General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsTwo Americas or "Poll: Half of Americans now predict U.S. may 'cease to be a democracy' someday"
"Poll: Half of Americans now predict U.S. may 'cease to be a democracy' someday"
Andrew Romano·West Coast Correspondent
Wed, June 15, 2022, 2:00 AM
https://www.yahoo.com/news/poll-half-of-americans-now-predict-us-may-cease-to-be-a-democracy-someday-090028564.html
In this eye-opening poll we see that there are two Americas not in the sense of John Edwards' rich and poor, but rather two groups of ideologically partitioned people who believe the other group to be a problem that will lead to the loss of American Democracy:
A Yahoo News/YouGov poll shows that a bipartisan majority: most Democrats (55%) and Republicans (53%) now believe it likely that the US will cease to be a democracy in the future.
--snipped out lots of interesting poll data-- basically less than 50% of Americans paying attention to Jan 6 hearings, with Republicans by a large majority disbelieving the committee and dismissing it. It's very much worth reading this poll-based article linked above.
"But if Republicans and Republican-leaning independents are largely dismissive of the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol, then why are most of them pessimistic about the future of democracy? For the same reason most refused to watch the hearings in the first place: because they see Democrats not the Trump supporters who invaded the Capitol as the real problem. And Democrats largely feel the same way about Republicans.
When asked to choose the phrase that best describes most people on the other side of the political aisle from you, a majority of Republicans pick extreme negatives such as out of touch with reality (30%), a threat to America (25%), immoral (8%) and a threat to me personally (4%). A tiny fraction select more sympathetic phrases such as well-meaning (4%) or not that different from me (6%).
The results among Democrats are nearly identical, with negatives such as out of touch with reality (27%), a threat to America (23%), immoral (7%) and a threat to me personally (4%) vastly outnumbering positives such as well-meaning (7%) or not that different from me (5%).
Meanwhile, the number of Trump and Biden voters who say the other side is primarily a threat to America (28% and 25%, respectively) is double the number who say the other side is primarily wrong about policy (14% and 13%)."
-------------------
The current level of political polarization, led by politically-oriented propaganda outlets such as Fox News is leading the US astray. The problem is that politically oriented media/websites/social media are polarizing, but some are necessary as means to effectively counter the most powerful propaganda sources such as Fox News by organizing against distortions and lies.
Walleye
(30,983 posts)andym
(5,443 posts)which is even a more accurate description. Of course, it took a long time historically to include all adults as potential voters.
And the representative democracy implemented in the US is not quite one person/one vote in terms of influence due to the way the government is constructed, especially given the Senate and the role geography plays.
Or do Republicans go further than this in their beliefs that we don't live in a democracy?
Interesting that these terms encompass the names of the two major parties.
Walleye
(30,983 posts)Yes the United States is a republic but we elect people democratically. The Republicans are now referring to democracy as mob rule just listen to them. In other words they do not believe the majority should rule. They have completely forgotten about the will of the people. Elections to them are a contest to see who can bully more
central scrutinizer
(11,637 posts)Theyre convinced that the Democratic Party has committed rampant election fraud to steal elections and will continue to do so.
Walleye
(30,983 posts)They dont believe in the will the people they call it mob rule
MiniMe
(21,709 posts)They are the ones who are trying to kill our democracy. And who is going to be hurt the most by their plan to kill these social programs? The poor and POC. Bastards.
ancianita
(35,941 posts)RAB910
(3,489 posts)while the more than half of Democrats know the Republicans are actively working to destroy our democracy
ancianita
(35,941 posts)So the "wolf we feed" should take that into consideration.
We should also remember that what that number shows is that no matter how much voter purging, suppression and gerrymandering succeed, it will not drive the 7+ MILLION number down by 7+ MILLION.
By millions, perhaps, but not enough to win in 2022 or 2024.
andym
(5,443 posts)Without him running this Fall, there may be less enthusiasm from less committed voters.
Keep in mind that the polarization is amplified by alternate views of reality. With the key difference that one view of reality, the propagandists of the GOP, has basically no grounding in actual facts, because they feel free to believe whatever they want. They then pollute the body politic. The parties have always differed over debatable approaches to government and how society should be organized-- but in the modern era, the GOP has decided that reality is whatever they say it to be, independent of even science or established facts (e,g., concerning the last election). Keep in mind it only takes one "side" going off the far end to create incompatible polarization.
ancianita
(35,941 posts)Last edited Wed Jun 15, 2022, 03:18 PM - Edit history (1)
There was never more alt-reality, propaganda, lies, poison and corporation dark money pollution than in the 2020 election. It's not as if the other side's not been groomed. They have, and they've been going off the far end since Gore v Bush, culminating in Jan 6.
The Jan 6 hearings are mopping up a lot of that. Not all, but A LOT.
You're right about world views and approaches to law and order in society. How's that working out for them?
But not enough to win back over 7M. Now reality bites and they're sore, hollering, cheating losers.
So I'm not letting anyone feed my FUD wolf.
andym
(5,443 posts)For Democrats, 2010 was a clear example. 2014 was somewhat less problematic, although the GOP gained the Senate.
Having a big bad wolf in the form of Trump is actually very helpful for Democrats' election prospects-- the more he inserts himself this time, the better it will be. Without him, there is the potential overturn of Roe V Wade. and the gun control issue that can help keep the 7M engaged, and perhaps increase the number.
Some of us believe that one's enthusiasm and attempts to help Democrats win should not be altered by the current or even projected state of the political landscape, which tends to be volatile, especially in off-year elections. Rather our enthusiasm should be grounded in the pursuit of truth, facts and clear moral judgements about what will bring the best future for all of us (progress, or preventing regression).
ancianita
(35,941 posts)Recall that isn't the first election cycle in which violence and menace have loomed in the landscape.
https://www.vox.com/midterm-elections/2018/11/7/18068486/midterm-election-2018-results-race-surburb
It's one thing to alter one's enthusiasm and attempts to help Democrats when the landscape changes; it's quite another to succumb to FUD about that landscape and shrink one's enthusiasm and help on a daily basis. So I agree that what the nation needs, as you say, is to compensate with even more "pursuit of truth, facts and clear moral judgements about what will bring the best future for all of us ... "
andym
(5,443 posts)So 2018 was an off-year midterm election for them. It is the opposition party that tends to gain in off-year/midterms. Thus, the blue wave, as the Democratic Party was the opposition party to Trump's GOP.
I believe the last time the pattern didn't hold was 2002 midterms when GW Bush picked up a few seats, so it is not always true.
ancianita
(35,941 posts)that year? And recall that the menace and violence got even worse.
Midterms have had that pattern of lower turnout, true. But the pattern is changing, if we want to read the landscape accurately. Obama won both times, despite growing opposition, if you recall. He did suffer a "shellacking" because our side was too complacent; I don't know, but surmise that maybe there's such a thing as too much peace and tranquility, when people forget that democracy won't protect and defend itself without voters.
So imo, I'm not wanting to fit 2022's or 2024's voter turnout to fit a pattern further in the past, because that pattern doesn't take into account a new pattern of a changing electorate landscape.
andym
(5,443 posts)An on-year is a year in which the President is elected. The opposition party only tends to gain in off-years/midterms. The thinking is that voters are most engaged in Presidential election years and when their party holds the Presidency is more apathetic in off-year/midterms (no Presidential election) elections. I think midterm is the better terminology here, as off-year may technically refer to when there is no congressional election.
ancianita
(35,941 posts)I've explained voting stuff, in spite of your formula, that you seem to ignore, so I'm done now.
andym
(5,443 posts)The formula only applies to midterms (not Presidential elections).
2006 midterm (GOP President)--blue wave
2010 midterm (Democratic President) -- red wave
2014 midterm (Democratic President) -- small red wave
2018 midterm (GOP President) -- blue wave
The rule does not apply in Presidential election years.
Response to ancianita (Reply #15)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)And if the majority say "Yes" to democracy, then the anti-democracy folks win. But if the anti-democracy faction gets a majority of the vote, then majority rules. Is that what I'm hearing?