Opinions expressed on the Whig Blog, in the Forums and in comments are those of the individual authors and do not necessarilly represent positions of the Modern Whig Party. The ability to post opinion pieces and comments is not restricted to Whig members (although blog entries are by invitation.) These items are not pre-screened but are subject to our Terms of Use. Please Contact Us or Ask a Question if you have concerns about the content.
Two polls in three days, my kind of research!
For the third installment of my report on potential voter support for the Occupy movement, I first have to thank the good people at the Pew Research Center for this poll just released today online. Specifically, Pew conducted a survey of 1,009 adults in America between October 20th and the 23rd. The poll specifically asked about support for not just the Occupy Wall Street movement but also the Tea Party movement. The poll went a little further to specifically ask how much opposition there was with the public for both movements (instead of just asking how many support them and being left to assume the remaining percentage dislike them).
So what did those surveyed say about these two seemingly opposing movements? (1)
39% of those surveyed support the Occupy Wall Street Movement
32% of those surveyed support the Tea Party Movement
35% of those surveyed oppose the Occupy Wall Street Movement
44% of those surveyed oppose the Tea Party Movement
10% of those surveyed support both movements
14% of those surveyed oppose both movements
Also, 20% of those surveyed weren't sure how they felt about either movements.
But wait, there's more! The good people at Pew also broke down the support for each movement down by political affiliation.
For the OWS movement, their ideological support is as follows:
52% of Democrats support OWS
19% of Republicans support OWS
43% of Independents support OWS
For the Tea Party Movement, the breakdown is:
63% of Republicans support the Tea Party
13% of Democrats support the Tea Party
30% of Independents support the Tea Party
So what does all this mean? Well firstly, the numbers for the Tea Party as a whole did surprise me. Now there has been a lot of talk lately about the Tea Party's support eroding since the 2010 mid-term elections, including a recent New York Times/CBS poll that showed that just 20% of Americans supported the Tea Party movement, with 40% opposing it. (2) Gallup released a poll conducted during August this year that showed 25% of adults polled supported the Tea Party movement, 28% opposing the movement, and 42% who claimed to be neither supporters or opponents of the movement. Further, according to Gallup's tracking of the Tea Party's support, their highest support in their polls was 32% in November 2010. (3)
So as you can see, the support for the Tea Party movement is not exactly easy to pin down. Gallup and the NYT's polls show a decline in Tea Party support since last November while this Pew poll found the numbers of supporters to be quite similar to those high numbers from last fall. Gallup's option of being "neither" a supporter or an opponents is much higher than the other two polls and would seem to explain the gap between theirs and NYT's poll. Regardless, I believe the reason the Tea Party's support MAY have fallen since last fall is simply because their level of exposure has certainly gone down since last fall. I suspect their numbers will go up a bit the closer we get to the 2012 election but we'll have to wait and see..
What this does show is that polls are fickle things and depending on who conducts the poll the results can be rather unpredictable and uneven. The same is bound to be true of any polls involving the Occupy Wall Street.
However, the fact that the new Pew poll and the AP-GfK show similar support for the OWS does give their numbers some good strength in the accuracy department since it's rare for two polls conducted by two different organizations to have such similar numbers. The only major difference in the two polls is the breakdown of support for the OWS. In the AP-GfK poll, 60% of Democrats support the OWS compared to 52% in this new poll.
So what do I think of the numbers for the OWS to date? Personally, the amount of support in the polls today is fairly strong considering how young the movement is. In theory anyway, their numbers are high enough that if this was an election year the movement could have a major political impact. The key words there however are "in theory". The OWS is using much different tactics than the Tea Party did to cause change and as such it's hard for me personally to gauge how successful they will be.
Special thanks to the Pew Research Center for the release of this new poll, lets hope there will be more similar polls to come!
References:
1. http://www.people-press.org/2011/10/24/public-divided-over-occupy-wall-s...
2. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/05/us/politics/05poll.html?_r=1&ref=us
3. http://www.gallup.com/poll/148940/tea-party-sparks-antipathy-passion.aspx
Disclaimer:
The views expressed in this work are solely those of the author and not that of the Modern Whig Party or any other political organization.
I was just at OWS NY and the poll numbers there show that 70% of protesters are for neither of the TWO parties- they are independent or looking for something different (this was published in their new paper and I have a copy). Contrary to FOX news or other republican polls, the OWS movement is protesting BOTH parties- not just republicans. I have a great picture of a cutout of Obama with the phrase "took our dollars but didn't give us change". Protest against both parties -if you can call them two parties- is taking place(Check "current event" forum for details about my visit to OWS last Sunday).
Honestly, polls are a good basic guide, but unless you actullay go there and ask questions and talk to people yourself, you can't trust them fully- obviously.
If 70% of OWS protesters are sick of the REPUBLICRAT PARTY, why are we not jumping on this?? The MWP should be all over this and I do not understand why Evans or whoever is in charge of the MWP is not doing anything?
Occupy has received about $500,000 in donations and has only spent about $66,000 of that. They could use money for candidates to get elected and get real change. Why is the MWP sitting around doing nothing? Because we need to check poll numbers first? We need to see where the OWS really stands? Ok, I understand doing that initially, but it has been almost 2 months now- it is time to make a move and endorse the OWS movement and be their party.
I will be going up to NY again, Baltimore, and DC at some point....alone I guess.
Here is a third email I sent Evans- still no response!!! What the hell!?!?!
Mr. Evans,
I still have not heard back from you. I have been voicing my concern on the MWP forums regarding the Occupy movement and us getting involved somehow- whether supporting some of the cause or at the very least appearing on our own behalf- since there were 23 various groups (a reporter counted on TV) supporting some aspects of the movement, I thought it would be appropriate, especially if we wanted to do our own thing yet distance ourselves from the "commies and smelly hippies," as some MWP members have referred to the OWS protesters (which I think is wrong!).
I believe it would be best to go ALL IN, put our differences aside and "guide" the movement and be the real party for real change and endorse the cause, others on the party forum do not agree- yet......
I have been going back and forth with Jim Bacon about it and have responded to others- I just do not understand why we are not doing something- taking advantage of this movement to promote our party and the need for change in our government. OWS does not want the Dems or Reps....they need a new, third party.
If you have not read any of the posts, perhaps you could and then I could get your opinion. I think it is important to make a move ASAP. If you have been organizing something, I would like to help, if you are against this idea, I would like to know about that too so I can make a decision as to what I want to do or where I want to direct my energy.
If I am going too far up the chain of command, please redirect me so I can receive some sort of feedback from one of the leaders in the MWP.
Thanks for your time,
Nik Swanton
Nik
Posted Oct. 26, 2011, 8:53 p.m. EST by OccupyWallSt
Late last night, Scott Olsen, a former Marine, two-time Iraq war veteran, and member of Iraq Veterans Against the War, sustained a skull fracture after being shot in the head with a police projectile while peacefully participating in an Occupy Oakland march. He remains unconscious in critical condition at Oakland's Highland Hospital.
Olsen was hit at close range. After demonstrators rush to Olsen's aid, an Oakland cop waits a few beats before lobbing a second tear-gas canister at the crowd. They are attending to Olsen when the canister explodes, sending smoke everywhere.
Press release from Iraq Veterans Against the War.
Our hearts and prayers go out to Scott and his family.
PLEASE SHARE THIS VIDEO AND TAKE ACTION!
Call Mayor Quan's office and demand that she investigate this incident and allow peaceful protests to continue: (510) 238-3141
WILL THIS GET THE VETERAN MWP MEMBERS GOING ON THIS OR WHAT!?!?!?!?
COME ON MAN!!!!!!!!!!!
Nik, you hit the nail right on the head. What happened last night in Oakland is absolutely atrocious! I too wonder what the deal here is regarding the MWP and our fellow Americans in the OWS movement.
I will be the first to say that although I am still leery of the OWP movement and think it should be directed at Congress instead I am appalled by the reports I am seeing about Oakland.
Being a Vet myself I feel a particular outrage at this (though in my day it was the protesters who were spitting on me if I was in uniform.)
Nik J. S.
On the issue of polling the protesters themselves, that has little if anything to do with the purpose of my posts. My posts are dedicated to looking to see how much support this movement has with the nation has a whole, not the movement itself. Which party the movement favors is a different topic entirely. The political leanings of this movement is a noteworthy topic, but not directly relevant to my posts IMHO.
As to the events in Oakland, they were quite hard to watch to say the least (I watched much of it live) and made little sense to me. Someone getting hit in the head with a smoke canister or tear gas canister is rare but not unheard of. Whether it has intential or not I suspect will never be known (I would hope it was either an accident of aiming the canister too low or an error) but the use of "flash bangs" against the group that tried to attend to Mr. Olsen was disturbing to say the least and sickening at worst. Justified or not, what happened that night was a terrible scene and should never be repeated.
However, I personally don't see how the horrible wounding of a veteran relates to whether the MWP should support the OWS. Definitely the MWP should denouce the actions of the OPD that night and denounce violence against all peaceful protesters, whether they are veterans or not. However the incident in Oakland doesn't/shouldn't affect whether the MWP should support the OWS or not IMHO. What happened in Oakland had nothing to do with the movement's politics or message, it had to do with police crossing a line.
The decision by the MWP's leadership to either support, denounce, or remain neutral on the OWS should be, in my humble opinion, based on the OWS' actions and posititions, nothing else.
Wmpenn09 (et al),
I am wondering whether or not we will be seeing more of the OWS movement eclipsing and encompassing the ideologies of other movements. I personally believe the OWS people are far too broad-based and widespread to recede. I believe they will continue and be a force to be considered (if not for any other reason than to add voice to a certain proportion of the disaffected populace). Deem it fringe, deem it a flash in the pan, but its presence is altogether self-sustaining. It smacks of permanency and if, as hinted, it narrows its focus, it may yet withstand the winter.
It may sound simplistic but the weather is a factor in all of this. What if the storms of the Midwest and East buffet the Occupy people? In military campaigns of the ancient world, winter was a period for the cessation of hostilities so that basic survival could continue. The whole adage, "...live to fight another day" rings true in this case. At least it does to me.
While I may be alert, active, and vocal, my ideological bent toward or away from a given cause takes a back seat to the kind of life-threatening cold hurled at our good people in the Midwest and East.
Keep the faith (God bless America and Henry Clay),
---Ecclesius
civilitas successit barbarum
I imagine the OWS folks mean well, but they are terribly misguided and uninformed. Their premise is a false one, based on Keynesian beliefs. If they knew better, they would be more productive occupying the Federal Reserve.
Perception is reality. It may not be 100% true but how people perceive the OWS is a group of out of work bellyaching lazy people that think corporations owe them. Now I bet that did raise the blood pressure of many but my first sentence is Perception is reality. How people see the OWS group becomes reality and anyone aligned with this will be seen as the same beliefs. Develop the Wig party independently and do not be jumping on the band wagon to seek publicity with OWS. Develop the MWP with the goals we subscribe. Before endorsing other groups ensure they align with the parties objectives.
Stay true to the following of the six-tenet philosophy. Promote the values of the MWP and avoid aligning with groups that are looked at as radicals. To develop a legitimate viable party we should avoid extremist fanatical stands. Stick to the basic philosophy and goals of thee party. Radical groups will never win the people we need to in order to be seen as a party of the people.
From Wikipedia: “In particular, the Whigs supported the supremacy of Congress over the presidency and favored a program of modernization and economic protectionism.” Stay true to the values and avoid disenfranchising the people the party needs to grow into. A organization the founding fathers would have supported.
AAW, the problem with "Their premise is a false one, based on Keynesian beliefs" is that Keynesian policies, that is, true Keynesian policies, have, historically, been quite successful.
Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer
