Marquette Warrior

Tuesday, July 09, 2019

Hispanics Favor Census Citizenship Question, Deny Trump “Too Tough” on Immigration


For the left, anybody who wants to control the border must be a racist. And Donald Trump’s desire to ask about citizenship status on the 2020 Census is also racist.

Of course, white leftists pride themselves on being very sensitive to racism. But what do Hispanics, the “racial group” (actually not a racial group, but let’s play the game) think?

The Center for American Political Studies at Harvard asked them, in an online poll that included 2,182 respondents, including 282 Hispanics.

Not Very Politically Correct

Asked “Should the census be able to ask whether people living here are us citizens?” Sixty-seven percent of the entire sample said “yes,” and only 33% said “No.”

But even a majority of Hispanics said “yes:” 55% did, as opposed to 45% who said “No.”

Even More Politically Incorrect

The survey also asked “Do you think President Trump is too tough, too lenient or just right in dealing with illegal immigrants caught trying to cross the border?”

Among the entire sample, 42% said “too tough,” 24% said “too lenient,” and 34% said “just right.”

But among Hispanics, the results were very similar: 46% said “too tough,” 30% said “too lenient,” and 24% said “just right.”

Thus Hispanic opinion was a bit more polarized, with 4% more saying “too tough” but also 6% more saying “too lenient.”

Bottom Line

Taken at face value, both Hispanics and the entire sample show a majority favoring Trump’s policies, or policies even more strict.

But it is a well-known artifact in polling that, when given three alternatives, people tend to choose the middle option (“just right” in this case). It seems “safer.” But this only applies when people don’t have a strong, clear opinion.

If the nation’s Hispanics were convinced that Trump’s policies are too harsh, or that asking about citizenship is a racist attack on their group, nothing would prevent them from expressing that.

We have yet another case where the white Social Justice Warriors and their pet ethnic activists don’t represent the group they claim to.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Friday, January 22, 2016

Disappearing

Wednesday, January 06, 2016

Public Opinion Running Against Gun Control

It wasn’t widely reported, but ABC News recently conducted a poll of citizens, and for the first time in the history of major polls, a majority of respondents opposed an assault weapons ban.



This does not seem to be a fluke. Where long time-series of opinion data exist, the trend seems to be moving in the direction of protecting gun rights.

For example, since the 1960s, Gallup has been asking people whether the private ownership of handguns should be forbidden. The trend, which has the normal number of temporary ups and downs, has been from a robust majority who would support that proposition, to a robust majority who oppose it.



Since 1990, Gallup has been asking respondents whether the nation’s gun control laws on the sale of firearms should be “more strict,” “less strict” or should “kept as they are now.” The trend is downward, although again with some ups and downs depending on what gun violence is in the news.



A large collection of polls on the issue is found here.

Liberals who think that public opinion is on their side are simply kidding themselves. Although some polls show majorities in favor of this or that policy, the long term trend is in favor of the Second Amendment.

Further, demonizing the National Rifle Association is not a winning strategy in a general election (although it may mobilize core partisans in a primary). Gallup has found that a majority of respondents have a favorable view of the NRA.



And this leaves out of account the asymmetry of intensity: the fact that people who favor gun rights are more intense in their opinions than those who oppose them.

The push for gun control, fundamentally, reflects the cultural bias of the latte sipping, Prius driving, NPR listening liberals. It gives them a warm rush of self-righteousness. But increasingly, they are at odds with the broad public.

Labels: , , ,

Thursday, January 24, 2013

Public Opinion on Gun Control: Not What You Think

If you listen to the anti-gun people in the wake of the Sandy Hook shooting, you might think that there is an overwhelming public consensus for the policies the liberals favor.

But if fact, as a new Gallup Poll shows, the picture is much more complex.

It is true that a clear majority of Americans favor stricter gun laws, or at least say they do if asked that question.

The striking thing here, however, is that support for stricter gun laws has declined sharply since the early 1990s. True, Sandy Hook caused an uptick. But there have been mass shootings before, and any uptick was temporary.

But what about the most commonly mentioned kind of “stricter gun law,” a ban on assault weapons?

Strikingly, Gallup finds a bare majority opposed to an assault weapons ban.

Of course, if you asked the question differently, you might get a different answer. If you said “military-style weapons” you could probably get a majority favoring a ban. But Gallup did use a relatively straightforward question.

Asked about some more modest gun control proposals, majorities were in favor. Gallup showed an overwhelming majority in favor of background checks, including checks at gun shows. Gun shows are exempted under current policy, and for reasons that were good ones at the time: there was no way to process such a check in a timely fashion. But technology should have alleviated that problem — or at least it will if government makes the appropriate data available over the Internet.

A clear majority also favor a ban on large capacity magazines.

None of Gallup’s questions tap the intensity of opinion on these issues. But there clearly is a huge asymmetry of intensity, with pro-gun people being highly intense. The anti-gun people are split between relatively apolitical people who don’t care much, and liberals who are highly political, but are concerned with pretty much every issue under the sun.

Another striking thing in the Gallup poll was the fact that support for a ban on handguns has been dropping over the last two decades, and is at an extremely low point.

So what is going on here?

The public is not necessarily terribly sophisticated in terms of policy. Nuts wanting to get guns can use straw buyers or buy on the black market (or steal weapons) and thus evade background checks. Large capacity magazines would also likely be available on the black market even if banned, and it doesn’t take long to switch out a low-capacity magazine and keep shooting.

The guys who have engaged in mass shootings have been intelligent schemers. Deranged, but intelligent, and capable of mounting elaborate operations. These sorts of people would have both the smarts and the motivation to evade pretty much any gun law.

But it does appear the public increasingly “gets” the Second Amendment. It opposes anything that would excessively burden the right of ordinary law-abiding Americans to have the kinds of guns that ordinary law-abiding Americans have.

And there isn’t even a majority to ban military-style weapons that law abiding gun buffs own, and enjoy shooting.

And the trend of opinion over time favors gun rights.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Thursday, November 11, 2010

Support for ObamaCare At New Low

This based on a survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation:

Support for ObamaCare can be measured in two ways. First, we can ask whether Americans
Do you think you and your family will be better off or worse off under the new health reform law, or don’t you think it will make much difference?
The number of people saying “worse off” is close to the all time high, and is currently at 31%.

The number of people saying “better off” is at an all time low, at 25%.

The chart is below (you can click on the image to see it full size).


Public disapproval of an extension of the welfare state is rare. Usually, the public just sees they are getting goodies, and isn’t inclined to ask questions about who pays, and when the bill comes due.

But now it’s different. The public is aware that there is a lot they may lose.

Labels: , ,

Tuesday, June 29, 2010

Pollster Busted for Bogus Data, Local TV Station Among Victims

From the Daily Kos, a statistical analysis that shows that the firm Research 2000 has been producing and distributing to clients apparently bogus data.

The conclusion was the result of a statistical analysis that will seem arcane to people who haven’t had statistics, but in fact is quite sound.

One of the victims of the firm was Milwaukee’s WISN-TV, which used data from Research 2000 in at least eight reports between 2004 and 2008.

WISN was far from the only media outlet using Research 2000. Its clients, according to the Daily Kos included:
KCCI-TV in Iowa, WCAX-TV in Vermont, WKYT-TV in Kentucky, Lee Enterprises, the Concord Monitor, The Florida Times-Union, WSBT-TV/WISH-TV/WANE-TV in Indiana, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the Bergen Record, and the Reno Gazette-Journal.
A source at WISN-TV confirms that the station is no longer using the polling firm.

We have a call in to the News Director asking for a comment.

Labels: , , ,

Sunday, December 13, 2009

Poll: 39% of Israelis believe Obama is Muslim

From Politico:
The New America Foundation’s poll of Israelis, released today, contains a finding suggesting campaign-trail rumors about Barack Obama’s religion penetrated deeply in the Jewish state.

The survey, by Jim Gerstein, asked Israelis (both Jewish and Muslim) whether a series of terms describe President Obama well, and 39% of respondents said the term “Muslim” describes the president, who is Christian, well. Of those, only 15% said the term described him very well.

A plurality, 49%, said Obama isn’t well-described as a Muslim.

But in a country engaged in decades of violent conflict with its Muslim and Arab neighbors, the fact that well over a third of Israelis buy into the groundless rumors about Obama’s faith suggests the depth of his image problems.

ALSO: About 11% of Americans think Obama is a Muslim, a number that has remained stable since the rumor spread widely in 2007.
Of course, this is a boneheaded thing to believe, but there is a sort of logic here, even if it is oversimplistic.

Obama, compared to previous American presidents, has tilted strongly against Israel and strongly toward the Palestinians.

Somebody, knowing full well that Jews support Israel, and that American Christians support Israel, might think that Obama comes from the group that most visibly dislikes Israel.

The flaw in the argument is that there is another group that doesn’t like Israel: secular liberals and leftists. That group includes Obama.

Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

How Popular Is Obama?

While the Mainstream Media swoon over Obama, a sober look at public opinion polls shows him to be pretty much an average president in terms of public approval.

From Gary Langer of ABC News:
There are a couple of data points worth keeping in mind . . . as we digest an aide’s claim today, as Jake Tapper reports, that his strong approval rating is “earned.” One, while his rating is high, it’s also dead average for a new president. The other is the impressive partisanship beneath it.

We have approval ratings for each of the last nine elected presidents after their first month in office, back to Dwight Eisenhower. (We’re leaving Johnson and Ford aside.) There’s been a healthy range, from a low of 55 percent for George W. Bush after the disputed election of 2000 to a high of 76 percent for his father 12 years earlier. (I’m using ABC/Post polls since Reagan, Gallup previously).

But the average? Sixty-seven percent. And Obama’s? Sixty-eight percent, as we reported in our new poll yesterday. His initial rating, then, is strong – but it’s also generally typical for a new guy.
In fact, the current approval rating of Obama is best estimated as 62.5%, according to an average of polls on Real Clear Politics.

This doesn’t necessarily mean that Langer is understating the case. Since he is using ABC polls consistently (at least since Reagan) his conclusions on the comparative standing of Obama are quite likely valid, even if the exact numbers can be quibbled about.

In the meantime, Gallup is showing a 10% decline in Obama approval since the Inauguration. It now stands at 59%, according to the organization that invented the concept (and much else in polling).

While Obama’s standing isn’t low, by any means, the American public hasn’t gotten the memo about how he is the Messiah who will lead the citizens to the Promised Land (and yes, we know we are mixing Biblical metaphors).

Labels: , ,

Saturday, September 13, 2008

Polling in the Darling/Wasserman Race

We just got a call on our land-line asking us how we intended to vote in the Alberta Darling/Sheldon Wasserman state senate race.

The interviewer didn’t know how to pronounce “Wasserman.”

That was the one question. No demographics. No “push polling.” Just vote preference.

We asked him from where he was calling. He said “Central America,” and then quickly corrected himself saying “Florida.”

We asked him who was paying for the poll: Darling, Wasserman or some other organization. He said some other organization, but didn’t see to want to give more information.

We pressed him on the name of the firm that was doing the research and he said “WC Research.”
Whoever is paying for this poll needs to see that the interviewers at least know how to pronounce the candidates names.

Labels:

Friday, January 11, 2008

It’s Not Easy