May 17, 2012

"But 45% of voters believe the justices nominated by President Obama are too liberal, while 40% say their ideologies are about right."

Rasmussen polls.
Thirty-one percent (31%) of voters nationwide regard the overall Supreme Court as being too politically liberal, while 27% see it as too conservative. Another 32% say the court’s ideology is about right....
Close to Goldilocks-pleasing perfection, right?

21 comments:

The Drill SGT said...

Seems to indicate that the public is slightly right of this "conservative court" (as the MSM likes to call it) and the Public would nudge it farther to the right.

RonF said...

My worry is not so much the kinds of rulings that the court is making now as it is the kinds of rulings it will make in the future. The current 4-1-4 makeup is too close for comfort. For example - I'm happy to see the Court affirm that the Constitution's 2nd Amendment means that citizens have an individual right to keep and bear arms. I'm not happy that it was 5-4, and we were one vote away from having that taken away. We need to bolster the makeup of the court so that votes like that are more like 7-2 (I suppose 9-0 is too much to hope for).

GetReal said...

While it's true that this blog never has anything valid or worthwhile on it, your constant posts about polls conducted by Rasmussen Reports is just downright embarrassing. I'm ashamed that the flagship university in my home state is apparently paying your salary.

traditionalguy said...

Today the 5th vote is all that matters. We are being ruled by the whim of Anthony Kennedy.

But if Obama gets reelected, the court will likely become Kangeroo approval stamp for a rewritten Constitution for a Royal Reign. Restoration of the Monarchy worked for Charles II after Cromwell had done the religious right tap dance during his version of ruling England.

I want to see if Romney names Gingrich as a Justice? Newt could write some way out opinions that even the Professor would struggle to comprehend.

MaggotAtBroad&Wall said...

A Pew poll from 2010 reveals that 8% of the people polled believe a man who has been dead since 1993, Thurgood Marshall, is the Chief Justice, while 4% think Harry Reid is the Chief Justice.

53% of those polled were honest and said they don't have a clue who the Chief Justice is.

The American people are totally ignorant about SCOTUS.

Oddly, I'm citing a poll to demonstrate that the public is willfully ignorant about many of the things polled.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/what-people-dont-know-about-the-supreme-court--in-one-chart/2012/04/18/gIQA5w6gQT_blog.html

phx said...

The SC generally gets it right. I think W was about the worst president we've ever had, but I don't fault the SC rulings in the 2000 election. They make the calls and so far I've never had a reason to not stand by my SCOTUS.

damikesc said...

While it's true that this blog never has anything valid or worthwhile on it, your constant posts about polls conducted by Rasmussen Reports is just downright embarrassing. I'm ashamed that the flagship university in my home state is apparently paying your salary.

I assume your home state is embarrassed enough that it produced the likes of you.

My beef with Obama's nominees? Both seem intellectually incurious to an extreme and come across as being, well, dullards.

damikesc said...

I think W was about the worst president we've ever had

I thought so as well...until the NEXT President came in.

I then grew to miss Bush's fiscal discipline.

edutcher said...

Wise Latina + Short Shortstop from Haavahd

Do the math.

Chip S. said...

I'm ashamed that the flagship university in my home state is apparently paying your salary.

You've got a brawling state supreme court, an absurd recall election wasting millions of dollars, and Lori "Don't Go" Berquam as a Dean of Students, but a Rasmussen-citing lawprof is what embarrasses you?

Er, OK.

harrogate said...

"My beef with Obama's nominees? Both seem intellectually incurious to an extreme and come across as being, well, dullards."

These impressions of seeming intellectual incuriosity and dullness are based upon what, exactly?

Mitchell said...

If the Justices were allowed to dress as they please it'd be easier to spot who's insufficiently conservative.

traditionalguy said...

Go easy on Sotomayor. What's she done wrong besides have ancestors from Spain?

Those guys are the ones that discovered there was a New World blocking the way to Japan. Their work gave our Norse ancestors a place to come and grab up land around Jamestown and Cape Cod.

What the Spanish Conquistadors did was heroic in war and done very intelligently in peace while always honoring the Catholic faith, Saints and Feast days.

Obama is at war with the Catholic Church. Stay tuned.

damikesc said...

These impressions of seeming intellectual incuriosity and dullness are based upon what, exactly?

Kagan being a dullard is based on the testimony of her FRIENDS at the time of her nomination. Leaving the car running "absent-mindedly"? That is the action, to be generous, of a fucking moron.

Both are as lockstep, doctrinaire Progressives as exist on the SCOTUS. Two who see, literally, no limit to government power.

Nothing they have said reeks of intellect. They are middling talents on their best days. Having great certification isn't an effective replacement for actual intellect.

edutcher said...

traditionalguy said...

Go easy on Sotomayor. What's she done wrong besides have ancestors from Spain?

Those guys are the ones that discovered there was a New World blocking the way to Japan.


And here I thought it was this little guy from Genoa.

Rabel said...

"I'm ashamed that the flagship university in my home state is apparently paying your salary."

Now that's now a nice thing to say. However, Althouse does sometimes disappoint. For example, her failure to cover one of the critical constitutional and social issues facing Wisconsinites such as:

Hunger in Wisconsin

Chip S. said...

Say, Rabel, you might want to browse the rest of the blog.

Rabel said...

Damn. She's just too fast for me to keep up.

Saint Croix said...

It's just so damning how few people in the media are pro-life. I mean, Scott Rasmussen is a Republican and he's useless.

That poll question is the mark of a lazy thinker. He just assumes we can't be killing any babies because the authorities wouldn't do that sort of thing.

What a glib fucking Teen Beat poll that is. Why not ask us which Justice is the grooviest?

The Supreme Court is the institution that has defined people as sub-human, and has a 95% kill rate on babies that are handicapped. We're removing the "anomalies" from our society.

Why not poll on the rightness of that?

Why not ask people if the Supreme Court does a good job protecting free speech, or gun rights, or racial equality? At least that would be specific. I think the Supreme Court has done an excellent job on all that stuff.

Or you could ask ordinary citizens if a baby in the womb is a person or is property. You know, that Roe v. Wade case that has infuriated millions of Americans. What about that question, Rasmussen?

Saint Croix said...

Where there's a Stalin there's a Pravda.

Dante said...

Regarding the supreme court, the question isn't too liberal or to conservative, the question is whether or not they are doing their job well, which is to uphold the constitution.