Daily Kos/Research 2000 Poll of Self-Identified Republicans

[SzczerbiakManiac]

Detailed Breakdown of the Poll Results (http://www.dailykos.com/statepoll/2010/1/31/US/437)

Commentary by the Poll's Initiator (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/2/2/832988/-The-2010-Comprehensive-Daily-Kos-Research-2000-Poll-of-Self-Identified-Republicans)

Here are a few of my "favorites"
Do you believe Barack Obama wants the terrorists to win? Yes 24
No 43
Not Sure 33

Do you believe Barack Obama is a racist who hates White people? Yes 31
No 36
Not Sure 33

Should public school students be taught that the book of Genesis in the Bible explains how God created the world? Yes 77
No 15
Not Sure 8

Should contraceptive use be outlawed? Yes 31
No 56
Not Sure 13

Do you believe the birth control pill is abortion? Yes 34
No 48
Not Sure 18

The poll didn't give figures for religion, I think it would have been interesting to see how the contraceptive questions varied by religious franchise. I've always thought of Catholics as being vehemently opposed to birth control where as Protestants weren't particularly concerned about preventing a pregnancy in the first place.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Regarding the 3rd question you posted - I would probably answer yes to that myself. I don't have a problem with the bible being discussed in public schools. Knowledge of the bible is an important component to understanding a lot of other subjects, from history to literature. So as the question is posed, yes, I do think public schools should address what's in the bible.

I just don't want it taught as truth or a valid alternative to the theory of evolution.

[flippyshark]

Yeah, that seems like a poorly worded question. I also advocate teaching the Bible, as a source of founding myths for the big three mono-religions, as a necessary component for understanding literature from Shakespeare to Robert Heinlein, as a fascinating collection of highly diverse viewpoints (it's not really a book, it's a library), even in some cases as primary historical material. It's a rich resource, and much too easily dismissed by those who (understandably) lament what literalism has wrought. But it doesn't belong in science class, and it sure as heck shouldn't ever be presented as authoritative, holy or infallible in any public school, ever. (Though it would be great for civics classes to examine the repercussions of literalism and fundamentalism!)

I don't understand how the participants in this survey were (self) selected, but I hope this doesn't truly represent reality. If so, that's an unbelievable burden of public hysteria and ignorance that is going to be very hard to fight. Alas, the very fact that it was initiated by Daily Kos means that, valid or not, it will not be taken seriously by anyone on the right. I hope at least a few rational souls in the conservative wing will at least consider a gut check, though.

[SzczerbiakManiac]

While I would ultimately prefer religion not be taught anywhere by anyone, I'm okay with Creationism being taught in either a theological or social studies course. It has absolutely no place in a science class or textbook though.

[Strangler Lewis]

I do not read the third question as endorsing biblical literacy as a neutral concept. I read it as positing that children should be taught that the answer to the question of how the world came into being is found in the Book of Genesis.

Answer: no.

[Ghoulish Delight]

That's clearly the implication they wanted you to read into it, but as worded, I can't say no. Mostly, coming across that question, I'd probably just stop taking the survey as it would just highlight how biased and unproductive a survey it is.

[Tref]

Regarding the 3rd question you posted - I would probably answer yes to that myself.

As well as L. Ron Hubbard's theories on clams and the Piltdown Man in The History of Man? We need to be inclusive!

Of course, that opens the door for the Bhagavad Gita and the Koran ...

Ahh, let's just take a longer recess, kids!

[flippyshark]

Given how central the Judeo-Chrisitan origin myths are to so much Western music, art, literature, thought and so on, yes, there's no question they should be included in any comprehensive education in Western Civ and liberal arts. (Right alongside the Iliad and The Odyssey) And understanding the rest of the world requires at least some familiarity with the ideas in other holy texts. Hubbard's clams can be presented in the form of a delightful children's musical (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YD9FrbgFafM&feature=related).

[sleepyjeff]

No, not sure, yes, no, no.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Is this poll a pathetic attempt to paint Republicans as toothless hillbillies who keep their children home from school to operate backyard stills while they stand guard with automatic weapons waiting for them revenuers to come a knockin?

Yes.

[scaeagles]

I agree Sleepy. He who frames the questions wins the debate.

My answers would be no, *, yes, no, no.

The * on #2 is because that is a two part question. One can be a racist without hating the race in question.

[Alex]

As for whether the survey is a trap, maybe. But it is a relatively easy one to avoid if one wishes. If given the access I would ask every candidate for high office I would ask these three questions:

1. Do you believe the world is less than 8,000 years old?
2. Do you believe your personal religious beliefs provide a rational basis for you to impose laws on others.
3. Do you believe any of the following are innocent of murder? OJ Simpson, the Baretta guy, Phil Specter.

Sure, those questions are designed to identify idiots. But it isn't my fault if they answer in such a way to self identify as idiots.

If the questions in the survey are ridiculous (and I'm sure that two years ago a similar questionnaire would, and probably did, show equal idiocy by Democrats) then wouldn't the ideal resolution be that very few people gave ridiculous answers? Is it not ridiculous that in any population of people 58% of people are not sure or believe that Obama was not born in the United States. Is it not ridiculous that in any population 73% of people would say that homosexuals should be barred from teaching in public schools? That 31% still believe contraceptives should be illegal.

The group did show they were able to avoid non-ridiculous positions. Only 4% think women should not work outside the home.

So sure, the touting of the results is tilted to make Republicans look as ridiculous as possible but surely they were met halfway in the actual responses?

[Strangler Lewis]

To those of you who answered "yes" to question three, which of the above interpretations of the question are you ascribing to?

In chemistry class, if someone is asked, "How do you make salt?" should they get full credit for answering "Wait for God to do it."

[SzczerbiakManiac]

No, not sure, yes, no, no.The * on #2 is because that is a two part question. One can be a racist without hating the race in question.Okay, I'll bite.
sleepyjeff: Are you not sure Obama is a racist, a hater of Whites, or both?
scaeagles: Do you think Obama is a racist? Do you think he hates White people?
Both: If yes to any of those, on what do you base your opinion?

[sleepyjeff]

Okay, I'll bite.
sleepyjeff: Are you not sure Obama is a racist, a hater of Whites, or both?
scaeagles: Do you think Obama is a racist? Do you think he hates White people?
Both: If yes to any of those, on what do you base your opinion?

I am not sure bc for the longest time he publicly stated that his mentor was a man that I know is a racist who hates Whites.....but on the other hand Obama has strongly stated he parts with this man when it comes to racial views...so, I really don't know.

Let me turn it around on you and ask how you know he's not a racist? There's really no way you can know unless you are a close friend or family member to the President(and even then, maybe not).

-Not Sure- is really the only answer when you think about it.


:)

[Alex]

How do you know there isn't a leprechaun behind you?

[SzczerbiakManiac]

I pretty much assume someone isn't a racist until evidence is presented to me that they are.

I'm also "not sure" the Sun will rise in the East tomorrow morning.

[sleepyjeff]

To those of you who answered "yes" to question three, which of the above interpretations of the question are you ascribing to?

In chemistry class, if someone is asked, "How do you make salt?" should they get full credit for answering "Wait for God to do it."

Blame the pollster for not making that question clear(which they did on purpose in order to get more yes's I imagine).

If the pollster was being honest and was trully trying to find out how many Repuoblicans want Creationism taught over Evolution then they should have asked it that way.

btw. I personally do believe in Evolution but think the book of Genesis is still an important part of our heritage(history, literature, etc) and should be taught in that format.

[sleepyjeff]

How do you know there isn't a leprechaun behind you?


I pretty much assume someone isn't a racist until evidence is presented to me that they are.

I'm also "not sure" the Sun will rise in the East tomorrow morning.

No, I am not asking you to prove a negative......the evidence is already there. Obama was a long time follower of a man who was a screaming hater of Whites(literally).

He took his two young daughters to see this lunatic every(or near every) Sunday......who would subject their own children to racist rhetoric unless they sympathized with that rhetoric?

And it was only when Obama was slipping in the polls that he came out against him...how convenient:rolleyes: .........so the question remains, how do you know he's not a racist?

He says he's not vs actions that suggest otherwise.

[flippyshark]

Sorry, sleepyjeff, but, as insane as Reverend Wright's sermons (at least as excerpted in the media) may be, they aren't racist. Essentially, he rails on the government, which in his eyes has not atoned for the evils of slavery and the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. His message in the most famous sermon clip was that we don't have God's favor because we haven't acknowledged these crimes in our own past. His use of the phrase "God Damn America" was intended to sound shocking and it did. But, not a word about white people being inherently evil or inferior. (Yes, it's implicit that those bad things were done by the white people in charge, which is hard to deny.) Not a rational or useful view to my mind, but not "hate whitey" talk either. It's hardly any different than Jerry Falwell's famous on-air contention that God had lifted his hand of protection from us because of the ACLU and feminists and so on. (actually, Falwell's strikes me as miles more stupid. At least slavery really is factually an atrocity - so are the mass bombings of civilians in Japan, to my mind, though I know some would argue that those actions prevented more deaths than they caused - that's another conversation.)

Barack Obama was born into a world where black Americans did not yet have equal rights. Of course the political discourse in the black community still carries that baggage, with resentments, mistrust and suspicions that make perfect sense to the people who were until so recently second-class citizens. Of course sermons in black churches reflect this. It would be really surprising if they didn't.

It has never been shown that Obama attended this particular sermon, but it seems reasonable to guess that he heard plenty of this sort of "evil government" rhetoric in church and in his community. So did I. My father gave it to me every day, just from a white Evangelical point of view. He's not a racist either, by the way. And he loves America, passionately. But he thinks the government is evil to this day. (In his mind, the great atrocity is legalized abortion.) He's not crazy. He has strong beliefs that offend some other citizens. I sat through tons of church services loaded with this kind of talk.

I read Obama's memoir well before he won the nomination, and he talks plenty about the various ideas about race he encountered growing up. It sounds as though he filtered it all and gave it rational consideration, just like I did to all the ugly and stupid things I was told day in and day out. If I remember correctly, he credited Pastor Wright with enlightening him about civil rights ideas we do not now find at all controversial. Wright is certainly a provocateur, but racist? I'm not convinced. (And no, I don't count his joke about how white people can't keep rhythm on the off beat - that's not racist, it's too often sadly true - and would be perfectly acceptable if it was pointed out by a black comic.)

Even if it could be shown that Wright really thinks whites are devils, it doesn't prove a thing about Obama. It's a really old talking point that didn't fly during the presidential campaign and doesn't make any sense now.

[flippyshark]

To your point about Obama's eventual parting of ways with Wright, that was an uncomfortable situation that I agree looked bad for Barack. Immediately after the YouTube frenzy over the big bad sermon, Barack tried to downplay the whole thing by comparing Wright to the sort of crazy uncle that every family has. And indeed, when he later made the break complete, it seemed like the politics of convenience because it was.Wright was an important person in Obama's circle, but he was also an embarrassment, so there was really no way that could ever have ended well. It seems to me that Obama put off an uncomfortable situation until it was no longer avoidable. (a trait it could be argued he still displays) I don't know what a perfect handling of this situation would have looked like. If I ever run for office, which will never happen, there are people in my circle who might make me look bad by association - I know a handful of radicals who mean business, at least one of whom is in jail - we're all linked to some highly interesting people. Heck, look at this very community we are having this conversation in right now! :)

[sleepyjeff]

Well stated....I am still "not sure", but am glad many of you are:)

[Alex]

And it was only when Obama was slipping in the polls that he came out against him...how convenient:rolleyes: .........so the question remains, how do you know he's not a racist?

I don't. That said, if he is one he has done such a masterful job of hiding it that it becomes irrelevant. I don't care what's in his heart, I care what he does and so far, other than listening to someone who says questionable things (I grew up with a very racist grandfather and I never called him out on it either and if I had kids I'd still take them to see him -- if he were alive) I've seen no evidence to suggest Obama is racist in any way that matters.

[Alex]

Well stated....I am still "not sure", but am glad many of you are:)

So would it be correct that you're essentially unsure whether anybody is a racist?

[sleepyjeff]

So would it be correct that you're essentially unsure whether anybody is a racist?

That would be correct.

[scaeagles]

"white man's greed vs. a world in need".....not only did that come from a sermon, he quoted it in his book, I believe.

Let's change that to something like "Black man's lazy makes the world all crazy" or something else stupid like "Jew boy's greed vs. a world in need". For someone to say those things they would immediately be branded racist.

Do I think Obama hates white people? No. Do I think he is a racist? I think he makes comments that point toward it but cannot say whether he is or not.

[Strangler Lewis]

. . . I personally do believe in Evolution but think the book of Genesis is still an important part of our heritage(history, literature, etc) and should be taught in that format.

Query how much of the Book of Genesis beyond the Adam and Eve/Cain and Abel stories is actually relevant to anything you'd teach in elementary school.

That said, I would not have objected to the Book of Genesis being taught in grade school--or, more aptly, in junior high--if the textbook used was the R. Crumb illustrated version.

[Gemini Cricket]

How do you know there isn't a leprechaun behind you?
The leprechaun tells me to burn things!

[Stan4dSteph]

You left off the best crazy question about if Obama was really born in the US or not. 60% believe he wasn't, which means that at least 60% of the people answering the survey are complete morons.

[sleepyjeff]

. I don't care what's in his heart, I care what he does and so far, other than listening to someone who says questionable things (I grew up with a very racist grandfather and I never called him out on it either and if I had kids I'd still take them to see him -- if he were alive) I've seen no evidence to suggest Obama is racist in any way that matters.

Would it be fair to say then that the Daily kos poll should have asked "Does Obama do racist things?"

I submit that had they asked the question that way Republicans would have overwhelming responded ......"no"

[flippyshark]

Would it be fair to say then that the Daily kos poll should have asked "Does Obama do racist things?"

I submit that had they asked the question that way Republicans would have overwhelming responded ......"no"

That is a much better question - and I hope you're right.

[flippyshark]

"white man's greed vs. a world in need".....not only did that come from a sermon, he quoted it in his book, I believe.


Still not racist. Agree with it or not - it's an angry challenge to the status quo. It's very much in the "hate what they do" category, which is very understandable.

[flippyshark]

Let's change that to something like "Black man's lazy makes the world all crazy" or something else stupid like "Jew boy's greed vs. a world in need". For someone to say those things they would immediately be branded racist.


And those would be racist (and silly) things to say by themselves. But, "white man's greed vs. a world in need" is totally understandable when a) white people really have been the ones in power and b) they really have been oppressing you. Now, I think it's long past time to move on from such statements, and it has been said many times of Wright that he belongs to an old school stream of socio-political discourse. But you can find quotes from Wright that indicate he values a vision of racial equality and world unity. He just thinks the white power structure is too corrupt and entrenched to bring that about, and he says so in very charged language. He's calling for social change, it's true, in a way that even many blacks are no longer comfortable with. There is a big difference between that and hateful conspiracy theories about world-controlling jews or dehumanizing slurs about lazy black people.

[Alex]

Would it be fair to say then that the Daily kos poll should have asked "Does Obama do racist things?"

I submit that had they asked the question that way Republicans would have overwhelming responded ......"no"

No, I don't agree necessarily. If they don't believe that he does racist things I don't see how they could possibly answer yes to believing he is racist.