Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

September 18, 2009

A REGIONAL PARTY.... I was looking over the new results from the weekly Research 2000 poll conducted for Daily Kos. Most of the results are about what we've come to expect -- President Obama's ratings are more favorable than unfavorable (55% to 38%); neither congressional caucus is popular, though Dems are more than twice as popular as Republicans (39% to 18%), and the Democratic Party has a 41% favorable rating to the GOP's 23%.

R2K_GOP.png

But I also like looking at these numbers when broken down by region. I put together this chart, for example, showing Republican Party favorability in the Northeast, South, Midwest, and West. While about a fourth of the country overall has a positive impression of the GOP, it's hard not to notice that the party's strength seems to rest in one specific part of the country.

In case anyone's having trouble reading the visual, the Republican Party's favorability is very weak in Northeast (7% to 87%), and only marginally better in the Midwest (13% to 78%) and West (14% to 75%). In the South, however, 50% have a favorable opinion of the GOP, and only 37% have an unfavorable view.

Time will tell how the electorate responds to changing economic circumstances, the debate over health care reform, etc., and I can very easily imagine Democrats taking a drubbing in the midterms. But it seems the Republican Party would be in a much more competitive position -- in the short and long term -- if its base wasn't centered in just one region.

Steve Benen 2:00 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (59)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

Segregating our republicans...

It ain't over until the fat man sings "Barack the magic negro."

Again.
And again.
And again....

Posted by: koreyel on September 18, 2009 at 2:08 PM | PERMALINK

It's only barely a regional party if only 50% of the people who supposed to be its "base" have a favorable view of it.

Sadly, Democrats in Congress and the White House seem to be totally unaware of how unpopular the Republicans are and allow them to control the message and the direction of the conversation.

Where did the backbone go? I thought 2008 was about FINALLY growing a spine, but they seem to have reverted to the cowardice of the late 1990s.

Posted by: taritac on September 18, 2009 at 2:08 PM | PERMALINK

More like 'Stranger in a Strange Land' living in Georgia.

Posted by: anomaly on September 18, 2009 at 2:10 PM | PERMALINK

The Money Party doesn't want Democrats to have backbone. Pity, it is.

Posted by: anomaly on September 18, 2009 at 2:12 PM | PERMALINK

The chart looks like three of the four regions of the country are giving the Republican party the one-finger salute. Even the south is giving the Republicans the English two-finger salute (though I doubt there are many southerners who watch BBC programmes on PBS enough to recognize it).

And I wonder whether the Republicans' 37 percent unfavorable rating in the south is because some folks think the Republicans are being too polite to the socialist, librul, uppity, Muslim illegal alien who has stolen the White House.


Posted by: Secede__Please! on September 18, 2009 at 2:13 PM | PERMALINK


How long until someone in the Wingnutosphere takes that visual, strips out the actual wording, and uses it to show that the Republicans are overwhelmingly more popular across the country, because there is a hell of a lot of red in it?

Though, seriously, those results show that all the GOP has done over the last 10 months is make itself unelectable outside of the South.

Give it a generation, and the conventional-wisdom is going to be that the GOP can't win a Presidential Election unless they out forward a candidate from a Northern state who can talk the language of pregressive voters.

Which is - very - unlikely to happen. They'az dayud, Momma. They'ze dayud.

Posted by: Tony J on September 18, 2009 at 2:14 PM | PERMALINK

I love it that those crackers favor the party of Lincoln and the abolitionists. Ah, sweet irony of life we love you.

Posted by: buddy66 on September 18, 2009 at 2:18 PM | PERMALINK


"out forward"?

"pregressive"?!?

I can only apologise.

Posted by: Tony J on September 18, 2009 at 2:19 PM | PERMALINK

The graphic appears to show voters in three out of four regions of the country are giving the GOP the finger.

Quite a graphic graphic.

Posted by: Screamin' Demon on September 18, 2009 at 2:22 PM | PERMALINK

I love it that those crackers favor the party of Lincoln and the abolitionists. Ah, sweet irony of life we love you.

On the other hand, Southern Maryland Republicans just held a "Lincoln-Reagan" dinner.

I think Abe just turned over.

Posted by: howie on September 18, 2009 at 2:23 PM | PERMALINK

I think Abe just turned over.

I'm holding out for the giant stone Abe from the monument to get up and go on a rampage.

Posted by: Blue Girl on September 18, 2009 at 2:29 PM | PERMALINK

I look at these polling charts and wonder why the media heads keep talking that the 2010 midterms will be like the 1994 midterms (when the GOP overturned a Dem majority in Congress with a Democrat sitting in the White House). Where will the GOP get the votes to overturn the Democrats 77-plus majority in the House? By the look of things, certainly not from the Northeast... or the Midwest... or the West...

Posted by: PaulW on September 18, 2009 at 2:36 PM | PERMALINK

Something doesn't jive. How D's approval rating be in the 50-60% range on other polls, yet KOS puts it at 3/4ths of the country nearing 90% favorable.

I have a hard time believing their is this hug gap between 'favorable' and 'approval'.

Posted by: ScottW on September 18, 2009 at 2:40 PM | PERMALINK

What I love about this is how 180-degrees wrong turncoat Zell Miller was when he said that the Democratic Party was a "National Party no more".

Posted by: Daryl McCullough on September 18, 2009 at 2:40 PM | PERMALINK

As long as the Democrats maintain a sizable majority in the House, I would not mind losing a few of Rahm's Blue Dogs in this election in return for a more unified, progressive caucus. Maybe in 2012 actual progressives could win some of those "marginal" seats running as real Democrats instead of as lobbyist-beholden near-Republicans.

Posted by: Jim in Chicago on September 18, 2009 at 2:45 PM | PERMALINK

Some people think this confirms the meme that the GOP has been "hijacked" by know-nothing Southern rednecks. But I see it differently. To me, this is the final chapter in a long effort to turn the Republicans from a governing party into a de facto guerilla army, whose sole mission is to prevent this country from progressing any further. The party wasn't hijacked; rather the corporate interests and anti-tax crowd simply discarded all the moderates in favor of a lean, mean fighting machine full of diabetic crackers who will flood the zone whenever Rush or Fox News tells them to. I believe there are elements of the GOP that have no interest in reclaiming power. Sure, that would be a bonus -- but when your raisom d'etre is to simply stand in the way of social progress and equitable distribution of the wealth, you don't need the White House. That's the problems with Democrats -- they want to change stuff, add things, grow the coalition. The GOP is like the Vietcong or the Taliban -- just wear 'em down until they quit.

Posted by: TomTomTommy on September 18, 2009 at 2:46 PM | PERMALINK

Holy cow!

Though I must say it's quite maddening to see the craziness of my fellow southerners on that graphic.

Posted by: fourlegsgood on September 18, 2009 at 3:01 PM | PERMALINK

I agree with PaulW@2.36p. I can't see how, if this poll is correct (and I sure would like it to be!) that Republican hopes (and columnists' prognostications) of Republicans making gains - let alone major gains - in 2010 is possible.

Very questionable. Either this poll or Republican goals.

Posted by: phoebes-in-santa fe on September 18, 2009 at 3:12 PM | PERMALINK

Really, I'd like to see the "west" broken down a bit more; there's a large cultural divide between california's coast and central valleys, not to mention between SoCal and the intermountain west; I'd be willing to bet that the numbers in the intermountain west would be better for the Republicans if they were pulled out into their own portion of the sample.

Posted by: thrashbluegrass on September 18, 2009 at 3:20 PM | PERMALINK

This particular poll doesn't explain why we still have so many senators and congressmen/women from outside the south who are Republicans. Steve's daily "Campaign Round-Up" also usually illustrates Republican candidates still doing fairly well in the polls.

Posted by: qwerty on September 18, 2009 at 3:24 PM | PERMALINK


"Lean, mean fighting machine."

Heh.

It might have looked like a good idea last century, but the problem the GOP hierarchy has is that they've built an army to win the political wars of the last century. The country has moved on, and the GOP is effectively pulling back to inspire their core areas into a last ditch defence. There are no reinforcements coming, the enemy is building up overwhelming threats on every border, and they have no mobile forces still in the field that can break out of the pocket they're trapped in.

It's over.

Posted by: Tony J on September 18, 2009 at 3:26 PM | PERMALINK

The gap between reality and perception is... well... somethin' else! What we're dealing with is a "fair and balanced" media which reports as though the two parties have equal support.

At the same time, the meme is that The Blogosphere is hysterical and wrong-headed. I'd like to see a new graph, Steve, in which you and Josh and a number of other top bloggers go mano a mano head with major media (press and broadcast) on perspicacity, accuracy, and integrity in reporting and commentary on specific issues over the past eight years.

The media's ratings? I bet they'd be hardly big enough to wipe Tinkerbell's shoes on.

Posted by: PW on September 18, 2009 at 3:28 PM | PERMALINK

I must agree with TomTomTommy. The radical repugs don't need to show they can govern. They just need to show that they can make the country ungovernable, while the corporate class loots what's left of the federal and state treasuries, as well as the middle class's pocketbooks.

Makes sense to me.

Posted by: Ed in Montana on September 18, 2009 at 3:30 PM | PERMALINK

It occurs to me that the flip side of the healthcare fight being the President's "Waterloo", is the fact that it may well be the Republican's Waterloo. Given that: 1. They have become a regional party; 2. Once healthcare is in place the Democratic Party could be in power "...for a generation."; 3. The Republican Party of bygone years has disappeared; then successful passage of the healthcare in any reasonable form might well end the Republican Party.

This is even more likely because of how hard they are fighting it: If people like having affordable healthcare, then they might well recall that the Republicans were the Party that lied constantly about it and were responsible for preventing us from getting good healthcare for the last 50 years!

This could go beyond a political wilderness, this could be an extinction event.

Posted by: MichMan on September 18, 2009 at 3:53 PM | PERMALINK

interestingly enough, these regional charts are close to the mirror image of obama's approvial numbers...

and @ qwerty....outside the south, i wouldn't describe what's left of the gop congressional delegation as "so many."

they have three senators in the midwest [ia,oh,in] three in the northeast [me,me, nh], and one on the west coast [ak.] ....i think half of the 40 they have left are in the south or the mormon zone...24 of the 50 states currently don't have a republican senator

as for the house, the gop has zero seats in new england and are the minority party in every region other than the south...the dems currently hold the majority of house seats in two midwestern states where the gop drew the maps, oh and wi...

i'm with paulw....where is that gop comeback gonna come from? they'd have to flip almost every suburban seat they lost in the last two cycles to even get close..

if they can't get the midwest back, they have no way of becoming a national party again

Posted by: dj spellchecka on September 18, 2009 at 3:59 PM | PERMALINK

I'll bet they called Texas part of the west, rather than the south, which would lower the South's favorable numbers and raise the West's.

Posted by: anandine on September 18, 2009 at 4:02 PM | PERMALINK

Something doesn't jive. How D's approval rating be in the 50-60% range on other polls, yet KOS puts it at 3/4ths of the country nearing 90% favorable.

I'd be curious to see the internals of each set of polls. The Kos poll is broken out regionally -- are the other ones? Because Obama's numbers are so low in the South, it's entirely possible for them to drag the rest of the numbers down with them to the 50 percent mark.

You also need to check if the polls are going for 50/50 Democrat/Republican. Since Republican identification is down to something like 30 percent of voters, giving them 50 percent of the poll would be massively overcounting them.

Posted by: Mnemosyne on September 18, 2009 at 4:05 PM | PERMALINK

You can't make sense of this data unless you look at the corresponding Dem graph. There's nothing that says a voter can't disapprove of both parties. And, if you go to the link, you'll see that a majority of voters in the Midwest, West, and South have an unfavorable view of the Democrats, too. So what you've got is a Democratic party strong in the Northeast, a Republican party strong in the South, and a West and Midwest that don't like either one very much, although certainly more disapproving of Republicans than of Dems.

Posted by: Bloix on September 18, 2009 at 4:07 PM | PERMALINK

It's the new Southern Strategy: Corporate America is using the threat of Southern belligerence to hold the rest of the country in line. Which isn't so different from the old Southern Strategy...

Posted by: dr sardonicus on September 18, 2009 at 4:10 PM | PERMALINK

I don't understand then, why Repubs are doing so well (really, or just in (R)-ass-musin' polls?), getting close to Dems they say.

BTW, I am really amazed at the low R-ratings in West and MW!

Posted by: Neil B ♪ on September 18, 2009 at 4:12 PM | PERMALINK

I will be on watch for the Republicans to do just that - spin this to say R's are wildly popular.....and when I find it, ON FOX no doubt, then what? Who do we go to? After all, there isn't a respectable journalist in the nation that THEY will listen to, is there?

There is NO WAY to ever FORCE any logic/integrity/knowledge into the dumbest OR greediest folks in the nation.

Rick Sanchez asked today if CNN should be doing more to let their viewers know when FOX lies; HELL YES, what a dumb Q - isn't THAT kind of thing the JOB of journalists/media?!? This makes me sick.......all the lying and brain washing going on.....keep fighting folks!

Posted by: mfpdx on September 18, 2009 at 4:13 PM | PERMALINK

"The South" aint as popular in the rest of the country as the talking heads would have you believe either

Posted by: jefft452 on September 18, 2009 at 4:13 PM | PERMALINK

It's scandalous how much influence the South has had in our politics, how the hell did it happen?

Posted by: N e i l B on September 18, 2009 at 4:17 PM | PERMALINK

I'd be curious to see the internals of each set of polls. The Kos poll is broken out regionally -- are the other ones? Because Obama's numbers are so low in the South, it's entirely possible for them to drag the rest of the numbers down with them to the 50 percent mark.


I've noticed that the national polls are rarely broken down by region. One of the few lately I have seen is the recent AP/GFK poll, where Obama's approval/disapproval was 50/49. It's on the Real Clear Politics list near the bottom of the ones still being used in their average. Looks bad, but the breakdown showed 35% of the respondents were from the south, compared to around 20% for the other 4 regions. If the regions were more proportionally represented, I suspect the numbers would have been closer to the 55/43 margin that seems to be the norm right now.

Posted by: observer on September 18, 2009 at 4:19 PM | PERMALINK

people...might well recall that the Republicans were the Party that lied constantly

You're kidding right? We're talking about Americans here. They can barely remember what happened last week, much less over the last fifty years.

Posted by: Juanita de Talmas on September 18, 2009 at 4:26 PM | PERMALINK

"It's scandalous how much influence the South has had in our politics, how the hell did it happen?"

Sherman was a slacker?

Posted by: jefft452 on September 18, 2009 at 4:26 PM | PERMALINK

Heh, my g-g-paw marched to the sea with Sherm, who was no slacker. Maybe a group that can tilt from one end to the other over time, is seen as needing to be courted.

Posted by: N e i l B on September 18, 2009 at 4:38 PM | PERMALINK

*cough*RACISM*cough*

Pardon me...

Posted by: Will on September 18, 2009 at 4:49 PM | PERMALINK

Looks like the other three areas of the country are giving Rethuglicans the bird.

Posted by: fry1laurie on September 18, 2009 at 4:51 PM | PERMALINK

Anandine:

No, TX is in the "South" for the purposes of reporting. From the linked page:

Northeast: DC, ME, VT, NY, MD, PA, CT, DE, MA, NH, RI, WV, NJ

South: FL, NC, SC, AL, MS, GA, VA, TN, KY, LA, AR, TX

Midwest: IL, MN, MI, OH, WI, IA, MO, KS, IN, ND, SD, OK, NE

West: NM, CA, OR, WA, AK, HI, MT, ID, UT, NV, AZ, WY, CO

Posted by: Brock on September 18, 2009 at 4:52 PM | PERMALINK

....i think half of the 40 they have left are in the south or the mormon zone

Well, a lot of that "mormon" zone is in the west. There are ten (R) senators in Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, and Alaska.

Posted by: qwerty on September 18, 2009 at 4:52 PM | PERMALINK

I will be on watch for the Republicans to do just that - spin this to say R's are wildly popular.....and when I find it, ON FOX no doubt, then what? Who do we go to? After all, there isn't a respectable journalist in the nation that THEY will listen to, is there?

There is NO WAY to ever FORCE any logic/integrity/knowledge into the dumbest OR greediest folks in the nation.

Rick Sanchez asked today if CNN should be doing more to let their viewers know when FOX lies; HELL YES, what a dumb Q - isn't THAT kind of thing the JOB of journalists/media?!? This makes me sick.......all the lying and brain washing going on.....keep fighting folks!

Posted by: mfpdx on September 18, 2009 at 5:19 PM | PERMALINK

A few random observations...

If we recalculate President Obama's favorability rating based on only the Northeast, Midwest, and West, approval is 67% and disapproval is 26%.

More than half (53%) of those who disapprove of the President are from the South.

The President won the election by a 53-46 popular vote margin, so his 55-38 approval-disapproval outperforms the election results. Even Gallup has Obama's current approval-disapproval as 51-42. It's unlikely that many of the 46% who voted for McCain/Palin approve of the President now.

But oddly enough, the President seems to have picked up support from McCain voters in the Northeast, while losing support among his own voters in the South...

Northeast
Popular Vote: Obama 59.4, McCain 39.1
Research 2000: Approva 82, Disapprove 10

Midwest
Popular Vote: Obama 53.0, McCain 45.4
Research 2000: Approve 62, Disapprove 31

West
Popular Vote: Obama 55.9, McCain 41.9
Research 2000: Approve 59, Disapprove 34

South
Popular Vote: Obama 46.1, McCain 52.8
Research 2000: Approve 27, Disapprove 67

Total
Popular Vote: Obama 52.9, McCain 45.6
Research 2000: Approve 55, Disapprove 38

Posted by: KTinOhio on September 18, 2009 at 6:03 PM | PERMALINK

Secede__Please: a large percentage of that 37 percent in the South who disapprove of Republicans have reason to: they're African-American. Not sure of the exact percentage of that population in the South as a region as a whole (the Census site is great on state data, but not on regions), but I'd guess a bit over 20 percent of residents of that region are Afr-Am. Which would make up over half of those disapprovers; a growing Hispanic population would make up quite a few of the rest. And being a southern white liberal can be lonely; I remember being literally the only white guy at my school for Mondale...

Posted by: noplot on September 18, 2009 at 6:47 PM | PERMALINK

Bloix:
Democratic party: fav/unfav/ no opinion
NORTHEAST 62 26 12
SOUTH 20 70 10
MIDWEST 46 47 7
WEST 44 48 8

Republican party:

NORTHEAST 7 87 6
SOUTH 50 37 13
MIDWEST 13 78 9
WEST 14 75 11

You can make believe that these two are the same, but an even approve/disapprove is a wee bit different than a 65 point deficit for most of us.

Posted by: Marc on September 18, 2009 at 10:19 PM | PERMALINK

Thrashbluegrass:

"Really, I'd like to see the "west" broken down a bit more; there's a large cultural divide between california's coast and central valleys, not to mention between SoCal and the intermountain west; I'd be willing to bet that the numbers in the intermountain west would be better for the Republicans if they were pulled out into their own portion of the sample."

Actually, a more relevant breakdown would be between the urban parts of cities, and suburbs/small towns/rural areas, country-wide, in all regions. That's where much of the divide is, and somewhat understandably. People are exposed to different sorts of stresses according to which one of the above they inhabit. It's by no means as simple as comparing coastal California with all other areas of the West.

Posted by: Wolfdaughter on September 18, 2009 at 11:03 PM | PERMALINK

”Heh, my g-g-paw marched to the sea with Sherm, who was no slacker”

Just joking, I wouldn’t disparage uncle Billy

”Maybe a group that can tilt from one end to the other over time, is seen as needing to be courted.”

Hmmm.. no I don’t think so
The South hasn’t tilted over time. They have the exact same ideology that they had 100, 200 or 300 years ago.
There have always been 3 parties in this country, Dem, GOP, and Southern
Dem & GOP have gone by different names and have flipped ideologies over the centuries, but the Southern party was always the party of the feudalistic planter aristocracy and would demand concessions from the other 2 parties to tip the balance on one side or the other
Whats different now is that the old GOP and the Dems have allied, (Howard Dean could have easily fit into the Republican party of 40-50 yrs ago), leaving the Southern party as the odd man out

Posted by: jefft452 on September 19, 2009 at 1:46 AM | PERMALINK

Actually I went to the poll graphs that your report from which your poll gets its information.

The actual geographic part of the poll shows that the only geographical region where Obama is getting even 50% is in the ultra-liberal Northeast. In every other region Obama is below 50% approval. In the South where Obama and the Democrats keep calling everyone racists, Obama's approval ratings are plummeting from where they once were.

Posted by: Jerry on September 19, 2009 at 2:30 PM | PERMALINK

You can make believe that an almost even popularity split (dems, west and midwest) is exactly the same as a 65 point deficit (repubs, outside south.) Are you even convincing yourself?

Posted by: Marc on September 19, 2009 at 3:33 PM | PERMALINK

i wrote...."i think half of the 40 they have left are in the south or the mormon zone

qwerty wrote... Well, a lot of that "mormon" zone is in the west. There are ten (R) senators in Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, and Alaska."

i should have said the "mormon/militia zone" which i consider to be ut, id and wy..that's 6 of the 10 western senators....add the south and you're well over halfway to 40...sorry for any confusion

Posted by: dj spellchecka on September 19, 2009 at 4:32 PM | PERMALINK

Wow, the Dems are really reaching on this one. So the south...what....doesn't count?

This is nonsense. The GOP is going to pick up a ton of seats in the 2010 midterms. I'll look forward to what sort of rationalizations the left comes up with then.

Posted by: Ed on September 20, 2009 at 1:33 AM | PERMALINK

ed: The GOP is going to pick up a ton of seats in the 2010 midterms.


and..

saddam had nukes...

and...

this is a mental recession...

and...

obama is a muslim...

gop declarative statements: any suckers left?

Posted by: mr. irony on September 20, 2009 at 8:07 AM | PERMALINK

I'm sure this has been brought up (haven't read all the comments -- sorry), but ...

CAN SOMEONE PLEASE SHOW THIS TO THE DEMOCRATS IN CONGRESS AND THE WHITE HOUSE?!?!?!?!?

Oh, and if someone else could inform the media, I'd appreciate it.

kthxbai

Posted by: Mark D on September 20, 2009 at 9:34 AM | PERMALINK

Jerry wrote [September 19, 2009 at 2:30 PM]:The actual geographic part of the poll shows that the only region where Obama is getting even 50% is in the ultra-liberal Northeast. In every other region Obama is below 50% approval."

i'm guessing that jerry got these two charts mixed up

CONGRESSIONAL DEMOCRATS
approve/disapprove
NORTHEAST 53 43
SOUTH 21 72
MIDWEST 45 51
WEST 43 53

PRESIDENT OBAMA
approve/disapprove
NORTHEAST 82 10
SOUTH 27 67
MIDWEST 62 31
WEST 59 34

Posted by: dj spellchecka on September 20, 2009 at 2:15 PM | PERMALINK

Lots of unverified information. Who were test subjects? When and how was data accumulated and from whom was it gathered. It represents far too much information, jammed together and interpreted in way to arrive at support for a predetermined result. Smarten up Steve, not everyone in your audience is an 11 year old

Posted by: cris on September 20, 2009 at 5:43 PM | PERMALINK

The only way that Democrats will lose any ground in 2010 is if Democratic voters simply walk away in disgust at the lack of progress from those who were supposed to give us "change". That is a very real possibility, considering the screw job that Congress is trying to give us on health care and multiple failures to roll back (or bring to account for) the abuses of the Bush Administration.

Since polls are conducted mainly over land lines, which already skews results, I'd be interested in seeing the numbers on how many in the South have landlines versus the rest of the nation. Could this be why such a large percentage of the polling data came from the south (as noted by "observer" at 4:19 PM), that it was simply easier to get southerners on the phone? With the bias of southerners, any poll with an excess number of them would also be biased.
I'd also be curious if the 2010 census will be asking about things like phone access and political affiliation?

Posted by: daveawayfromhome on September 20, 2009 at 10:08 PM | PERMALINK

Anyone who takes the Daily Kos poll as the final say on the GOP's standing is simply out of their minds.

Posted by: Steve on September 21, 2009 at 10:15 AM | PERMALINK

"Anyone who takes the Daily Kos poll as the final say on the GOP's standing is simply out of their minds.

Posted by: Steve on September 21, 2009 at 10:15 AM "

.....It's a perfectly respectable poll conducted for them by Research 2000.......who commissioned the poll is irrelevant........of course these numbers are not the last word but by any measure these numbers are horrific for the GOP......for some reason they seem to nurse the illusion that the Dems are going to lose big in the mid terms because of the passage of healthcare reform......but Bill Kristol said it had to be fought tooth and nail because it was going to be a) very popular and b)irreversible.....but then Republicans have long given up on intellectual consistency.

Posted by: John(2) on September 21, 2009 at 3:08 PM | PERMALINK

at the bottom of the results is the explaination of how the poll was conducted and who was asked:

A total of 2400 adults nationally were interviewed by telephone. A cross-section of calls was made into each state in the country in order to reflect the adult population nationally.

Men 1151 48%
Women 1249 52%
Democrats 745 31%
Republicans 527 22%
Independents 601 25%
Other 119 5%
Non Voters 408 17%
White 1703 71%
Black 337 14%
Latino 287 12%
Other/Ref 73 3%
18-29 432 18%
30-44 791 33%
45-59 697 29%
60+ 480 20%
Northeast 504 21%
South 719 30%
Midwest 650 27%
West 527 22%

The margin for error, according to standards customarily used by statisticians, is no more than plus or minus 2% percentage points. This means that there is a 95 percent probability that the “true” figure would fall within that range if the entire adult population were sampled. The margin for error is higher for any demographic subgroup, such as gender, race, or region.

Posted by: dj spellchecka on September 21, 2009 at 4:45 PM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly