Posted on 01/17/2012 5:46:32 PM PST by Clintonfatigued
Gallup poll: Conservatives outnumber liberals
Self-identified conservatives make up 71 percent of the Republican Party. | AP Photo
Close
By TIM MAK | 1/12/12 4:28 PM EST
Conservatives continue to make up the largest segment of political views in the country, outnumbering liberals nearly two-to-one, according to a new poll Thursday.
The Gallup survey found that 40 percent of Americans consider themselves conservative; 35 percent consider themselves moderate; and 21 percent see themselves as liberal. The figures did not change from 2010.
For the third straight year, conservatives outnumbered both moderates and liberals.
Conservatives began outstripping moderates in 2008, and the percentage of moderates has declined steadily over the past two decades, from 43 percent 1992 to 35 percent in 2011.
In fact, both self-identified conservatives and liberals have risen in number since the early 1990s, indicating a growing polarization in American politics.
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
While self-identified conservatives dominate the Republican party
up 71 percent,
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
the Democratic Party is more split — 39 percent of Democrats view themselves as liberal, and 38 percent consider themselves moderates.
Meanwhile, independents are mostly moderate (41 percent), but skew more toward conservatism (35 percent) than liberalism (20 percent).
The Gallup survey, which was conducted from January to December 2011, includes 20,392 respondents and has a margin of error of plus or minus one percentage point.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71385.html#ixzz1jp0LV45N
While I won’t support Mittens in the primary, I will add that I’m not certain that the nation could survive a second Obama term.
“I believe over 60 percent, say 75 percent, are essentially anti Romney, but the roller coaster circus this primary has been is beating them down.”
We’re not beaten down, what’s happening is that as long as the votes continue to be divided 3 or 4 ways (if you count RP), then Romney will continue to get the largest single percentage. RP is a lost cause, but Perry and Santorum have no chance (look at what a tough time Newt the superior debater is having) and their votes could go to Newt if they’d “take one for the team”. Both of them are young and have a good future. But this is the problem we currently have.
Okay, my flame suit is ready :-)
No flame necessary....
“We’re not beaten down, what’s happening is that as long as the votes continue to be divided 3 or 4 ways (if you count RP), then Romney will continue to get the largest single percentage. “
No disagreement there. I believe I was one of the first to start pointing out this phenomenon. Where the game starts to change is the point Romney breaks the anti Romney barrier. There are reasons for it happening. I’m presently leaning towards voter fatigue. That is at the core of Romney’s support to begin with. He is the contrast to Bush bumpkin fear, experienced by all of us who cringed and held our bleeding ears when Bush started speaking. Romney is the plastic man with a shining, fake smile, and he enunciates words properly. It’s not like Romney stands for anything that puts fire in the gut or drives voters to crawl on broken glass to pull a switch for him. Nope, I haven’t heard many reasons why anyone is for Romney, other than they’ve been told he can beat Obama, and they get the sense he won’t embarrass them in debates. ...Taking that same reasoning further, this roller coaster ride of pop sensations shooting up only to crash, has voters afraid to commit to the other candidates. So what if they don’t like Romney, they are going along with what they have had pounded into them; Romney is the chosen one. Of course, before Rombots start popping the corks on their Mormon Tabernacle bubbly, ...grape juice to us heathens, they might want to see if Mitt is the latest pop sensation. It’s a fickle thing. ...And yes, the only way Romney will be beaten is if the conservative side of the aisle can quickly settle upon one champion. ...I dreaded this circus from the beginning, because it was destined to give us what we have now.
“I doubt it has the same impact on non Pubbies as it does with the Pubbie base.”
I KNOW it doesn’t. Look, Newt’s said many times that making the ad was a very stupid thing, AND that he was speaking out against cap and trade on the House floor the day Gore was trying to push it. If R’s don’t know that, they haven’t been listening.
“He is the perfect foil to help Obama gin things up enough that his base will be so angry, they will turn out in higher numbers.”
You betcha. He’ll be painted everything from a rich fat cat who doesn’t care about “the 99%” to the architect of Obamacare 1.0. It’ll be a no-win situation. And that doesn’t even take into consideration what a wimp he’ll be debating BHO face to face. He wants so badly to be liked by everybody (including the Left), and he’s scared to death of the race card, that it’ll be Juan McLame all over again.
Are (almost all of) the so-called conservative pundits and Repub spokespeople really THAT dumb that they don’t see this??? It’s obvious why the Dems are talking him up - they DO see what an easy mark he is.
But what’s the Republicans’ excuse? Do they want to see BHO re-elected or what?
“That can be done by holding the House and taking ontrol of the Senate, so the more important perspective is turnout of actual conseravtive voters, to support pubbies and tea partyiers down ticket.”
That’s important, yes, but not THE most important - Congress/Senate alone won’t prevent BHO from completing our destruction - look for a record # of Executive Orders, appointing Leftist SC justices, more czars, and circumventing Congress in general for whatever he wants to do. And I don’t see a chance of there being enough conservatives in both houses who’d impeach him.
No, ousting the Constitution-shredding, foreign, Marxist, Muslim, race-baiting, America-hating, Traitor in Chief IS JOB #1.
And (IMO) the only one we have who’s fearless, un-PC yet articulate enough to do that is Newt.
“And if I’m at all indicative of the sentiment of conservatives at large, I think a Romney nomination almost certainly means another 4 years of Obama.”
Agreed - but can anyone explain, then, WHY the Repub pundits don’t get this??? Are they blinded by his looks and smooth exterior? Aren’t they intelligent enough to see how weak he’ll be up against the Rock Star in Chief? Don’t they see all the similarities with BHO and yet the disconnect with “the masses”, such that he (Romney) would LOSE?
But what’s the Republicans’ excuse? Do they want to see BHO re-elected or what?”
No they are not that dumb. I don't know why, but it is no doubt related to money and power. I think they either don't care whether Obama is elected, or are convinced that he is not beatable.
The horrible onslaught of any Pubbie facing Obama Machine may also be a factor. I do think a number of people GOP E would like to see as president took a pass in favor of 2016.
It is possible that so much damage has been done, that we are already sunk. If GOP regains the senate and keeps the house, they get their committee chairmanship back, then Obama will have to accept the blame. Maybe. Who knows?
“The conservative candidate in 2012 who seems most likely able to articulate the ideas of liberty to generations who’ve probably never heard them before is Gingrich, warts and all.”
The reason is that Newt is a historian and a teacher. To defeat leftist, progressive ideas we must reform the education system. How the youth are taught shapes the future of a nation. I think we’re now paying a heavy price for the years and years of propaganda fed to our kids in K-12 and so many universities.
A president like Newt who understands (and cares about) this issue of the educational system and the problems therein, along with a right-minded Congress, could do a lot to revamp it - such as turn over a lot of it (or all?) to states and local communities, do away with NEA/DOE, teacher unions and tenure.
“There is no longer any reason to continue with this lie. Newt has has testified in the House stronger against GoreBull Warming than I have seen ANY of the other candidates speak against it.”
Amen, FRiend. It’s what I’ve been saying.
If we all stay divided, we’ll get Romney as nominee. And if many stay home in protest for the general, we’ll get four more years of BHO. This won’t teach the GOP anything. What WILL is if we recognize the anti-Romney guy who can best go up against BHO and support him before it’s too late, which will FORCE the defeat of Romney. ThAT’S how to teach the GOP and not punish our country (and ourselves) with the re-election of a traitorous dictator who wants to put the final nails in our coffin.
It seems to me that 2008 was a reaction to ‘64 because establishment GOP types keep themselves reminded of it without seeing 1980.
So they just keep repeating the same old middle of the road candidate and it always fails. Nixon and W Bush got reelected being moderates and look how those second terms turned out. And look at all the big government programs created or expanded under both.
Unfortunately, the GOP is back to a Rockefeller Republican party and it will take probably to 2016 to get a true, good conservative back into the WH.
That idea, is of course "unique" and essential to liberty. If rights are grants from government, they are, by nature, alienable and subject to the whims of human nature.
Perhaps that is why the acknowledgement of God has been anathema to the so-called "progressives."
The following is excerpted from a series entitled, "Lessons on Liberty," by La Vaughn G. Lewis, Co-Editor, "Our Ageless Constitution" & "Rediscovering the Ideas of Liberty." The "Lesson" contrasts the Founders' Ideas of Liberty" to be taught to rising generations, with the Counterfeit Ideas being promoted in the so-called "public schools" of America for decades.
“The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time; the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them.” (Jefferson - 1774)
“Statesmen may plan and speculate for Liberty, but it is Religion and Morality alone which can establish the principles upon which Freedom can securely stand.” (John Adams - 1775)
“The Sacred Rights of Mankind are not to be rummaged for among old parchments or musty records. They are written, as with a sunbeam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the Hand of the Divinity itself, and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power.” (Alexander Hamilton)
“Without God, there could be no American form of government, nor an American way of life. Recognition of the Supreme Being is the first and the most basic expression of Americanism. Thus the founding fathers saw it, and thus, with God’s help, it will continue to be.” (Dwight Eisenhower)
“The same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe, the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God.” (John F. Kennedy - 1961 Inaugural)
“…it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly implore His protection and favor….”(George Washington)
“Now the virtue which had been infused into the Constitution…and was to give it…the stability and duration to which it was destined, was no other than…those abstract principles…proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence—namely, the self-evident truths of the…unalienable rights of man…the…sovereignty of the people, always subordinate to a rule of right and wrong, and always responsible to the Supreme Ruler of the universe for the rightful exercise of that sovereign…power.” (John Quincy Adams, on the occasion of The Jubilee of the Constitution - 1839)
"Today, across our nation, we see consequences of decades of gross neglect and outright censorship of the Founders’ ideas from textbooks and from our public discourse. We have allowed counterfeit ideas to dominate the public square, and the Founders’ principles have been crowded out. Unwittingly, many teachers and other unknowing officials have participated in the agenda of an unelected mind-controlling elite whose tyrannical actions have robbed generations of Americans from reading or studying the ideas that made America free. Like termites, they have eroded our foundations as effectively as if they had burned the books. Yet, not once have they been willing to call it by its rightful name—censorship. Once, in America, stifling ideas about the Creator and Creator-endowed liberty was considered unthinkable. . . .
"The ideas of liberty must be passed on from generation to generation if liberty is to survive. These ideas, when they are allowed to be examined freely, will prevail, because their appeal is to reason and to the love for liberty that is deep in the human heart. John Adams warned: “The people of America now have the best opportunity and the greatest trust in their hands, that Providence ever committed to so small a number…if they betray their trust, their guilt will merit even greater punishment than other nations have suffered, and the indignation of Heaven.”
“The idea of God is the keystone of a perverted society. The true root of liberty, equality and culture is atheism.” (Karl Marx)
Our thinking is enlightened “in the degree in which we cease to depend upon belief in the supernatural.” (John Dewey, father of ‘progressive education’ and 1st President of American Humanist Society)
“…democracy is a human faith and movement, unencumbered by supernatural preconceptions.” (John Childs, a protégé of John Dewey at Columbia)
“…the majority of our youth still hold the values of their parents, and if we do not alter this pattern, if we do not resocialize ourselves to accept change, our society may decay.” (John Goodlad, 1971 Report to President, Schooling for the Future)
“As in 1933, humanists still believe that traditional theism, especially a faith in the prayer-hearing God, who is assumed to love and care for persons, to hear and understand their prayers, and be able to do something about them, is an unproved and outmoded faith.” (Humanist Manifesto II, 1973)
“…the most important factor moving us toward a secular society has been the educational factor. Our schools may not teach Johnny to read properly, but the fact that Johnny is in school until he is sixteen tends to lead toward elimination of religious superstition.” (Paul Blanshard, The Humanist, March-April, 1976)
“It [the Nat’l. Education Association’s publication list] includes the delegitimizing of all authority save that of the state, the degradation of traditional morality and the encouragement of citizens in general and children in particular to despise the rules and customs that make their society a functional democracy. The NEA is drifting into exceedingly dangerous waters, and probably carrying more than a few teachers and pupils with it.” (Chester E. Finn, Jr., Ass’t. Sec. Of Education & Prof. Of Education & Public Policy, Vanderbilt Univ., 1982)
--------------
“Now, my countrymen, if you have been taught doctrines which conflict with the great landmarks of the Declaration of Independence…let me entreat you to come back. Return to the fountains whose waters spring close to the blood of the Revolution.” (Abraham Lincoln)
I can’t see any difference between Romney and Obama. Romney’s political record proves this out.
If they made all GOP primaries closed in all states, then I don’t care how many candidates are in the race.
I’m just tired of libs voting in our primaries to water down the candidates.
Does anyone truly believe that non-republicans voting for Ron Paul are going to stay with the GOP? Hell no, and probably not even with Paul the nominee.
To listen to RINO’s today saying “don’t tick off all those new voters Ron Paul is bringing to the process” is a laugh riot. He’s bringning nothing new at all. They should write a book about the Dean administration.
What the term “conservative” actually means seems to differ based on who you’re asking. I have no doubt that most of mitt romney’s supporters would identify themselves as “conservatives. “ I wouldn’t be surprised if most of Ron Paul’s did as well.
Here is another recent poll.
Interesting quote: “Seventy-six percent (76%) of all Republican primary voters say they will vote for the GOP candidate even if their favorite doesn’t win the nomination.”
“Agreed - but can anyone explain, then, WHY the Repub pundits don’t get this??? Are they blinded by his looks and smooth exterior? Aren’t they intelligent enough to see how weak he’ll be up against the Rock Star in Chief? Don’t they see all the similarities with BHO and yet the disconnect with “the masses”, such that he (Romney) would LOSE?”
All great questions, and I think as usual Rush provided the best answer. I’m paraphrasing, but I’ve heard him say repeatedly that the GOP establishment does not believe our country is in deep peril. They just view Obama as “just another Dem POTUS” and they just want to win back power so they can control the purse strings.
They are backing Romney cause they believe (rightfully so) that Romney is not likely to do anything radical or “make any wave.” On the other hand, with someone like Newt for example, they’ve seen what he did as Speaker, and he didn’t just sit back and enjoy his power, he used it to advance the conservative agenda, balancing the budget and getting us Welfare Reform. The last thing the establishment wants is someone like that who they deem “unreliable” and think may actually push for REAL reforms that might shrink the size of govn’t (BTW-I think Perry would do that too).
So bottom line, and I know Rush has said this too, so it’s not an original thought, the GOP establishment would rather LOSE with a RINO like Romney than WIN with a movement conservative like Gingrich, Perry, (and I suppose you can throw Santorum in there, although I think he’s more like GW Bush when it comes to govn’t spending). To these parasites, it’s all about their power, status and position in the establishment, and anyone that is perceived to be a threat to that MUST be taken out.
” While you could argue that it’s crossover voting, I think that’s just denial.”
Well, I think that could be more significant than you might think. Remember Rush’s Operation Chaos in ‘08? That represented untold thousands in the primaries. The left has no incentive NOT to cross over this year; they’re dedicated (and organized) to re-anoint BHO - including trying to insure that the weakest possible candidate ends up running against him.
But exact numbers aside, as long as conservatives remain divided among 3-4 candidates (albeit some un-electable ones), that’s how Romney keeps winning even though polls show he only has about 25% total support. With the other 75% scattered, Mittens slides by.
Newt can defeat BHO if he’s allowed to get to the general. But with Ron Paul screwing things up, Newt badly needs Perry/Santorum voters. They’re both good people, but neither can get the large spectrum of voters outside the primaries - Perry reminds too many of GW, Santorum’s viewed as too extreme (by non-Repubs and a fair amount of GOP), and neither are adroit enough to go up against BHO and the media’s dirty tactics.
I agree with your analysis.
I’ve said for a year that Dems in open primary states are going to make Mitty the nominee.
They know he’s the one most likely to produce a Tea Party challenger on the ballot in most red states, leading to a Clintonian plurality win for Baraq.
“it could be argued that a Mitt Milquetoast presidency would be worse than another Obamby admin.”
NO WAY - and I’m no Mittens fan. But THIS “donkey” (or camel) president is going to completely bypass the “elephant” Congress more and more, issue more Executive Orders, appoint more leftist judges, and create more czars, agencies and cabinet posts in a second term than can possibly be imagined.
And this donkey/camel president has a war on Christianity, Israel and our allies, and a love affair with Islam and our enemies.
Come the general election, we “sit it out” at our country’s (and our own) great peril.
“other than they’ve been told he can beat Obama, and they get the sense he won’t embarrass them in debates”
Oh, but he CAN’T beat Obama, and he WILL embarrass them in debates. Why oh why oh why can’t supposedly intelligent people see that??? Instead, Newt’s being called arrogant for stating the truth - the Massachusetts Moderate will not, cannot, defeat BHO. Didn’t the Juan McLame politically correct, weenie wussy-ness teach them anything?
Mittens is same-same, just in younger and slicker packaging.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.