Walker has more than doubled his support since his 11% standing on our January national poll...ADDED: Here are the details — PDF. This is particularly interesting:
Walker is climbing fast in the polling because of his appeal to the most conservative elements of the Republican electorate. Among 'very conservative' voters he leads with 37% to 19% for Carson, 12% for Bush, and 11% for Huckabee. Bush has a similarly large lead over Walker with moderates at 34/12...the problem for Bush though is that there are two times more GOP primary voters who identify as 'very conservative' than there are ones who identify as moderates.
Congratulations to the Scott Walker supporters for coming in with the lowest percentage on this one, but, jeez, Republicans. I mean, we're not in danger of this becoming law. It would be blatantly unconstitutional. But these numbers are awful.
Posts
59 comments:
I would think this would make it easier to fundraise. (oh jeesh, look what I did. Can't wait for the "Koch Brothers!" from Garage)
I don't get the Ben Carson surge. He's a good, smart man, but electing a guy President without ever holding elected office? Iffy.
IIRC, the G. W. Bush operation ran a river of sewage over McCain in the 2000 SC primary. And Romney attacked his Republican opponents harder than he ever attacked Obama. I'm curious to see what garbage Jeb's team dumps on Walker. The Democrats might be Walker's weakest opponents.
I'm waiting for the survey of Dems about outlawing religion in public life.
Bit of a sadist, aren't you, Althouse? Garage is already writhing in agony.
Even though Rand Paul is the libertarian in this race, a clear majority of his supporters want to make Christianity the official national religion. That's higher than the average for the GOP base as a whole.
I'm surprised that Rand Paul has such devout Christian support.
The term "leader" is pretty meaningless when the numbers are this low.
Notice also that George W. Bush has a higher favorability rating among Republicans than do any of the probable 2016 GOP candidates.
The GOP base likes Dubya even more than they like Scott Walker.
I think I know why.
One question that PPP should have asked each respondent, but didn't:
"Do you personally know someone who served or is serving in the military?"
Re: ADDED
What?!
If you scroll to the bottom of the PDF, you'll shake your head at young people.
"The term "leader" is pretty meaningless when the numbers are this low."
He went from 11% to 25% in one month. At that rate...
sinz52: "Notice also that George W. Bush has a higher favorability rating among Republicans than do any of the probable 2016 GOP candidates."
Not hard to understand.
W was in the arena for 8 years and even though he executed policies that many republicans/conservatives disagreed with and, along with Rove, literally chose not to defend their own record for the last several years, we see the results of the Walker phenomenon with Bush.
When his attackers are that insane the wagons will get circled.
This is neither surprising, novel, unique, unprecedented, strange, unexplainable, etc.
There is already an established "secular" religion, complete with articles of faith, fairy tales, amoral tenets, tithing, interpretive priests, mortal gods or executives, and, in ancient pagan tradition, human sacrifice.
I wonder why people would think less of Christianity that only promises judgment in their postmortem.
I suppose we should follow the secular profits that promise wealth, pleasure, leisure, and egoistic gratification. Ah, that's it. Pass the opiates.
But these numbers are awful.
What numbers? Nowhere did I see a count of the number of people surveyed.
Carson is the new Cain. Plenty of republicans want to be able to say: "I'm not racist. I voted for the black guy. "
Doesn't mean anything unless you also poll Democrats. The constituency most supportive of Obama is also the one least supportive of same-sex marriage and most receptive to the idea of a national church.
I'd really like to know just exactly how the phrase/question "Support establishing Christianity as the national religion" was put/asked.
As sinz52 points out above, it's really difficult to believe that 62% of Rand Paul supporters would go for such a blatantly unconstitutional formulation.
I smell a rat here.
@JohnGalt:I'm waiting for the survey of Dems about outlawing religion in public life.
That's silly. Democrats don't want to outlaw Islam.
Give him another month and he will be pulling an astonishing 137% of likely voters! The man is a prodigy. We can save ourselves a lot of trouble and jump right to the inauguration.
Amazing! Walker has gone from Liftoff to Escape Velocity in three weeks.
A Wermacht General commenting upon seeing that fast of a breakout movement in Normandy through Avranches on August 1 1944 said, "Good grief, that has to be Patton's Army."
I wonder how many people who said "Yes" to establishing Christianity as the state religion think we already have a state religion, and they prefer Christianity.
They may think that our state religion is secularism, or materialism, or feminism, or multiculturalism -- or perhaps it's all of these.
It is not clear what "establishing Christianity as the national religion means."
To person who understands the constitution and the establishment clause, the question is clearly absurd and even offensive. However a layperson may interpret it like the bald eagle being the national animal.
Also, the follow-up question whether they would "oppose" the same designation is confusing because it suggests that some other religion should be the national religion.
"Carson is the new Cain. Plenty of republicans want to be able to say: "I'm not racist. I voted for the black guy. ""
No, Republicans don't think that way, thats the way the Dems think. If a black man is conservative, we like him. We like Clarence Thomas and none of us voted for him and its the same with Condoleezza Rice.
This is why if Huckabee were to get the nomination -- if Huckabee were even on the ticket -- I would vote for the Democrat. Huckabee is literally the only Republican candidate I can think of where I wouldn't even hesitate to vote for Obama instead. The media blather about Republican theocracy is usually just so much empty-headed hysteria. With Huckabee, it would take on a tinge of plausibility.
Bush has a similarly large lead over Walker with moderates at 34/12...the problem for Bush though is that there are two times more GOP primary voters who identify as 'very conservative' than there are ones who identify as moderates.
The problem for Bush is the abject scorn his camp heaps on the Tea Party, or what's left of it. Real or not, that's the perception. Karma is a bitch.
The primaries are a year away. These polls about the candidates tell us a little bit about name recognition, likability, and class identification. Not much else.
As far as the Christianity question, I don't give any weight to polls on questions of that sort. The poll doesn't tell you what the general public "thinks" about the issue. At best they tell you what people who are wiling to answer a poll want to tell a pollster. You could completely skew the results of the poll by offering the option, "Go piss up a rope." There are lots of polls where the piss up a rope answer gets a huge vote. Options like GWB planned 9/11, or BHO is a Kenyan, socialist atheist are piss up a rope options. They are chosen by people who want to send a message more than people who are saying wat they "believe."
Silly Ann
Of COURSE it would be unconstitutional. That's why republicans who support it support a constitutional amendment to make it so.
Its been a fairly popular idea since Lincoln, who quasi-supported it
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_amendment
n.n said...
There is already an established "secular" religion, complete with articles of faith, fairy tales, amoral tenets, tithing, interpretive priests, mortal gods or executives, and, in ancient pagan tradition, human sacrifice.
You forgot about indulgences -- carbon credits to assuage the guilty footprinters.
[from the link]: Republican voters nationally actually have one elected official they like better than any of their potential choices for President- Benjamin Netanyahu has a 57% favorability rating. Huckabee at 56%, Carson at 54%, and Walker at 51% come closest but none of them are liked by as many voters in their party base as the Israeli Prime Minister.
Bibi in your next poll, Prof.?
Walker is climbing fast because he's coming under so much fire in such rabidly insane ways.
It's not real support when that's all it's based on.
If primaries were being held this week, it wouldn't matter, a vote is a vote, but with the first primary nearly a year away all this is doing is raising his profile and helping him fundraise.
Much of this is name recognition at this stage--it's why Hillary leads in the polls. It'll be time to start watching come next January, when they'll all have had to get the media exposure they need.
I expect also for Rubio to drop out by then.
clint: "It's not real support when that's all it's based on."
True, but it does position him in a very advantageous way to close the deal, if he can, in the primaries.
Rep voters are already predisposed to support him based on all that has occurred to date.
Big advantage, particularly in the early states.
Ann,
How was the question phrased?
If it was, "If a National Religion were established, should it be Christianity?" would you be equally appalled?
I mean, if the question assumed an Unconstitutional occurrence, would you fault people for stating their preference or not rejecting the premise?
I see the question was, "Would you support or oppose establishing Christianity as the national
religion?"
The use of the definite article may presuppose to certain respondents that there is going to be a national religion.
PPP is a Democratic operation. They presumably phrased the Christianity question the way they did to provide "ZOMG Chritianists on the march" ammunition for the DNC.
Why assume that most respondents were unfamiliar with the First Amendment? The answers are compatible with the notion that respondents took the question as
counterfactual, and answered it accordingly: if there were to be a state religion (we know there can't be), would you support or oppose making Christianity the national religion?
On a question like that, there's not much harm in going with the home team.
More than 60% of Rand Paul supporters gave an answer you're taking as evidence these Republicans actually want to make Christianity the national/state religion, and that passes your smell test, Professor? Either you've never met Paul supporters or you've got your extra-credible pants on tonight.
"Support establishing Christianity as the national religion"
One of the stupidest media questions of a week filled with them.
Public Policy Trolling is at it again.
Public Policy Polling is a small Democratic outfit out of North Carolina, and after they had done three or four of these kinds of things (and most particularly after they set foot into polling about coaching changes at my beloved University of Michigan), I questioned them about who was commissioning these high-publicity polls.
I should not have been surprised at the answer. "No one," was the reply. They do them on their own, to get the name of Public Policy Trolli- er, Polling into the news.
You won't see Public Policy Polling going into inner city neighborhoods and conducting polls about religion, or homosexuality, or anything else that would embarrass their Democrat paymeasters.
Boob bait.
""He went from 11% to 25% in one month. At that rate..."
At that rate a newborn human would be the size of the empire state building. Growth rates are instantaneous and not sustained, most of the time.
Do you mean this is not a Christian Country??? When did that happen?
That is going to disappoint Netanyhu when he comes over. But Congress still has a Christian prayer before each session.
Oh well, back to preaching the Gospel again.
I do not believe the religion survey. I am 67 years old. I have lived in Alabama, North Carolina, Illinois, Virginia, DC, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Texas, part of that time as a member of a Methodist or Presbyterian church. I have never met anyone who thought the US should have an official religion. Never.
I suspect the question was asked in an ambiguous way and re-phrased to get this result. IOW, a lie!
chickelit:
You're right. It's time for a reformation. And what better place than in Protestant America.
Prof. Althouse, you seem to be overly impressed with the importance of polls.
The only polls that count are the ones at which people show up to vote.
Let me put it another way:
The only conceivable relevance of a public opinion poll is that it proves someone wanted the result that ended up being reported, and was willing to pay for that.
Not a single damned thing more.
Garbage in, garbage out — and all poll questions, without exception, are garbage. But they're refined and carefully polished garbage. Indeed, without exception, poll questions are garbage sequenced and arranged and crafted to produce a pre-ordained or desired result, for which someone has paid good money, usually in cash up front.
Althouse---
It's PPP. I wouldn't trust them as far as I can spit. Read some of Nate Cohn's articles from last year on why you should not trust their numbers.
PPP is a left wing polling outfit. I'm surprised anyone takes their results as anything but BS.
Usually, they are used as an example of left wing polling, as in "Imagine what the lefties are thinning !"
I do not believe that most of the respondents understood what it means to establish a state religion. If you were to tell the respondents if the government should own and run the Church as a bureaucracy (and that is what it means to establish a religion in this context), I imagine most of them would have been horrified.
There are two ways to use these results to try to get a grip on where the votes are going to accumulate as the field narrows: one, who are the second choice candidates and two, who have the smallest amounts of unfavorability.
Ben Carson looks strong based on being many people's second choice. However, that could also mean he is seen as a safe second choice because few expect him to go the distance.
If you focus on the "unfavorable" ratings, Scott Walker looks poised to go even higher since he has the lowest negative rating among all candidates: just 10%.
Those with comparatively high negative ratings but poor overall support should be getting concerned. I'm looking at you, Rand Paul and Chris Christie.
Blogger dreams said...
"Carson is the new Cain. Plenty of republicans want to be able to say: "I'm not racist. I voted for the black guy. "
No, Republicans don't think that way, thats the way the Dems think. If a black man is conservative, we like him. We like Clarence Thomas and none of us voted for him and its the same with Condoleezza Rice.
2/24/15, 6:34 PM
Baloney. You're kidding yourself if you think people who have no idea about Carson's opinion on topics such as gun control, illegal immigration and amnesty, and the expansion of the federal government yet still support him for president are doing so because they think he's conservative. In fact, if there's one thing we know about Carson's public policies is that he's a gun-grabber. Nothing conservative or republican about that. He is very similar to Cain, an African-American unknown without any political experience who'd had personal and private sector success. He declares for the presidency and formulates some rubbery republicanish platform like Cain's 9-9-9 nonsense, or taps Newt Gingrich as a campaign adviser and we're off to the races! 15-20% support for the presidency right out of the chute for someone who has never held office, never campaigned for election, never been in the public eye. Why did these guys start out with such positive numbers? Walker's been governor of a state for four years, been victorious through two recalls, has soundly established conservative credentials, challenged democrat powerhouses and won, yet two months ago he had half the numbers of Carson. If you think it's because they look at Cain and Carson and see a conservative republican then we have to disagree. They see a black guy running as a republican and they think- I want to support that.
I would be surprised if those polled meant "establish" in the First Amendment sense.
Most of the Christians I know would be thrilled for people who became Christians, but would not believe the gov't could, or should, require it. It's a salvation thing, not a power thing.
The religion survey is horse crap. Like many others here, I get a strong whiff of rat.
As a Christian I would be terrified if the gov't made Christianity the national religon. First of all they'd screw up a good thing. Then they would start amending text.
Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and leave the rest alone.
Congratulations to the Scott Walker supporters for coming in with the lowest percentage on this one, but, jeez, Republicans. I mean, we're not in danger of this becoming law. It would be blatantly unconstitutional. But these numbers are awful.
Well, Repubs do tend to be otnay ootay ightbray. On the other hand, I figure they're the most likely to lower my taxes and otherwise leave me alone. So, go Repubs!
Smilin' Jack said...
Well, Repubs do tend to be otnay ootay ightbray.
Right, they're so stupid, unlike super duper smart people who always vote "D" and end up electing super duper smart and awesome public servants like Barry Obama, and Joe Biden, and Hillary and Bill, and John Kerry, and Barney Frank, and Alan Grayson, and Cynthia McKinney, and Debbie Waserman-Schultz, and Richard Blumenthal, and Howard Dean etc. Newsflash!: Democrat party member thinks republicans are dumb! The same democrat party members and their leaders like John F. Kerry think that anyone who joins the military is dumb, and that the military is comprised of knuckle-dragging morons. These arrogant and delusional democrat party asswipes never stop to consider for a second how such stupid Army-men can fly jets and helicopters and develop weapons and intelligence systems and utilize skills and experience to perform tasks that not 1% of the general populace could understand, let alone mimic. But yeah, dude, republicans aren't too bright. It's just too bad that democrats are completely in the dark.
It is perfectly possible, in the abstract, to establish Christianity as the "state religion" same as it is perfectly possible to repeal the 2nd amendment. If the democratic will is there, it will happen.
But it is more fun to pretend that it is impossible or would be unconstitutional or something else.
But you could put me down as Pro Walker and as an anti-establishmentarianist.
I'm surprised Ben Carson gets second place. I haven't heard much about him in the news lately.
Be careful reading those "details."
They represent percentages of percentages. In some of those cases the numbers are starting to get really small. Rick Perry's numbers for example. Are Rick Perry supporters rabid Christianists as the numbers indicate? Not necessarily. I immediately recognised that 83% 17% 0% split for what it probably is - six people split 5 to 1.
After the 2012 elections, I went back and tabulated the votes that went to
the Tea Party candidates vs those that were considered "moderates". The Tea
Party candidates, in the first 6 months of primary season actually received
more vote en-Toto than the moderates.
Problem was, the 5 Tea Party candidates split that majority vote between
each other, and by the time enough of the Tea Party candidates had dropped
out to give themselves a better chance of competing for votes, it was a
ready too late - there was no way they could get enough votes for the
nomination, so the majority, begrudgingly, swung around and supported Mitt.
If the Tea Party wing can get behind one candidate early on, then there is
a very good chance their guy, or gal, can capture the nomination.
PS. I'm on my phone, and linking is a PITA. Later, when I' m home, I can
link to the post that shows the totals if you'd like.
--
Mike @ Sonicfrog.net
The problem is that the vote is twenty two mother fracking months from now. Must we constantly eschew real news for this who's up / who's down garbage? Ask president Michelle Bachman, Steve Forbes, or Pat Robertson how important being ahead in Iowa is.
Post a Comment