. This was greatly influenced by the failure of public support that shifted the pro-Democratic in 2006 and the 2008 elections. Because opinions are not fixed, establishing a connection between public views and political outcomes might be impossible.       
Berry, J. M., & Wilcox, C. (2015). The interest group society. Routledge.
Cantril, H. (2015). Gauging public opinion. Princeton University Press.
Dür, A. (2019). How interest groups influence public opinion: Arguments matter more than the sources. European journal of political research, 58(2), 514-535.
Erikson, R. S., & Tedin, K. L. (2015). American public opinion: Its origins, content, and impact. Routledge.” 6
1597218061-8216 Part 2 of Paper “For this assignment you will take your case-study from the first paper and, first, provide your analytical opinion (thesis) on the case.  Second, you will detail the threat in a nine-section Threat Assessment format.  Your assignment should be 10 to 12 pages (not including title page and bibliography), typed double-spaced in Times New Roman, 12-point font.  Remember to us the Chicago Style Manual for all citations and bibliography.  A minimum of 10 (10) scholarly sources are required for this assignment. Below are the required sections.  Please include the section headings in red on your assignment.  You are welcome to rearrange topics so your paper flows well. 
OVERALL THREAT ASSESSMENT/ANALYTICAL OPINION:  How much of a threat does this non-state actor actually pose to your chosen nation-state, taking everything into consideration?  Is the threat successful at exerting its influence?  Is the nation-state’s response effective or ineffective?  

     HISTORY:  This is the section where you can discuss the history of the threat and your nation’s perception and response.  Discuss why and how the threat came to be.  Why did it become a threat?  What was its initial motivation?  What environmental/societal/economic/etc. factors contributed to its formation?  
     MEMBERSHIP/LEADERSHIP:  Who makes up the threat?  Why do they participate?  What is their motivation?  Who are the leaders, if any?  How effective are they?  
     STRUCTURE/ORGANIZATION:  How is the threat structured?  Is there an organization?  What is it?
     CURRENT GOAL/MOTIVATION:  What is the current goal/motivation of the threat entity?  What is it trying to achieve?  Has it evolved since its formation?  
     TACTICS/CAPABILITIES:  What tactics does the threat employ?  How capable is it?  What weapons/tools does it use?  
     FUNDING/CONNECTIONS:  Where does the threat get funding?  Supplies?  Weapons?  Does the threat have connections to any other organizations, nation-states, etc.?
     LOCATION/SCOPE/MAGNITUDE:  Where does the threat operate?  How broad in scope is the threat?  Are they a regional threat or a global threat beyond the immediate threat to your nation-state?
     COUNTERING THE THREAT:  How has the nation-state countered the threat?  Also, please suggest possible ways to mitigate or counter the threat.  Look at alternatives the nation-state could take to counter the threat.  This is especially true if the nation’s responses are ineffective.  Try to think outside the box and be a little creative.  I understand that you won’t have total information, but just give it a try!