NPR Poll: Upsets Ahead?
On NPR this morning, Mara Liasson reported on a "Morning Edition" poll "…done in the 50 competitive House races where, in fact, control of the House of Representatives will be decided." Forty (i.e., 80%) of the seats in those districts are currently held by Republicans. In 2004 these districts voted Republican by a 12-point margin; in this poll, respondants said they would "definitely" or "probably" vote for a non-incumbant (i.e., not a Republican in 80% of the cases) by 46% over 29% who would definitely or probably support the incumbant.
Some people are going to be surprised by this fall's elections. Listen to Peggy Beekler:
Then there are undecided voters like Peggy Beekler, a retired social worker who lives in the 3rd District of Kentucky, represented by Ann Northup.
"Well, I'm rather disappointed in the Republicans," Beekler says. "I think they've made a mess of things, even though I've been a Republican."
Beekler is not happy about the war, but she's also unhappy about the so-called values issues that Republicans have counted on to get their voters to the polls.
"I think to do an amendment on burning the flag would be totally ridiculous," Beekler says. "I also think when Bush vetoed the stem-cell research … I feel like that's ridiculous because they're just going to destroy all those embryos anyway, so even though I am for life, I think that shouldn't have been vetoed. I think that was a really bad thing."
Ms. Beekler would, in most circumstances, probably be mistaken for one of the Republican base.
But there's more, and this is the bit that caught my attention. Consider this reaction to the big agenda of the congressional moralists:
Beekler represents one of our most surprising findings: On the question of which party would do a better job on "values issues," like stem-cell research, flag-burning and gay marriage, Democrats prevailed by their biggest margin in the entire poll: 51 percent to 37 percent.
"And when we list values issues like stem-cell research, flag-burning and gay marriage, these are the issues that Republicans took the initiative, used their control in Congress to get on the air to be voting on, to be talking about," Greenberg says. "What this says: By 13 points, voters say they are more likely to vote Democratic because of hearing about these issues. Which suggests that the strategy of using the Congress to get out the base is one that's driving away a lot of voters."
Perhaps it's time to reiterate my conviction that Democrats will do better in elections if they stand firmly and with conviction on liberal, progressive platforms. I will enjoy the irony when the day finally arrives that strong support for marriage equality means more votes.
4 Responses
Subscribe to comments via RSS
Subscribe to comments via RSS
Leave a Reply
To thwart spam, comments by new people are held for moderation; give me a bit of time and your comment will show up.
I welcome comments -- even dissent -- but I will delete without notice irrelevant, rude, psychotic, or incomprehensible comments, particularly those that I deem homophobic, unless they are amusing. The same goes for commercial comments and trackbacks. Sorry, but it's my blog and my decisions are final.
on Friday, 28 July 2006 at 18.36
Permalink
Those wedge-issue results are surprising.
And hang on. Not without setbacks, obviously, but the day when most people accept marriage equality as right and fair is coming. Polls of younger people's attitudes make that clear.
on Friday, 28 July 2006 at 19.30
Permalink
It's irritating and impossible to understand some of these attitudes, but I usually feel confident that I am on the right side of history — perhaps even in my own lifetime!
on Sunday, 30 July 2006 at 02.51
Permalink
I believe a lot of it is religious overlay on what is to me a very understandable mindset. It has to do with tradition but goes deeper than most things of that type.
Nearly all kids, from their earliest days, come to understand the world and their place in it as part of a family consisting of a female mother and male father. That's not as universal as it once was, but it's still the accepted, understood model, even among many families of differing makeup.
So to say this understanding of the "proper" order of things is ingrained is to drastically understate the situation. From there, it goes on to understandings of affection and romance — again, understood to be a male-female thing from very early in life.
These things learned in early childhood are extremely resistant to change. They're accepted without question when infants and toddlers are at their most impressionable. There's no questioning and no two ways about it.
Just look at the nudity taboo, another thing kids learn very early. Nudist groups and clothing-optional beaches may be enjoyed by a relatively few people, it's true. But the overwhelming majority never experience nudity in a social situation and never want to.
That's not rational, given that it could be pleasant, if just for the novelty, to visit a nudist camp. Internalized notions about modesty would be the only thing at risk. Even so, most people would rather spend a weekend in jail with the dregs of society than in an attractive, clean, orderly place where the management goes to great lengths to keep riff-raff out and the atmosphere family-friendly. That's the power of very early lessons about no-no's.
Even so, attitudes change over time. Adolescents go through a stage where they're big on challenging old ways and the established order. I think that's what's going on with polls showing them more receptive to same-sex civil unions or marriages. As today's young people who've heard about and discussed same-sex marriage get older, I think you'll see most of them make their more-receptive attitude manifest in public policy.
Sorry to be so long winded, but I had something to say.
on Sunday, 30 July 2006 at 16.47
Permalink
Long winded with something to say is always acceptable, SW; thanks for the ideas. You suggest a very good reason for the rule of thumb that it takes two generations to effect social change: generation one might be willing to make the changes just to assert themselves, but it will only be their children to whom the changed will seem "natural".