How radical are Republicans?

A new poll conducted by Research 2000 and commissioned by the liberal activist site DailyKos found that:

* 63% of Republicans believe Barack Obama is a socialist.
* 39% of Republicans believe he should be impeached.
* 36% believe he was not born in the United States (22% are not sure)
* 31% believe he is “a racist who hates White people”
* 24% believe President Obama “wants the terrorists to win” (33% are not sure)
* 23% say they want their state to secede from the Union.

Obviously, DailyKos is a questionable source for such a damning poll, so I looked skeptically at the methodology. It seems sound – more than 2,000 people were surveyed by telephone over the last ten days of January. The questions, while geared toward confirming the worst stereotypes, were presented straightforwardly. Looking through the cross-tabs, young Republicans were not significantly more liberal-to-libertarian on most issues – and those age 30 to 44 seem particularly radicalized against President Obama.

Continue reading here.


Filed under Republicans

16 responses to “How radical are Republicans?

  1. fnord

    No matter what else Republicans may be, they are definitely sore losers! And, very cranky.

  2. fnord

    Is the Republican Party still mainly a regional party? I know there are many people dissatisfied and voicing their frustrations who aren’t Republicans — those in the middle who vote against the party currently ‘in charge’ when politics gets their attention. And certainly more people are paying attention than usually do — they’re worried, they’re scared, many don’t know if they’ll keep their homes…

    But, if we talk about those who will always vote for the candidate with the little “R” beside their name, have their numbers increased? Has their influence spread to more than the few states mostly in the South?

    They may be able to win state contests and make the Senate and House more balanced but wouldn’t that potentially have a negative impact for them? Wouldn’t that put them in a position of having to share blame for the nation’s ills?

  3. tosmarttobegop

    It is a phenomena that escapes me as to how people can believe the most illogical and irrational.
    Things without bases and proof, perhaps it was because of my own POV of G.W. Bush but I did not notice this extent of delusional rhetoric against Bush… The true was bad enough no need to go over the edge of reason with him.

    And why is it or is it only with a Democratic President?
    I know I was caught up in it with President Clinton, in hindsight there was nothing that would have supported the level of mistrust I had.

    It turns out the only complain I had that was real was about the incident with my oldest and lying.

    You have to make the enemy a monster in order to keep the will to fight them.
    The Japanese told their citizens that American soldiers was cannibals and would eat them alive if they could catch them alive. That led to civilians leaping to their death off of cliffs.

    You can argue that the spending is too much, that the entitlements are a trap to those in them and degrades their will to do for yourselves. But there is no evidence of Socialism or to even entertain the thought of no a U.S, Citizen and the like.

  4. tosmarttobegop

    Disingenuous, amoral two faced soulless fool… Kit Bonn on MSNBC.
    How in the Fook does he and all the rest sleep at night?

  5. tosmarttobegop

    OK now I am angry enough I feel like kicking some Palin supporters!

    Going to the other blog.

  6. I hate to say it, but those of us that vote Democratic can be just as unrealistic and deluded in our own way. There are particular situations:

    The vote by the majority Democratic congress in 2006-2007 to legalize Bush’s illegal surveillance of the citizens of this country (FISA). We were TOLD that if we voted for them, they would reign in the abuses that they themselves had railed against. When given the opportunity, they did the exact opposite. And don’t forget Nancy Pelosi’s assurance that impeachment was off the table. How dare she? Basically, the Democrats were promising not to do their jobs from the beginning.

    The naming of cabinet members right away revealed which way Obama would lean on financial governance and economic issues–naming to his cabinet those that were leaders in the “free market” ideology that crashed the ship of our economy on the rocks and those that were right in the thick of regulation that could have stopped it from happening, but looked the other way instead. Why would you choose these folks for your advisors when they were the ones that helped cause the mess? And what was the result? Giant bailouts for the banks and more financial screwing of the working class-loss of jobs, ridiculous credit tightening and outright usury by the very banks that our tax dollars went to bail out. And what is being done about that? Not a cotton-picking thing. Disgusting.

    These are but two instances, and I am sure that there are those among us that would offer “reasons” for the above. I would have to call those reasons “rationalizations” because that is what we would call them if it were the other side that elected someone that completely stomped on their values, objectives and the party platform. As Bush did, and the conservatives apologized/rationalized and many of us saw that for what it was–yet we don’t recognize it in ourselves.

  7. WSClark

    Ask that 63% what a socialist is….. they can’t answer with anything other than Fox News talking points. Barack Obama is nowhere near being a true socialist – not even a faux socialist. Perhaps if these “baggers” and nay-sayers would actually research the issue, they would be able to realize that, other than indigenous people and American Indians, there has NEVER been a truly socialistic society.

    But, then again, facts don’t matter to the right-wing.

    • lillacluvr

      But their medicare matters to the right-wing and despite all their nay saying, medicare is socialism.

      You see, to them a socialist is anyone that threatens their little world of ‘I’ve got mine, so screw you’.

  8. lillacluvr

    I listend to Sean Hannity last week while at work and a liberal caller got through and the topic was socialism.

    When the liberal caller brought up these tea baggers with their signs for Obama to keep his hands off their Medicare and that it was hypocrisy.

    Sean Hannity actually said that Medicare is not socialism because it is going bankrupt. WTF??

    He went on to say several derogatory statements about Obama and I guess that was to disguise the fact that Mr. Hannity does not have a clue as to what socialism really is or the fact that not one Republican politician will advocate to get rid of Medicare.

    They all know better than to take away a government program that is actually working and their people absolutely love.

  9. tosmarttobegop

    the fact that not one Republican politician will advocate to get rid of Medicare.

    I don’t bank on that, there has been a under the skin desire to eliminate Medicare since it beginning.
    Part coming from the Liberation wing and part from the Fiscal conservatives.

    You are right it is the third rail for the Republican party. But given the chance it would be gone or really reduced.

    • lillacluvr

      I don’t know about that tsbg – I think that was true in Reagan’s era but not so much now. There are too many people on Medicare and they like it!

      Hey, what’s not to like? Their premium is really cheap and I know that doctors all complain about Medicare payments being so low, etc. but the truth of the matter is, every doctor knows that Medicare is the insurance coverage that keeps the cash flow going in their practice. Medicare pays fairly promptly and they do not usually hold up claims like private insurance does.

      BTW – those low Medicare payments cannot be any worse than my for-profit insurance rates. My last lab work-up was billed at $297.00 and my i nsurance paid $34.00 of it. Isn’t that pretty low also?

    • lillacluvr

      They recently had the chance to vote against Medicare and not one Republican voted to kill Medicare. This was a bill proposed by Anthony Weiner during the health care reform debate.

  10. fnord

    Older people are reliable voters. It would seem to be political suicide to anger the age group that votes most reliably. The “boomers” will swell those numbers! So if they’re gonna do something stupid that doesn’t seem to be the time to do it.

  11. lillacluvr

    The boomers will be swelling that number soon but I don’t know if they will all be Republican in the next few years.

    I think more and more people are turning Independents.

  12. fnord

    I don’t think it matters what political association they have — they don’t want anyone messing with their Medicare! And anyone stupid enough to try, I think will be committing political suicide.

    Ya know, even those who are against government run health care, don’t want anyone messing with their government run health care. 🙂

    • lillacluvr

      But I do see a train wreck coming when those boomers hit the Medicare age. Isn’t that another reason Obama is so intent on getting health care costs under control?

      But, try explaining that to people whose theory is ‘I’ve got mine, screw you’.

      And such good Christians too.