Survey: Four in 10 Tea Party members are Dems or independents

[GarfieldtheCat]

How is the new Gallup poll treating you?

So why is your poll so truthful, and the one I posted isn't? Other then one fits what you want to believe, and one doesn't? Ohh, that's logical, not.

Oh, and nice strawman on the gallup poll. I could really care less. I am just pointing out your hypocrisy to blindly criticize and denigrate a poll, based solely on your dislike of the results, while blindly accepting another poll, based solely on your licking of the results.

So what evidence do you have to believe your one poll, vs the one I posted? Come on, you have to except to be called on something like this when you are so vocal in condemning anything any poll disagree with.

 

[ultimatebob]

I have a friend who calls himself an "independent"... but in reality, even the Republican party isn't conservative enough for him. I don't think that he would happy until the Bible was required to be taught in public school, welfare was completely abolished, and performing an abortion was punishable by death. In other words, he's your typical tea party member

 

[sportage]

Well all I know, 10 in 10 are total nut cases. (did someone already post that?)

 

[jman19]

"2.2% *of the total surveyed*" identified themselves as Dems?

If this comes soley from the article, then you can't be serious?

There is nothing whatsoever in the article about what the non- TEA Party respondants - 83% of those polled - claimed for political affiliation.

Your assertion can only be correct if ALL of the other 83% identified themselves as Repubs. That's a mighty powerful, and odd, assumption; can you explain it?

Fern

Read that again - he's absolutely right.

17% surveyed are Tea Baggers, 13% of those are Dems - 17% x 13% = 2.2% Tea Party dems of all ppl surveyed.

 

[Jhhnn]

I have a friend who calls himself an "independent"... but in reality, even the Republican party isn't conservative enough for him. I don't think that he would happy until the Bible was required to be taught in public school, welfare was completely abolished, and performing an abortion was punishable by death. In other words, he's your typical tea party member

I know the type- he thinks Cheney is a commie, right?

Not to mention that a fair number of so-called independents are tightwad repubs, they just register as independents so nobody will ask 'em for money...

 

[mooseracing]

America has always managed it in the past, but seems stuck on stupid now.

Part of the problem might be from the USA becoming a nannny country. How about getting rid of some warning labels, let darwin take it's course. If this country quit protecting so many stupid people we would be alot better off.

 

[zsdersw]

The only ones with the clear vision and thinking skills to address and solve problems. You're all legends in your own minds. The rest of us shake our heads in bewilderment that anyone could actually posses such arrogance.

When you're out of power we laugh at you. When you're in power we laugh at you. You fuck it up every single time. By all means, keep up the spin. By the time you've been kicked to the curb - again, maybe you'll actually believe the shit you've been laying on us.

Everything you ever really needed to know you learned in Kindergarten. Try to move beyond that. You're trying to run a country for Christ's sake, not a sandbox.

.. says someone who identifies with an ideology guilty of the exact same.

 

[her209]

Part of the problem might be from the USA becoming a nannny country. How about getting rid of some warning labels, let darwin take it's course. If this country quit protecting so many stupid people we would be alot better off.

LOL... tell that to the people who own Toyotas with the acceleration problem or people who bought Firestone tires.

 

[dmcowen674]

Survey: Four in 10 Tea Party members are Dems or independents

Bullshit

Who did the survey? Rush, Hannity and Levin???

 

[Fern]

Read that again - he's absolutely right.

17% surveyed are Tea Baggers, 13% of those are Dems - 17% x 13% = 2.2% Tea Party dems of all ppl surveyed.

I see what you're saying. Of the entire population:

1. .02 are TEA Party Dems

2. .04 are TEA Party Independants

.3 .09 are TEA Party Repubs.

But of what significance is that?

The ratio of 13%, 28% and 57% remains the same.

IMO, he attempted to use that 'math' to distort, or minimize, any significance of the assertion that 4 out of 10 TEA Party members are Indies or Dems.

If the point is that not many Dems are TEA party members, the same can be said of Indies or Repubs.

Fern

 

[woolfe9999]

I can understand bias in polls; how the questions are phrased and the results interpretated etc.

But when people self-identify as independants or Dems, how could bias come into play with that?

Are there any other such polls that have a different breakdown as to self identified political affiliations?

Fern

The trouble with the poll is not the pollster. The trouble is that party ID is not the same thing as ideological affiliation. Independents, for example, are not a group of "moderates." It is a group of people who do not affiliate with a political party. Some independents have views that are at extreme left or right, to the point where they will not affiliate with either major political party because neither is extreme enough for their views. Likewise, each political party has members who consistently vote with the other political party and/or have views totally at odds with the party platform. Some people join the "opposing party" just to influence their primaries, while many, many others are people who have changed their views over time but simply haven't gotten around to switching party ID.

In order for a poll like this to be meaningful, it needs to measure affiliation to a political ideology or viewpoint, not a party. The point of interest is not how many tea partiers are registered as democrats, but how many tea partiers identify themselves as liberal and/or progressive. IF they ask the question, how would you describe your political views: very liberal, somewhat liberal, moderate, somewhat conservative, or very conservative, I don't know what the result would be, but I strongly suspect it wouldn't be anything that Patranus would be starting a P&N thread about.

- wolf

 

[Fern]

The trouble with the poll is not the pollster. The trouble is that party ID is not the same thing as ideological affiliation.
-snip-

In order for a poll like this to be meaningful, it needs to measure affiliation to a political ideology or viewpoint, not a party. The point of interest is not how many tea partiers are registered as democrats, but how many tea partiers identify themselves as liberal and/or progressive.
- wolf

Looks to me like they did:

The group is united around two issues – the economy/jobs and reducing the deficit. They believe that cutting spending is the key to job creation and favor tax cuts as the best way to stimulate the economy. That said 61 percent of Tea Party members believe infrastructure spending creates jobs. Moreover, given the choice Tea Party members favor 63-32 reducing unemployment to 5 percent over balancing the budget.

The "cutting the deficit" was a big part of the Dem's campaign to win Congress in 2006. Obama still talks about it.

The "economy & jobs" is bipartisan. Everyone is for that (it's the 'how' where any differences lie).

The "cut taxes" is the best way to stimulate the economy is a Repub/conservative point.

OTOH, the "infrastruture spending" is a Dem point.

IDK which party favors the "reduce unemployment > balancing budget". (Personally I do, but think that's just common sense, more jobs = more gov revenue. And I don't see where any politician who wants to be relected is going favor a balanced budget over more jobs.)

So, looks to me like that group (TEA Party) has a fiscally conservative ideology, and is a mixed bag whether they favor a Dem or Repub approach. I.e., they favor elements of both and lean to neither.

Fern

 

[woolfe9999]

Looks to me like they did:



The "cutting the deficit" was a big part of the Dem's campaign to win Congress in 2006. Obama still talks about it.

The "economy & jobs" is bipartisan. Everyone is for that (it's the 'how' where any differences lie).

The "cut taxes" is the best way to stimulate the economy is a Repub/conservative point.

OTOH, the "infrastruture spending" is a Dem point.

IDK which party favors the "reduce unemployment > balancing budget". (Personally I do, but think that's just common sense, more jobs = more gov revenue. And I don't see where any politician who wants to be relected is going favor a balanced budget over more jobs.)

So, looks to me like that group (TEA Party) has a fiscally conservative ideology, and is a mixed bag whether they favor a Dem or Repub approach. I.e., they favor elements of both and lean to neither.

Fern

Those issue stances are far too vague to identify as either liberal or conservative, other than anti-tax, which is clearly conservative. While they are fiscally conservative, I don't think there is enough information to conclude that their approach is a "mixed bag." Being concerned about jobs and the economy is meaningless. Favoring infrastructure spending is about all you have on the "lib" side, and that stance has been relatively non-controversial; it seems to be the only form of stimulus spending that the republican party has gotten behind. Infrustructure spending is one thing, yet how many tea partiers do you think would support any sort of entitlement which involved wealth redistribution through taxation?

Bottom line is that I seriously doubt a poll which asks the question as lib-moderate-conservative will yield the result that has been inferred from this party ID poll. A few liberals may affiliate with the tea party because they oppose the wall street bailouts and the patriot act, and because some libs oppose the HRL, and it may seem unimportant to them that they oppose it for reasons entirely opposite from why conservatives oppose it. However, I strongly suspect that there are very few self-identified libs in that movement.

- wolf

 

[theeedude]

So for all their pandering to the teabaggers the Republicans can't even nail down more than 60% support from that group? Pathetic.

 

[Fern]

-snip-

I fear we're going about this the round-about way:

They are fiscal conservatives. (But so are many who self-identify as Democrats or Indies.)

Would they support 'wealth redistribution' in the broad sense? I seriously doubt it (Personally I don't think many Americans do.) Individually do some support programs or elements that might meet that definition? IDK, but I suspect so.

So far, they (TEA party) seem to avoid social issues, so IDK where they stand there. Likely some differences since they seem to avoid the matter.

But I do not believe there is anybody in the TEA party who is a 'progressive' or liberal along the lines of Craig234 etc.

This starting to remind me of conversations of just a few months ago - "who is a real Democrat and who is not".

Fern

 

[woolfe9999]

I fear we're going about this the round-about way:

They are fiscal conservatives. (But so are many who self-identify as Democrats or Indies.)

Would they support 'wealth redistribution' in the broad sense? I seriously doubt it (Personally I don't think many Americans do.) Individually do some support programs or elements that might meet that definition? IDK, but I suspect so.

So far, they (TEA party) seem to avoid social issues, so IDK where they stand there. Likely some differences since they seem to avoid the matter.

But I do not believe there is anybody in the TEA party who is a 'progressive' or liberal along the lines of Craig234 etc.

This starting to remind me of conversations of just a few months ago - "who is a real Democrat and who is not".

Fern

There is a difference between one who is fiscally conservative and one who is fiscally responsible. The former wants to limit government spending; the latter wants a balanced budget. Many who are fiscally conservative are also for fiscal responsibility, but not necessarily the other way around. A tax and spend liberal might want a balanced budget, for example. We can't tell by this particular poll how many tea partiers are interested in one versus the other, but we know from general tea party rhetoric that they tend to oppose government spending and think government is "too big." So they want a balanced budget, yes, that doesn't mean much, but what really identifies them is their desire for less government.

But that may not be their only distinguishing characteristic. While the tea partiers officially avoid discussion of social issues, I have noticed republican politicians raising social issues in tea party rallies and protests and getting a positive response. For example, while the HRB was in its final stage, one Congressman gave a speech to the protestors outside, was calling the bill a "baby killer" and was getting cheered by the crowd. Foreign policy is supposed to be another issue where the tea partiers are officially neutral. Yet here again, I recall Tom Trancedo at a tea party rally maligning Obama for wanting to try terrorists in civilian court, saying he was weak on terrorism, and getting big cheers from the crowd.

The interesting thing about both of these positions - anti-choice on abortion, and pro military tribunals - is not just that both are generally on the opposite side from liberalism, but both are generally on the opposite side from libertarianism as well. The thing I hear most often about the ideological diversity of the tea party is not so much that it contains lots of liberals, but that it is largely a libertarian movement. Yet both of these positions are pretty much straight up conservative positions.

I think the group consists mainly of conservatives, the common cause being that they hate liberals, democrats and Barack Obama. This is hardly arguable, as the movement barely existed prior to late 2008, and only now do they occasionally, and belatedely, protest certain Bush policies. Secondarily, there are undoubtedly a fair number of libertarians in the mix, though even Ron Paul has said that there is a lot of tension between him and the tea party over his stance on foreign policy and social issues. Finally, I'm sure there are a smattering of liberals and others who don't really fit the mold. Every group contains such people.

- wolf

 

[Fern]

I'll cut to the chase, at least as I see it.

Is anybody who self-identified as a Dem in that poll like any Dem here? No. (And not like most anywhere.)

Is the TEA party monolithic? No. (At least not IMO, however I understand most here believe they are).

I think they're a coalition loosely organized around fiscal issues.

I do note that the discussion/description of them by the left has changed. Not too long ago they were said to be 'artificial turf', not grass roots. That's mostly changed.

Fern

 

[woolfe9999]

I don't think they're homogenous. I just think they're overwelmingly conservative. And yes, I think the whole movement was a grass roots outpouring of anger over the democrats taking power in government. The movement sprang up during the campaign, and mushroomed particularly from December, 2008 through February, 2009, after Obama had been elected and before he had done a thing. The birther issue, which originated in the campaign, was the original core of the movement, and it has undoubtedly grown from there to add others who are not birthers, though polls have shown that a majority are birthers. The "fiscal" issue is a natural organizing principle because the movement has to have an identification on issues, but there was no grass roots outrage about runaway debt during the last administration, so far as I can recall. I'm not saying the movement doesn't actually care about the debt; I'm saying their awareness of and attention to the issue was occasioned first by their opposition to liberals being in power (or so they perceived as Obama is not much of a liberal), rather than the other way around.

- wolf

 

[Fern]

nm

 

[Jhhnn]

Actually, Fern, I put it in those terms to put the lie to this-

The poll shows that the Tea Party is hardly the conservative fringe groups that the LMSM claims it is.

I'm just trying to put it in an honest perspective. Only 2.2% of the total surveyed identify themselves as Dems who support the Tea Party.

It's his standard troll/deception in other ways, too, basically creating and using the impression that so-called "independents" who support the Tea Party are "moderates", when that hasn't been shown to be the case....

What does a guy call himself when his sentiments are right of the Tea Party? An Independent, obviously....