‘Nightmare Charts’ for Republicans?
The New York Times has an interesting and, I am sure, controversial opinion piece, which from the beginning (Title: “G.O.P. Nightmare Charts”) to its conclusion (see below) suggests that present trends “do not bode well for Republicans.”
All sarcasm aside and keeping in mind that the Times is called a “liberal newspaper” and worse, that it is written in “a place for opinionated political thinkers from all over the United States to make their arguments about everything connected to the 2012 election”, that polls and surveys are meaningless, unless they support one’s position; that it is still a long time before the elections and that the writer bringing this to your attention is a biased Democrat, here is a thumbnail.
The author, Charles Blow, has selected two questions “tucked away” in two polls that caught his eye but do not grab the headlines.
Questions that, according to Blow, “get us away from the presidential race, both of which highlight just how much trouble the Republican brand continues to find itself in despite the party’s many legislative and statehouse victories in 2010.” Blow adds: “Public sentiment is slowly drifting away from the Republicans in a way that must be giving the party’s long-range strategists sleepless nights.”
What are the two questions?
The first question comes from the NBC News/Wall Street Journal Survey released on Tuesday (question number 27). It read:
“When it comes to (READ ITEM), which party do you feel is most attuned and sensitive to issues that affect this group.”
Among the “Items” are groups such as religious conservatives, men and women in the military, retirees, stay-at-home moms, Hispanics or Latinos, Gays and Lesbians.
You can analyze the responses and charts yourself. Blow summarizes:
The chart illustrates just how narrow Republican support is. Respondents viewed Republicans as more sensitive to religious conservatives, people in the military and small business owners. That’s not enough for a winning coalition. For everyone else — including the middle class, young adults and Hispanics — Democrats won out. Democrats even scored higher than Republicans among some groups that conventional wisdom associates with supporting Republicans, like retirees and stay-at-home moms. (I wish that the pollsters had also asked about men and racial groups, but unfortunately they did not.)
The second question comes from a Gallup morality poll that was also released on Tuesday. The question read:
“Next, I’m going to read you a list of issues. Regardless of whether or not you think it should be legal, for each one, please tell me whether you personally believe that in general it is morally acceptable or morally wrong.”
Some of the issues in the list are divorce, gambling, sex between an unmarried man and a woman, birth control, medical research using embryonic stem cells, gay or lesbian relations, abortion, pornography, the death penalty and suicide.
Again you can do your own analysis. Among Blow’s comments:
Of the 18 moral issues, Democrats were more permissive than Republicans on 14. No surprise there. But what was a bit surprising was that on seven issues, independents eked out a small margin of permissiveness over Democrats. (This may be due in part to the fact that some devout Democrats like blacks are rather conservative, socially speaking.)
Republicans were only more permissive than Democrats and independents on three measures and they all had to do with the killing of people and animals — the death penalty, buying and wearing clothing made of animal fur and medical testing on animals. Interpret that as you will.
Independents were closer to Democrats than to Republicans on 13 of the 18 issues outlined. The only exceptions were medical research using embryonic stem cells, the death penalty, suicide and human cloning. (On cloning animals, Democrats and Republicans were both less permissive than independents, and in equal measure).
When people are asked to identify themselves by political ideology, Americans may appear to be center-right, but independents look more like Democrats than Republicans on moral issues.
Ergo, Blow’s verdict that all this does not bode well for Republicans “as the composition and conscience of the country continues to change” and as “we are slowly becoming less religious, more diverse and increasingly open-minded.”
Analyze it all for yourself here.
Image: www.shutterstock.com
Share This
Related Posts
-
A Vast Majority of Veterans Support Firearms Background Checks
Posted on Apr 11, 2013
-
The White House Looks for Serious Cuts
Posted on Apr 10, 2013
-
Perceptions of America’s Political Parties
Posted on Apr 9, 2013
-
The Politics behind the Killing of Americans
Posted on Apr 5, 2013
OK, let me have a go at this. Bear in mind that I am a swing voter who has pretty much decided to vote Democratic this year, just as in 2010, although I’m *not* happy with the Democrats, I’m just *less* happy with Republicans.
All that said: this looks a little dangerous for Democrats to read a lot into, because all it really says much about is trends, and it doesn’t say much about where people’s voting priorities are going to be come November. If they agree with Democrats on 80% of the issues, but on the 20% of issues they feel strongest on they agree with Republicans, how are they going to vote?
If the issue is long-term shifts in public opinion, if you look at both parties, both have shown themselves as adept at shifting to accomodate it. That goes both ways; you will notice, for example, that with the shift away from gun control as a popular measure, so too did Democrats begin softening their message on that, saying they just wanted tough gun laws in big cities with crime problems. With the shift toward gay rights, you saw Republicans softening their stance on that, from wanting to put people in jail to far less than that and a broader tolerance. With the long-term trends on abortion, Democrats decades ago (now) stopped with using the “a woman’s right to choose” message and changed to a software “safe, legal and rare” message more in keeping with the mentality of voters of both sexes.
My point is not to debate anyone on any of those issues (and I would really, seriously, BEG that no one try to loop me into a debate on any of those sample issues) but to note that when public opinion shifts, both parties gradually start changing to accommodate it. They have to, it’s pretty much Darwinian: if they don’t they die.
For 200 years now (if you count the Whigs as the precursor to the Republicans), as demographics and public attitudes have shifted, so have the two parties; on the big issues of today, neither party looks very much like it did 100 or 150 years ago.
These charts tell me something more about what the Republican Party is likely to look like in 2020 or 2024 than how this year’s election will go.
One thing that SHOULD trouble Republicans though: traditionally, they had a LOT of strength with small business owners. And while they still have an edge their, the Democrats seem to be doing VERY well with them these days.
I think the big thing that’s going to be hung around Republican necks is the perception that they are the Party of Big Business and Wall Street. Which is in part probably why they’re working to attack Obama on those very issues.
I’d say that’s a pretty good analysis,especially the observation that, in politics, five or six months is an eternity.
Thanks
Given the current mental and emotional dysfunction infecting today’s GOP – combined with their recent and glaring history of incompetence and sociopathy I’m amazed by the level of support they still manage to garner. Of course that amazement is tempered by the knowledge that a good portion of our electorate has all the intellectual prowess of the average 8th grader. (no offense intended toward actual 8th graders, who at least have good excuses for their state of development)
I think the first question doesn’t tell us much. Given that there are overlap in those groups, and that there are hundreds of other groups that weren’t asked about (gun owners? farmers? dare I say–the unborn and those that advocate for them?). If we’re trying to get an objective view of how the parties appeal to various groups, why only focus on groups that might be viewed as vulnerable? Why not include the rich? The bankers? tall people? So I think the measure is extremely simplistic.
A similar argument can be made for the second question. Who says that’s a comprehensive list of moral questions? And, who says that we are becoming more morally accepting? While that may be true of some questions (gay relationships, in particular), I don’t think that’s universally true (I think we’ve been pretty statically divided on the abortion question for quite some time).
Lastly, I’m pretty skeptical of any assertion that any political party will gain long-term dominance over the other. The other party will not allow it–even if they have to modify their positions. Two parties of relatively equal strength is the equilibrium point given the constraints of our current system. So at best I think this is an interesting intellectual exercise.
You pose some valid points, AD.
I should have included in my “caveats,” which of course apply to any poll or survey or the discussion thereof:
The way the questions are worded; cherry-picking the questions (and answers);comprehensiveness/inclusiveness of the question itself (as you point out) or of the entire poll/survey; the scope, diversity, etc. of those polled; etc., etc.
My personal opinion [emphasize "personal"], however, is that the snapshot and analysis Blow provides pretty much coincides with my view of the sentiments of the electorate — there were a couple of surprises. Of course, I could be wrong and I do agree with you that it is an interesting “intellectual exercise”
Thanks for your comments