Poll: Beck, Limbaugh too moderate for GOP
The Daily Kos has made a splash with its poll of 2003 self-identified Republicans. A fifth think the 2008 election was rigged. A third refuse to believe Barack Obama was born in the United States. Sixty percent think he’s a socialist.
Naturally, this is a good moment for certain liberals to heap scorn upon us Republicans. Either we’re pathetically ignorant or just easily misled. Kevin Drum writes,
I used to talk about the Texification of the Republican Party, but that’s now obsolete. We’re officially seeing the Foxification of the Republican Party. It’s Roger Ailes’ world now, we just live in it.
I thought Kevin might be a little more skeptical. I certainly am, and so is Dennis. But unless you have evidence that something is actually wrong with the poll, what can you possibly say? You can be suspicious of Kos, but that’s not an argument.
I think the one way to attack this problem is to find other polls that have asked similar questions. For example, the Kos poll reports that only 26% of Republicans think gays should be allowed to serve in the military, while 55% oppose and 19% are not sure.
While reading a Max Boot post about gays in the military, I noticed his link to a couple of Gallup polls on the subject.
In November 2004, 52% of Republicans supported gays serving openly in the military. In May 2009, the number was up to 58%. Overall support for allowing gays to serve was 63% in the first poll, 69% in the second. Those overall numbers are consistent with a large amount of data available from pollingreport.com. Regrettably, the pollingreport.com data isn’t broken down by party. However, you can’t have 60-70% support for gays in the military if a majority of Republicans are against it.
So, is there any way to explain a 30% difference in the results between Kos and Gallup? It’s not the wording of the questions; they’re almost identical. If a few more examples like this turn up, I think the credibility of the Kos poll will be in trouble.
But for the moment, we’ll have to wonder if 23% of Republicans want their home state to secede from the Union.
Cross-posted at Conventional Folly
40 Responses to “Poll: Beck, Limbaugh too moderate for GOP”
But for the moment, we’ll have to wonder if 23% of Republicans want their home state to secede from the Union.
Maybe the entire sample was from Texas?
2003 and 2004 were a long time ago though. I don't thing Gay marriage support has also fallen among Dems in the same period.
According to the cross-tabs, 33% percent of Southern Republicans favor secession. Yet 18% of Midwesterners and 16% of Westerners felt the same way, along with 10% of NE Republicans.
Well it would certainly be interesting to see some more polls, but I will say this: I've noticed an increasingly hostile attitude from the right toward Obama as his time in office has gone on, and I doubt many people would argue with that. Polls could easily shift once the “honeymoon” period was over, and that could bring the fringe elements back out of the woodwork in greater force. I have a friends of the republican persuation who are smart and reasonable people, but for every one of those I encounter one of the more, shall we say, gullible variety. Here's a question, who among us, whether right or left leaning would be willing to say the quality of the electorate is getting better? Smarter? Less willing to believe outlandish propaganda? I rest my case.
Another question: If nearly 60% of Republicans think gays should be allowed to serve openly in the military, why aren't our elected Republicans out there trying to make it happen?
Food for thought.
“You can be suspicious of Kos, but that’s not an argument.”
I think that is a very valid argument. Kos is the source of this information….why not question it? Kos, HuffPost, FoxNews….I would need independent verification of any information coming from those sources before I would consider it fact.
Highly amusing…
We have a political party who has spent the last year throwing the vilest and nastiest accusations at the President, his party and their supporters using their very own propaganda network FOX News… Did it not cross their minds that the people watching their propaganda were not the sharpest knifes in the drawer and that they would absorb and internalize said propaganda? Having been told that the President is not an American, is a Muslim and the Anti-Christ, and seeing that a large proportion of the population supports him, are you surprised that they want to secede?
It isn't an argument, unless as Adesnik provided above, you have evidence to justify your suspicion. Dismissing a poll or some other 'evidence' just because you don't like who provided it is the very definition of an Ad Hominem logical fallacy. For example, just because someone has told a lie, at some point in the past, doesn't mean they aren't telling the truth now. So, you can't just dismiss what they say out of hand. You have to make a case for why you think they are lying now.
Once again:
RESEARCH 2000 is a nonpartisan full service research firm that conducts surveys and focus groups for advocacy groups, trade associations, businesses and over 200 news media organizations.
Some of their most active media clientele include the Bergen Record, The Raleigh News & Observer, The Portland Tribune, The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, The Concord Monitor, The Manchester Journal Inquirer, The Reno-Gazette, KCCI-Television in Des Moines, Iowa, WEEK-Television in Peoria, Illinois, KOMU-Television in Columbia, Missouri, and WISC-Television in Madison, Wisconsin.
Their Polls can be seen on CNN'S “Inside Politics” and are also mentioned frequently in the National Journal's “Political Hotline”, The Washington Post, The New York Times, The Christian Science Monitor, and The Wall Street Journal. – WIKI
Also Nate Silver over at 538 doesn't seem to have any problem with their record of accuracy.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/10/tracking…
Why would an organization whose livelyhood depends on running respectable polls risk fudging data? If someone has some dirt on them by all means share it. Otherwise consider the margin of error (their number) of plus or minus 3%. Even if you quadruple that margin of error the results aren't exactly flattering are they. There are conservatives on this site who I consider to be level-headed and reasonable people, but you they may want to re-consider the degree to which they share their ideology with others who are in less possession of said reasoning abilites.
The numbers are suspicious, but consider whom they were meant to impress. (I had predicted we'd not be limited to only one thread on this site about it.)
Point taken, but they had better equally impress those republicans who care about the GOP brand if they are aiming for a more coherent image.
In the KOS poll 76% claim that they consider abortion murder. But in a October 1, 2009 Pew poll, 39% of Republicans answered yes to 'should abortion be legal'. Now, In know the questions are not identical, but I have a hard time believing that a almost 50% of Republicans that believe abortion is murder also believe it should be legal. That doesn't jibe.
Another is the KOS poll claiming only 4% of Republicans support women working outside the home. But a November 2, 2009 MSNBC/Time poll found that “around three-quarters of men and women believe that the growing presence of women in the workplace has been very or somewhat positive for American society and the economy.” There is simply no way to reconcile those results to each other.
Those are just two quick examples. I think something is rotten in the state of Denmark.
Well, for the sake of the future of republicans you'd better hope something is rotten in Denmark. Frankly I think there is a great deal more evidence for there being something rotten in the GOP, but I don't expect the party faithful to own up to that until the smell becomes even more unbearable than it already is. Denial is not a river in Egypt.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . (sorry bout that, couldn't resist 
Shady, you said, “I have a hard time believing that a almost 50% of Republicans that believe abortion is murder also believe it should be legal.”
Don't know many Republicans, do you? Just kidding.
Somebody please give me the opportunity to make a similar remark about Dems…Please.
We can tell how delegitimized the Republicans are by the results of recent elections in NJ, Virginia, and Massachusetts and the way numerous polls are reflecting the confidence voters are showing in Blanche Lincoln, Barbara Boxer, Russ Feingold, Chuck Schumer, Harry Reid, Arlen Specter, and other prominent Democrats.
Highly amusing indeed
DaMav,
Good point, well made, though I'm not sure how much trouble Feingold and Boxer are in…and Specter is an issue unto himself sans (current) party affiliation.
tidbits
What percentage of Americans considered secession seriously 30 years ago? Hell even admitted to considering it 30 years ago?
My guess is that Lincoln is in trouble, that's no surprise she's from a Red State… Reid is probably dead politically, but all the others will likely survive or be replaced by Democrats…
Kos is NOT the source of this information, shannonlee. The nonpartisan polling organization, Research 2000, is the source of this information.
Is this a turning point for the Republican party? Where are the moderate Republicans? Speak up and disavow these viewpoints. If moderate Republicans continue to sit by and let the “not so fringe” take control, then you are responsible for the demise of your party. It seems obvious, that this is bad for our country.
KK – any idea what just happened to the McCain thread? It just disappeared. Does that happen a lot here?
Where is the information on the so-called “self-identified Republicans” that Research 2000 & Kos, who is a notoriously biased intermediary, have disseminated on the original polling data?
I think Boot's observation that 58% of Gallup Republicans interviewed last year were okay with gays in the military versus the absurdly low number cited by “Research 2000″ demonstrates that Kos/Research are not independent, as one commenter imagines, but deeply dishonest—-or perhaps Gallup is dishonest in its two separate polls on the subject.
Anything associated with Kos is dishonest & tendentious to an extent that makes his observations worthless and sometimes pernicious.
Res ipsa loquitur, which is Latin for Kos is a BS machine.
Yep, vanished without a trace, comments and all. No explanation. The link on Memeorandum 404s.
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
I believe if this were a court of law we would be talking about a behavior pattern as a form of pattern evidence. Past polling and behavior from Kos demonstrates that their information is always slanted to the left.
They paid for it…they are the source. What went on between R2000 and Kos is pure speculation, but I know who paid for the research.
These kinds of twisted polls are exactly what is wrong with our political system. How can we get anything done while politicians and their supporters do nothing but insult each other?
What was the purpose of this poll? “Gee, look at the dumb Reps”. How does this help anything?
Dave, if you have any source to back up your claim about research 2000 being dishonest, then be prepared to back it up, otherwise you are only opining.
As for the results, even if they are skewed or inaccurate to some degree there is still an unpleasant picture there, one that no amount denial will address.
Oh! That happened with you, too? Just a few minutes ago, I tried to reply to your comment about how we probably had more than one thing in common (I get email notifications when someone replies to one of my comments), and I got an error page that said the thread didn't exist.
It happens sometimes, I don't know about a lot. I do know that Disqus has been very glitchy lately; T-Steel and others behind the scenes are working with Disqus to try and solve the problem.
Dave, if you have any source to back up your claim about research 2000 being dishonest, then be prepared to back it up, otherwise you are only opining.
I'm not Dave obviously but I'd compare this poll to the Rasmussen polls that continually lean to the right. This poll doesn't meet the common sense/gut feeling test unless you were already of the opinion conservatives are largely stupid rednecks.
KK – given your srong support for health care reform, i thought this might be worthy of a front page post by you, and another item we may agree on.
I am total opposed to the current House and Senate bills, but just like when HillarytCare failed, various aspects got enacted piecemeal.
This is one that I think is a GREAT idea, and fit the bill of a) allowing more real competition in the market place and b) not incurring massive federal spending:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/02/03/health.c…
Thoughts?
A couple things to think about here.
1) Perhaps “self-identified Republicans” in the R2K poll is different than “Republican voters” in the Gallup poll because the latter may include Independents who typically vote Republican and the former does not. I don't know if that's true but it could explain the difference.
2) The reasonableness test is not just what other pollsters say, but the extent to which Republican representatives push this position. How many Republicans support allowing gays in the military? Are there even as many as 26% of Republican politicians who openly support allowing gays in the military? Even John McCain has shamefully reversed himself on this…in the wrong direction. Is he just listening to his Arizona primary electorate?
The other nutty stuff has come out in polls before – especially re: secession. When liberals get alienated they talk of leaving the country and going to one of dozens of other socially liberal places (Canada, Europe, etc.). When conservatives get alienated they talk of secession because, well, the only other socially conservative places are, well, not the kinds of places American conservatives would want to live.
Above, someone said: the purpose of the poll is to make Repubs look stupid. I agree, and observe that many progressives take great comfort in believing conservatives or Repubs are stupid. Their thinking is:
This is a tremendously convenient rationalization for progressives. It precludes a need for the progressive to respond and engage in reasoned fashion. It means a progressive gets to be right by default – a wonderful perk, as many progressives do not seek truth so much as they seek a state of virtue which conferred, in part, by their righteous political advocacy. I wish I believed virtue was so easy. Sadly, no.
For such Progressives, Pew, in a Jan 28, 2010 poll, has good news and perplexing news: Repubs are ignorant; Dems are ignoranter (s/b a word, soon to be a catchphrase: “Dems are ignoranter!”). http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1478/political-iq-quiz-knowledge-filibuster-debt-colbert-steele
John Ziegler:
Yep, those legendary angry white males who vote Republican, i.e. those troglodyte voters who are excoriated by media and the truly enlightened, are the best informed voters in America – which is nothing much to brag about, yet is a nice laugh at the expense of media and the truly enlightened.
As for progressives who argue that Repubs only get elected b/c conservative voters are so ignorant: why, then, do Dems get elected? My point being: it's a silly argument which is intended to exclude the need for said progressives to engage their brains which issues which, in truth, they do not know how to argue. If they knew how to effectively argue the issue, they would make their case, and they would not resort to the “Repubs win b/c their voters are ignorant” argument.
I really think, and I read an article about this which I am not going to search for now: large numbers of voters are influenced by friends and co-workers whose opinions they respect. Many (most?) voters do not understand the issues, but they know which of their friends/co-workers are the wisest and most informed. As elections approach, the uninformed voters tend to vote the way their wisest friends/co-workers are voting. Which means, imo, it's valuable to be able to reasonably argue an issue with an informed person; valuable to be able to influence a person who might influence friends/co-workers who will be voting. It's useless to abandon reason and gripe about ignorant Repub voters. Dem voters are just as ignorant, if not more so.
I think you are a “BS machine” there boca burger.
lol
I searched for the article which referenced social influence of voters. It was this article, written by James G. Gimpel, a Professor of Government at University of Maryland:
All the places run by conservative wackjobs (Afghanistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc..) are hell-holes or police states where no one in their right mind would want to live unless they are at the top of the pile…
I don't think anyone is suggesting that Research 2000 is fudging data, but survey results can be significantly skewed by subtle differences in the way a question is asked, flaws in the sampling methodology, poorly trained questioners, etc. I'm sure the folks at Research 2000 know all this, but still errors can creep in.
Surveys can also be influenced by a client with a strong agenda such as The Daily Kos. Ultimately it is the client that chooses what questions to ask and how they are phrased.
Even so, the reason I remain skeptical about this survey has less to do with the Daily Kos as the client, and more to do with the striking differences in the results between this survey and others. Until those differences can be reconciled, we should all remain skeptical.
Facts: Birth certificate produced by Obama is not the long form Hawaiin birth certificate; it was a live certificate of birth in which a person who had one US citizen parent and a foriegn parent could be provided. It does not prove or disprove the holder is a Naturally born US citizen required by the constitution to be eligible to hold the office of The President of United States. It shows none of the vital imformation of his parents and their place of birth. Mine does. Pull out your own birth certificate and look and see for yourself to what is missing on Obama's. Therefore there is no proof he is a natural born US citizen. Mr. Obama refuses to release this record. Mr Obama signed an executive order to prevent it's release. For security of our Nation when I had work in Naval shipyards I was required to produce a birth certificate. I studied this out on my own and can only conclude that Mr. Obama is not a natural born US citizen based on his own arrogance toward this subject. The DNC FAILED to establish and so did the rest of the electorial process FAILED in this matter. Further: I have never seen one so arogant against your constitutional rights such as your right to bear arms. I am registered Republican but lean very much Independent. I am not Christian nor Islamic. I am a ten year Navy Vet and I would totally agree that homosexuals in the military would be a bad thing. This last item is my opinion and the other items are FACT. One is wise not to buy into the devices of the main stream media. Think for yourselves! I think that both houses need to be cleaned out and whether Democrat or Republican this I say if you can't represent the people who elected you it is time to get fired! Example: Scott Brown in MA. who the people deemed would actually represent them and placed him in Kenedy's Vacant seat. Independents are going to determine this next election with a vegance.
I would agree that the extremes are on both sides of the fence but would disagree with the proportions.
When you say, “the people watching their propaganda were not the sharpest knifes in the drawer” are you not committing the same mistake that you accuse those “dull knives” of committing? More directly put, you labeled people as “dull knives” just because of what they believe. So some how your beliefs make you “a sharper knife” in the drawer? And are you then a representative of the Democrats?
an Ad Hominem fallacy is the attacking of the person, not the argument. Example, “I don't think G.W. Bush did a good job in office” and the other person replies “Well you're just stupid”. That's an Ad Hominem.
So homosexuals in the military are a bad thing? Do you know how many are in the military already and just are not “out of the closet” in the military? You need to wake up and smell the coffee bud. Do you really think in the face of war you should be choosy about your fighting companions? Homosexuals just want the same rights as a heterosexual already has. NO H8!!
As I stated I have my opinion and so do you.
In a message dated 2/4/2010 12:36:59 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
writes:
mike0630 wrote, in response to eric2sw:
So homosexuals in the military are a bad thing? Do you know how many are
in the military already and just are not “out of the closet” in the
military? You need to wake up and smell the coffee bud. Do you really think in the
face of war you should be choosy about your fighting companions?
Homosexuals just want the same rights as a heterosexual already has. NO H8!!
Link to comment: http://disq.us/at3em
—–
Options: Respond in the body to post a reply comment.
To turn off notifications, go to: http://disqus.com/account/notifications/