In his recent article Polling the Occupy Wall Street Crowd, prominent pollster Douglas Schoen makes the case that embracing the Occupy Wall Street movement would cost President Obama and the Democratic Party leadership the 2012 elections. Schoen argues that the protesters "are bound by a deep commitment to radical left-wing policies," with "values that are dangerously out of touch with the broad mass of the American people." We recently conducted 100 interviews in Zuccotti Park (October 22-23) and 95 interviews at the site of Occupy Boston (October 23) and our data presents a very different picture.
Results of our interviews show a population more motivated by reform than massive overhauls of existing systems, a group well-educated and well-versed on relevant policy issues rather than a radical movement likely to resort to violence. Moreover, our data suggests that casting them as deeply committed to "radical left-wing policies" tells us less about this movement and more about the biased frameworks being applied to ascertain their policy positions.
Our Findings
Tax Structure: 83% of the New York and 79% of Boston respondents prefer a tax structure in which people who make more should be taxed at a higher rate, consistent with current progressive tax structure
Public vs. Private Sector: While a plurality of respondents in New York (45%) and Boston (47%) are of the view that social services are best delivered by the public sector as opposed to the private sector, a sizable number of respondents in New York (41%) and Boston (32%) selected the third option: "public private partnerships."
Tax cut on Businesses: Half of the respondents in New York (50%) and close to a quarter in Boston (26%) support (strongly/somewhat) a legislation that would reduce taxes on businesses to create more jobs. Many of the respondents who opposed such legislation did so on grounds of the size of the business: small businesses should receive tax benefits while big businesses should not.
Outsourcing: 70% of the New York and Boston respondents oppose (strongly/somewhat) outsourcing (abroad) of production and services.
Free Trade: Majority of the New York (69%) and Boston (52%) respondents support (strongly/somewhat) "free trade between U.S. and other nations."
Other policy positions and characteristics of respondents:
U.S. National Debt: An overwhelming number of respondents, 90 % in New York and 81% in Boston consider United States' national debt a very serious or a somewhat serious concern.
Education Reform: Upon being asked who should lead "education reform" 47% of the New York and 36% of the Boston respondents chose Federal government, while 34% of the New York and 36% of the Boston respondents chose State government.
Terrorism: 74% of New York and 70% of Boston respondents consider terrorism to be a very or somewhat serious concern at present.
Despite Schoen's findings, policy opinions on polarizing partisan issues remained overall consistent with main stream liberal social and energy concerns:
Public Support for Abortion Services: 80% of the New York and 79% of the Boston respondents support (strongly/somewhat) public support for organizations that provide abortions services.
Drilling in U.S. Waters: 76% of the New York and 74% of the Boston respondents oppose (somewhat/strongly) allowing drilling in U.S. waters.
Obama Care: 69% of the New York and 63% of the Boston respondents support (strongly/somewhat) "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act."
Unionized Labor: 62% of the New York and 58% of the Boston respondents support (strongly/somewhat) the idea that "companies with unionized labor should get government contracts before companies without unionized labor."
The majority of the supporters and protestors are highly educated and employed.
Employment Status: Only 16% of the respondents interviewed in New York and Boston were "unemployed." The majority, 57% in New York and 53% in Boston, are currently employed. Other respondents reported being students, underemployed or retired.
Education: Most of the respondents, 75% in New York and 62% in Boston either had an undergraduate or a graduate degree.
Stated simply, our results caution against any premature and overly simplified classification of the Occupy Wall Street movement and its supporters, while underscoring the need to conduct further research. Moreover, further research alone will not be sufficient, until and unless we move away from thinking of public opinion as a means to an end, rather than an end in itself. In a representative democracy, public opinion should serve as a mechanism by which elected officials and candidates understand and address the concerns of the citizenry, rather than being used solely to determine which groups are most expendable in the American electoral process.
The authors started the Occupy Wall Street - Public Opinion Project (OWS-POP), an independent initiative run by volunteer researchers to generate and publicly share data on the Occupy Wall Street protests and protesters on ongoing basis.
For Questions or Comments, please email: ows.pop@gmail.com
For Results: OWS-POP website: https://sites.google.com/site/owspublicopinionproject/home
Which Occupy Wall Street Demand Can Succeed?: Poll
Poll: 43 percent agree with views of "Occupy Wall Street"
Massachusetts GOP Misrepresents Polling To Smear Elizabeth Warren And Occupy ...
Occupy Wall Street: The Right's smear machine goes to work
Occupy Wall Street and the Second Amendment
Poll Position: Was Reed too fast or too slow vs. Occupy Atlanta?
Hucks Poll: Occupy Edges Tea Party
New York Wrestles Over Extending Millionaires Tax
Articles like this are increasingly desperate attempts to convince the public that this is still a mainstream movement. It isn't - and it is rapidly moving much further left.
The face of the movement is now angry protesters clashing with police and wealthy left-wing celebrities worshiped by adoring OWS activists.
That is the end of OWS.
This is exactly the fanaticism that the majority fears. And it will do nothing to help anyone.
But, speaking as an opposition researcher of the Religious and Far Right, let's talk about ideology. One of the factions that make up the Tea Party is what was called the Patriot/militia movement. The Patriot movement tends to be extremely suspicious of Wall Street, multi-national corporations, and international banks.
Sound familiar?
If you don't believe me, Google for the lyrics of the Patriot movement musician Carl Klang.
Being the opposition researcher that I am, I have subscribed to the John Birch Society magazine, the New American. The advertisers in the far-right New American are not the stereotypically greedy corporate interests, but blue-collar capital production industries who support the Patriot movement out of anger over the way that America is being sold out by the ultra-wealthy corporate heads. They see in corporate America and the financial industry the precursor to the dreaded New World Order -- one world government.
This faction of the Tea Party strongly supported Pat Buchanan in the 1990s. His dreams of legislated religious traditionalism were, of course, a big draw, but Buchanan also has strong Union Democrat traits. Love him or hate him, Buchanan *is* truly "America first,"
Does that dissipate any doubts that I indeed know my stuff? :)
the tea party is mainly a party that are angry republicans and green party are people considered democrat but dont like the democratic party
All you can talk about is mind your station in life. You make it worse and feed the fire with your insults and arrogance.
It reminds me of the Fukushima nuclear accident threads. The nuclear industry posters came to insult people who were concerned, with that same patronizing arrogance, calling people ignorant.
You make me double my resolve, you make me want to go to a demonstration, you make me want to wipe the smirk off your face.
I'm an opposition researcher of the Religious Right, and have been for 20 years. So, for me to say that the modern corporate right wing is more dangerous, more vicious, more bigoted, and more cold and callous than even Fred Phelps and the people from his Westboro Baptist Church, is really something.
When even Rick Santorum and Rick Perry, whom I consider very dangerous, can have glimmers of conscience that make them look like saints alongside the hyper-capitalist, social-darwinist corporate right, let's just say that it's not a good reflection on the latter.
By the way, do you know who's the most prominent supporter of OWS?
The Pope.
Yeah, *that* Pope.
At the same time, we have encouraged a business model that rewards wealth over productivity, shareholders over employees and customers. This sense of entitlement has allowed not just many CEOs and executives but the Middle Men like bankers, brokers, insurers, and investors to take a larger piece of the pie that, once upon a time, was shared by workers who became the most important facet of our consumer economy when they were well-paid consumers.
The 1% has had their interests catered to for so long and a whole class of billionaires of middle men whose only purpose is shuffling around other people's money have seen their wealth enhanced because of those policies. These executives and middle men don't want to give up the farm to those pesky workers. They forget that those pesky workers because those profitable consumers.
-------
Great sentence.
A time to rend, a time to sew
A time for love, a time for hate
A time for peace, I swear it's not too late
The Byrds (Pete Seger)
Some will always see anything left of their own perspective as "radical". When all you've got is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail.
That's they they've tried to drive all left-of-center voices from the mainstream media.
They almost succeeded. (Now try to tell me that the New York Times shows up on every American doorstep.)
http://youtu.be/oSo-MEiMbac
This is not about political agendas or right-left leanings, but simply a protest against the criminal way our government does business with Wall Street. Whether you are progressive, liberal, independent, or conservative should not matter. If you are tired of squeezing pennies while the ultra-rich get bailed out the YOU have a stake in this also!
A bunch of banks(mostly French and German) decide to invest in weak economies, those countries threaten to default, and the proposed solution being the rest of us must make sacrifice to ensure the banks survival. Hello, France and Germany can always nationalize the banks after they fail...but that would be public socialism, instead of corporate socialism.
It's about BoA dumping trillions of dollars worth of toxic assets on the public's books to ensure it's survival, while at the same time, the financial industry demands governments cut public expenditures because deficits are bad.
My sympathies go out to the people whose mortgages were bought by or financed by BofA , but those who chose to deal with BofA on an account level or investment level are just perpetuating the problem, and deserve whatever they get in the end.
When you respond to me please do so in a respectful way. I am not here to hear your opinion of what you think I am. I am here to share my views, enlighten others, and if possible become more enlightened myself.
Have a nice day.