posted November 17, 2011 09:36 AM            

The November 2011 Battleground Poll shows a profound disconnect in American political perceptions. To call these results evidence of how effective the left's control of the institutions of American society has been over the last fifty years would be a fair assessment.

The wording of Question 32 suggests that the Battleground Poll has descended into leftism. It reads thus: "Is there one particular item on the list that you think is the worst possible item to cut?" Among the seven items listed are "[c]losing tax loopholes" and "[i]ncreasing the taxes on wealth [sic] Americans and corporations." Apples and oranges. Closing "tax loopholes" and "increasing taxes," of course, are not cuts in federal expenditures at all, except to leftists who view all income as belonging to the state.

Other questions betray similar mutilated cognition. Question 26 deals with possible spending cuts and asks respondents if they favor "[m]aking hundreds of millions of dollars in cuts to Medicare and Medicaid through increasing beneficiary costs." Question 27 asks respondents if they favor "[m]aking hundreds of millions of dollars in spending cuts to programs like farm subsidies."

Anyone who thinks that cuts of "hundreds of millions" will do anything to address our gigantic federal spending problem is the sort of child who calculates the cost of a mansion in pennies. The Debt Clock shows that the federal government is spending $3.6 trillion a year, or roughly $400 million an hour. How would cutting Medicare, Medicaid, and farm subsidies by $900 million each affect federal spending? The Debt Clock, as of this writing, shows federal spending of $3,600,949,068,010. Making three cuts of $3.6 billion leaves federal spending at 99.64% of what it is now, which means doing nothing, really, at all.

Question 31 includes in possible spending cuts " programs for soldiers and veterans." Aside from the fact that "soldiers" is not a generic term for Marines, sailors, and airmen, the wording does not leave open the option of deferring or ending weapons programs or reducing recruitment goals to leave a smaller military. The clear implication is that any cuts in defense spending must include cuts in programs for military personnel and veterans.

Also missing from all the spending cuts ideas are fraud, waste, and inefficiency. How many respondents would identify those as a priority area when looking at cuts in federal spending? We don't know. Indeed, in the November 2011 Battleground Poll, the very words "fraud," "waste," and "abuse" have been banished. It seems almost as if the poll was constructed to prevent conservatives from expressing their beliefs.

Surely these contorted questions show that this poll does not tilt towards conservatives and, if anything, leans to the left. Yet this Battleground Poll, like all the dozens over the last decade, still provides resilient proof of a conservative supermajority in America in the answer to two polling questions.

The first is ideological, and the second is religious. In the last decade, there have been more than twenty of these polls, each conducted separately and each asking, in Question D3, for respondents to identify their own ideology. In November 2011, one year before Obama faces voters for reelection, 20% of Americans describe themselves as "very conservative," 41% of Americans describe themselves as "somewhat conservative," 25% of Americans describe themselves as "somewhat liberal," 9% of Americans describe themselves as "very liberal," a whopping 2% of Americans call themselves "moderate," and 3% are "unsure / don't know." Like past Battleground Polls, the November poll shows conservatives as about 60% of all Americans, even when moderates and "don't know" are included.

This profound conservatism also shows up in Question D11: 50% of Americans go to church or synagogue at least once a week, and 69% of Americans attend services several times a month, while only 2% of Americans never attend church or synagogue services. This fits in with a March Gallup poll that showed that 92% of Americans believe in God, while only 7% do not. Baylor University has conducted similar polls which show that only 10.8% of Americans are not affiliated with a church or synagogue. Moreover, the Baylor poll shows that conservatives are much more devout than liberals. For example, 81.1% of conservatives believe that "there is ultimate truth," while only 52.2% of liberals believe that statement. (Doesn't that explain a lot of the silliness of leftism?)

posted November 17, 2011 12:30 PM            

"Good Human Being" would rule out sexual predators, two timers, liars, financial exploiters.

posted November 17, 2011 06:04 PM            

and when the pope says paedophilia is just a "pretty normal" phenomenon that people never made much fuss about before...does that recommend the religious follower as a leader?

if the american population is so conservative, how come you are so afraid of creeping socialism, jwhop? sounds to me like you are trying to convince yourself that you are in with the "right" crowd.

posted November 17, 2011 10:55 PM            

Ohio
Mississippi
Arizona
Maine

posted November 18, 2011 03:48 AM            

Majority or not, they will vote Obama if Republicans put up a joker candidate or any candidate whose a*s will be whooped by the powerful Democratic Spin Machines.

Americans have always a preferred a strong leader. Gore and Kerry were pathetically weak that even Dubya could beat them [with a little help from Jeb ].
Obama has many many failures but he holds many leadership trump cards. Nobody comes close to his oratory skills.
And he delivered Osama whereas Republicans failed for 7 years.

Obama also has 3 major trump cards:
1. Martial Law
2. Overt support to a new wave of Occupy Wall Street in Spring. There won't be police brutality in that one.
3. Greek Solution: They could get away with 50% debt write off. Same can be done for the American Middle Class. Obama can afford to wreck the US economy between 2013 and 2016 and leave the ruins to a Republican, as ample payment for their non-cooperation.

Irrespective of whichever party wins, things are not looking good for the American voters.

And that is not good news for the rest of the world.

posted November 18, 2011 09:23 AM            

As usual, you find yourself off in the weeds and off point.

Trying to change the focus from what was said...to what you want it to mean is a fools errand.

For decades, poll after poll revealed that there's 60+/- of Americans who self identify as Conservative.

That's a Super Majority!

You couldn't even get the percentages of demoscats and Republicans right.

Partisan Trends
Partisan Trends: 34.3% Republican, 33.1% Democrat

Tuesday, November 01, 2011

The number of Republicans increased by half a percentage point in October, while the number of Democrats decreased by a similar amount.

posted November 18, 2011 03:34 PM            

quote:

---

For decades, poll after poll revealed that there's 60+/- of Americans who self identify as Conservative.

---

Yes, and YET we've still seen Democratic Presidents and majorities in Congress, which suggests that such self-identification is NOT an identification of support for, or an endorsement of, the Republican party.

posted November 18, 2011 06:24 PM            

quote:

---

For decades, poll after poll revealed that there's 60+/- of Americans who self identify as Conservative.

That's a Super Majority!

---

and then say this:

quote:

---

Partisan Trends
Partisan Trends: 34.3% Republican, 33.1% Democrat

---

posted November 18, 2011 06:30 PM            

On the other hand, Rasmussen is the most trusted and most accurate polling organization in America.

The reason most other polls are skewed is because they overestimate the numbers of demoscats and underestimate the numbers of Republicans...when the numbers of each are almost identical...with Republicans outnumbering demoscats.

posted November 19, 2011 08:22 AM            

You're confusing political party affiliation, demoscat/republican, with philosophical leanings, liberal/conservative, AND, you're ignoring the 32% who are not affilliated with either party...many of whom are conservatives.

acoustic has made the mistake in thinking that just because a demoscat has been elected, that means there are more liberals than conservatives. Not so.

Elections are won or lost on voter perceptions of candidates. demoscats run from labels like "Liberal" and "Socialist" like vampires run from a cross.

August 25, 2008
The Biggest Missing Story in Politics
By Bruce Walker

The Battleground Poll, the most respected and thorough of all public opinion polls, released its latest results on August 20th. Although many people read this poll for the data on voter preference in upcoming elections, for voter opinions about the two major political parties, for what things matter most to voters, I always zip past this data in the first fifteen pages of poll results and go straight to Question D3, which very quietly and totally ignored proclaims the biggest missing story in American politics and which is the only story, in the long run, that really matters.

I have been tracking Question D3 for a long time, since June 2002, in thirteen straight Battleground Poll results. Americans respond to this question more consistently than to any other question in those thirteen Battleground Poll surveys. People many change their opinions dramatically about Iraq or President Bush or drilling for oil, but not their answer to Question D3.

The Battleground Poll is different. It is bipartisan. A Republican polling organization, the Terrance Group, and a Democrat polling organization, Lake Research Partners, collaborate in picking the questions, selecting the sample population, conducting the surveys, and analyzing the results. The Battleground Poll website, along with the raw data, is "Republican Strategic Analysis" and "Democratic Strategic Analysis." There are few polls that are bipartisan. No other polling organization asks the same questions year after year, none that reveal the internals of their poll results so completely, and none ask anything like Question D3 in every survey. What is Question D3 and what were the results to Question D3 in the August 20, 2008 Battleground Poll? It is this:

"When thinking about politics and government, do you consider yourself to be...

Very conservative

Somewhat conservative

MODERATE

Somewhat liberal

Very liberal

UNSURE/REFUSED"

In August 2008, Americans answered that question this way: (1) 20% of Americans considered themselves to be very conservative; (2) 40% of Americans considered themselves to be somewhat conservative; (3) 2% of Americans considered themselves to be moderate; (4) 27% of Americans considered themselves to be somewhat liberal; (5) 9% of Americans considered themselves to be very liberal; and (6) 3% of Americans did not know or refused to answer.

Sixty percent of Americans considered themselves conservative. Does this mean that most Americans do not know what "conservative" means? No: The question specifically provides an out to people who are not sure about their ideology; it provides an out to people who want to be considered "moderate." Americans reject those choices. They overwhelmingly define themselves as "conservative." This is a huge political story - except that it is not "new" at all. Look at the thirteen Battleground Poll results over the last six years, and how do Americans answer that very question? Here are the percentages of Americans in those polls who call themselves "conservative" since June 2002: 59% (June 2002 poll), 59% (September 2003 poll), 61% (April 2004 poll), 59% (June 2004 poll), 60% (September 2004 poll), 61% (October 2005 poll), 59% (March 2006), 61% (October 2006), 59% (January 2007), 63% (July 2007), 58% (December 2007), 63% (May 2008), and now 60% (August 2008.)

The percentage of Americans who define themselves as "somewhat liberal" or "very liberal" has always been puny. In thirteen straight polls, this percentage has never been higher than 38% (June 2004) and it has usually been much lower. The gap between self-defined conservatives and self-defined liberals has been as high as thirty percentage points and as low as twenty-one percentage points. What does that translate into in electoral politics? If conservative presidential candidates simply got all the conservative votes - if virtually all moderate voters, uncommitted voters, and liberal voters went for the liberal candidate - then the conservative candidates would win a landslide bigger than Ronald Reagan in 1988. Have you ever wondered why liberals like Obama never call themselves liberals? Maybe their advisers have read the Battleground Poll internals.

Are these remarkable results skewed? This has always been the argument, but it is a hopelessly flawed argument. The poll results are incredibly consistent over time. These results are the same when President Bush has poll numbers at rock bottom and when Republicans were facing electoral disaster, like in October 2006 when 61% of Americans called themselves conservatives. The very consistency of these percentages is powerful evidence of their inherent validity.

If people did not know what conservative, liberal, and moderate meant, then the poll results to that question would bounce around over time and people would flock to define themselves as "moderate" or they would say "don't know." When given four different options to the conservative label, respondents overwhelmingly chose to define themselves, instead, as conservatives.

Do people feel pressured into calling themselves conservatives? Think: Hollywood regularly excoriates the image of conservatives; the mainstream media demonizes conservatives; schools teach that conservatives are narrow minded bigots; academia tries to hound independent conservative newspapers and organizations off campus. It requires much more courage to define yourself as a conservative than any other label, particularly when the banal "moderate" answer is so easily grasped. No: These answers to Question D3 are real, profound, and great.

Why, then, do other polls show Americans so different from conservatives? The short answer is that other polls are scrupulously constructed to hide the tsunami of conservative opinion in America. On abortion, for example, polls will report that Americans define themselves at least as much as "pro-choice" as they do "pro-life," but that is just not true. The "pro-choice" advocates nationally oppose bans on partial birth abortion, oppose parental notification, and oppose counseling on abortion. Led by men like Obama, the "pro-choice" position is, quite simply, that a woman always has a right to choose an abortion.

Polls do not show support for that at all. Polls over the last few months give the following levels of support to making abortion always legal: "always legal - 19%" (Quinnipiac Poll, July 2008); "legal in all cases - 19%" (Pew Poll, June 2008); "legal in all cases - 18%" (ABC / Washington Post Poll, June 2008). While it is true that the percentage of Americans who want abortion illegal in all situations is almost exactly the same as those who want abortion legal in all cases, the overwhelming percentage of Americans want just what pro-life advocates want: abortion generally available in cases of rape, incest, or life-threatening health problems for the mother; abortion for minors regulated just like abortion for any major medical procedure for minors is regulated; and abortion on account of personal inconvenience more strictly regulated. All of these polls showing Americans equally divided were crafted by people and by groups intent upon presenting a false impression of how Americans felt about abortion.

Polls on other issues are just as bad. The CNN poll of June 2008 on gun control is a good example. CNN asks people to interpret the Constitution, by reciting the text of the Second Amendment. Then asks whether this text in the Bill of Rights was intended to provide for "a well regulated militia" or to preserve "the right of the people to keep and bear arms." In other words, the question implies that the Second Amendment cannot preserve two rights, both of which are explicitly recited within the text of that amendment: A well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is specifically guaranteed as well.

Like everything that the Left does, from entertainment to higher education, the structure, the format, and the revealed results of information is conformed to present an image in which conservatives and their values are as invisible as blacks in the Antebellum South. Even Leftists themselves believe this false picture. Consider, in 1988, how many liberal Democrats did not believe that Reagan had won an overwhelming landslide because they, personally, knew of no one who voted for him. Consider how blindsided the Left was by the overwhelming popularity of an unapologetic conservative like Rush Limbaugh. Consider that Republicans walk about in a blue funk wondering where the next Reagan is, utterly forgetting that not only Leftists, but "moderate" Republicans in 1980 were labeling Reagan as far, far too conservative. The Gipper, in fact, was comfortably in the middle of a huge American majority. The extremists are that 9% of Americans who call themselves "very liberal."***Leftists!***

Conservatives are like those proverbial sailors becalmed off the coast of Brazil, dying of thirst, and wondering how they would survive until tomorrow. When another ship passed asked the listless sailing ship if its crew needed help, the urgent call was for fresh water, to which the passing ship replied "Lift down your buckets into the sea. You are in the mouth of the Amazon." Fresh water was everywhere around the dehydrated men; they just did not know it. Conservatives are not just a majority of Americans, but an utterly overwhelming majority of all Americans. As soon as they grasp this huge fact, government and politics in America will be transformed.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/08/the_biggest_missing_story_in_p.html

"Accuracy" counts. Polling "methods" count.

Rasmussen Reports has been a pioneer in the use of automated telephone polling techniques, but many other firms still utilize their own operator-assisted technology (see methodology). Pollsters for Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton have cited our "unchallenged record for both integrity and accuracy."

The Pew Center noted that Rasmussen Reports beat traditional media in covering Scott Brown's upset win in Massachusetts earlier this year: "It was polling-not journalistic reporting-that caught the wave in the race to succeed Massachusetts Senator Edward M. Kennedy." Rasmussen Reports was also the first to show Joe Sestak catching Arlen Specter in the Pennsylvania Democratic Primary race last year.

Once again in 2010, Rasmussen Reports polling provided an accurate preview of Election Night outcomes. See how we did.

Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, noted, “This was one tough election to poll and forecast. Rasmussen Reports caught the major trends of the election year nationally and in most states.”

posted November 20, 2011 02:28 PM            

quote:

---

On the other hand, Rasmussen is the most trusted and most accurate polling organization in America.

---

That's why you had to bold what the Pew Center said about them? Yeah, that's ironic.

quote:

---

The reason most other polls are skewed is because they overestimate the numbers of demoscats and underestimate the numbers of Republicans...when the numbers of each are almost identical...with Republicans outnumbering demoscats.

---

The actual numbers of each haven't been identical in years. Democrats have long had more registered voters, and only you can conceive of a world where a Republican majority elects Democrats.

quote:

---

acoustic has made the mistake in thinking that just because a demoscat has been elected, that means there are more liberals than conservatives. Not so.

---

Acoustic said no such thing. Acoustic acknowledged that people refer to themselves as Conservative, but rather pointed that this does not translate to a consistent Conservative majority in government. To believe that a plurality of the nation is Conservative in a Repulican-leaning way is just demonstrably untrue.

quote:

---

Elections are won or lost on voter perceptions of candidates. demoscats run from labels like "Liberal" and "Socialist" like vampires run from a cross.

---

posted November 20, 2011 04:44 PM            

If you don't believe them acoustic then...why do you cite them in the first place? Illogical and irrational!

Clutching at straws again acoustic?

I didn't say there's a "conservative majority in government". Do try to read with comprehension acoustic. I said there's a "Super Majority" of Conservatives in America.

More head up the ass rhetoric. demoscats ARE "diminished"...in the House and in the Senate. You can thank your little Marxist Socialist Progressive icon and his Socialist comrades in congress for the loss of the US House and 6 Senate seats PLUS Governorships and State Legislatures all over America.

AND, you forget something very important acoustic...if you ever knew it in the first place.

Not all demoscats are leftists or even liberals. There's a sizable percentage who are conservatives and an even larger percentage of Independents who are conservatives.

Large numbers of demoscats want O'Bomber GONE!

posted November 20, 2011 05:53 PM            

quote:

---

Even the polling organization you cite...Pew... recognizes Rasmussen is the most accurate polling organization.

---

No, it doesn't. Your quote from Rasmussen's site: The Pew Center noted that Rasmussen Reports beat traditional media in covering Scott Brown's upset win in Massachusetts earlier this year: "It was polling-not journalistic reporting-that caught the wave in the race to succeed Massachusetts Senator Edward M. Kennedy." If you read with clarity you'd understand that Pew said nothing at all with regard to Rasmussen being "the most accurate polling organization."

You're right to give the embarrassed smiley when you first try to downplay Pew's position in the polling world, and then try to bolster your favorite polling place by using their endorsement. That's the only illogical, irrational thing going on here.

quote:

---

I didn't say there's a "conservative majority in government". Do try to read with comprehension acoustic. I said there's a "Super Majority" of Conservatives in America.

---

Do try to understand what you've said, will you? The implication in saying that there's a "super majority" of Conservatives in this country is that they are all on your team. Why would you point it out otherwise? Reality backs up what I've stated here from the start, which is that self-proclaimed Conservatives don't translate into Republican majorities. You gain absolutely nothing from reporting on what people label themselves.

quote:

---

More head up the ass rhetoric. demoscats ARE "diminished"

---

Yeah, I would say that's head-up-your-ass rhetoric to try to claim that Democrats are diminished. There's a Democrat in the top slot, there's a Democratic majority in the Senate, the Democratic party continues to have more registered voters than the Republican party, etc. You're believing your own delusion too much.

quote:

---

Liberals have to "talk" conservatively to get elected, because if they spoke how they really felt about issues, they would be too far removed from what the average American thinks.

---

posted November 20, 2011 06:00 PM            

After trailing in nearly four months of weekly surveys, President Obama is now essentially tied with a generic Republican candidate in a hypothetical Election 2012 matchup for the week ending Sunday, November 13. The president earns his highest level of support in nearly six months.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely U.S. Voters finds Obama earning 45% support, while the generic Republican picks up 44% of the vote. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/generic_presidential_ballot/election_2012_generic_presidential_b allot

posted November 21, 2011 10:02 AM            

You sound like you're getting light headed again acoustic.

The Republican retaking of the US House and 6 Senate seats represents the biggest single election swing in more than 70 years. Incredible...indeed NOT credible any rational person would say democrats were not diminished and the 2010 elections were a referendum on Barack Hussein O'Bomber.

demoscats...including elected demoscats are running away from O'Bomber as fast as their little feet will carry them. When O'Bomber shows up their state or district, they suddenly find they have a scheduling conflict and can't appear with O'Bomber!

Even demoscat party campaigners and elders want to dump O'Bomber in 2012. He is, has been and will be a disaster for demoscats; perhaps for as long as a generation.

O'Bomber's support among all demoscat support groups is diminished...except for members of the Communist Party USA and the democratic Socialists of America...and their splinter groups.

Things are so bad in O'Bomberville that he had to send Michelle to a NASCAR race...where she got booed.

Things are so bad in O'Bomberville that O'Bomber is going to embrace country music at the White House.

Things are so bad in O'Bomberville that demoscat party operatives want to dump O'Bomber and draft Hillary in 2012.

Democratic Pollsters: Obama Should Abandon Run for Second Term
By Michael Catalini
November 20, 2011

President Obama should abandon his run for a second term and turn over the reins of the Democratic Party to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, two one-time Democratic pollsters wrote in Monday's Wall Street Journal, which appeared online Sunday.

From National Journal:

Patrick H. Caddell and Douglas E. Schoen argued that just as Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson decided not to pursue additional runs though they could have, Obama should do the same.

“He should abandon his candidacy for re-election in favor of a clear alternative, one capable not only of saving the Democratic Party, but more important, of governing effectively and in a way that preserves the most important of the president's accomplishments. He should step aside for the one candidate who would become, by acclamation, the nominee of the Democratic Party: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton,”Caddell and Schoen wrote.

Caddell, who worked as a pollster for President Jimmy Carter, and Schoen, who was a pollster for President Bill Clinton, argue that Obama will inevitably have to run a negative campaign in order to win reelection, the negative consequences of which will make it difficult for him to govern effectively.

“One year ago in these pages, we warned that if President Obama continued down his overly partisan road, the nation would be ‘guaranteed two years of political gridlock at a time when we can ill afford it.’ The result has been exactly as we predicted: stalemate in Washington, fights over the debt ceiling, an inability to tackle the debt and deficit, and paralysis exacerbating market turmoil and economic decline,” they write.

Caddell and Schoen say they write as “patriots and Democrats” who are concerned for their country, and they do not expect to play a direct role in any possible Clinton campaign.

This is not the first time Caddell and Schoen have made this argument. They wrote in November 2010 in The Washington Post that they “do not come to this conclusion lightly. But it is clear, we believe, that the president has largely lost the consent of the governed.”
http://nationaljournal.com/2012-presidential-campaign/democratic-pollsters-obama-should-abandon-run-for-second-term-20111120

Now acoustic, snap out of it and pull your head out.

posted November 22, 2011 12:14 PM            

With 8 republican candidates vying for republican primary votes and independents who lean republican...all of whom have their favorite...and different republican, O'Bomber is barely staying even with top tier candidates.

When all those voters consolidate behind one republican candidate, O'Bomber will be lucky to get more than 47% of the vote in the general election.

That is...if O'Bomber doesn't throw in the towel and announce he's not running for reelection...as he's being urged to do.

posted November 22, 2011 03:43 PM            

With it not being the heat end game of the election, there are a lot of opinions to still be formulated. There will be more support for both sides than there currently is.

Unaligned people don't always break against the incumbent. I've never seen a study that suggested that. Were Bush and Kerry ever tied in the polls? (yes) What happened there? You're still demonstrating an extreme lack of saavy when it comes to knowing how elections play out.

posted November 22, 2011 04:28 PM            

It's hardly worth talking to you acoustic. You simply don't know what you're talking about.

Poll: In 2012 swing states, Obama is tied with Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich
By Jennifer Skalka Tulumello
Christian Science Monitor
Mon, 21 Nov, 2011

In 12 swing states in the 2012 election, Obama is deadlocked against Republican Mitt Romney, with 45 percent of the vote each, a new Purple Poll shows. Newt Gingrich also shows well............

The poll of 1,436 likely voters focuses on Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Wisconsin. Obama won all of them in defeating the Republican nominee, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, in 2008. Since 1996, according to Purple Insights, nine of these states have shifted between the parties, and three – Minnesota, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin – have been determined by margins of three points or less.
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/poll-2012-swing-states-obama-tied-mitt-romney-202607190.html

posted November 23, 2011 02:55 PM            

randall and jwhop live in the south. they therefore consider the southern point of view to be the "average american" p.o.v.