Public Opinion Souring On Occupy Wall Street
A new Quinnipiac Poll seems to suggest that the public is starting to sour on the Occupy Wall Street movement:
A sign that the Occupy Wall Street movement isn’t the best long-term vehicle for Democrats to connect themselves with: A new Quinnipiac poll, showing a plurality of voters viewing the group unfavorably.
The poll, released today, show 30 percent of voters surveyed view the movement favorably, 39 percent unfavorably, with an additional 30 percent not hearing enough to have an opinion. It’s one of the first national polls to suggest voters are growing skeptical of Occupy Wall Street- and it comes as police have clashed with protesters in several cities. Previous national polls have shown a plurality of adults supporting the movement.
These numbers comes as Democrats, from the White House on down, have struck a decidedly populist tone in recent months, from President Obama calling on the wealthy to pay a higher share in taxes, Senate Democratic officials rallying behind the campaign of Elizabeth Warren, who has embraced the Occupy Wall Street movement, and House Democrats, who sent out a petition last month aimed at leveraging the Occupy Wall Street movement against the Republican Party.
The poll found that Occupy Wall Street’s negatives aren’t quite as high as the Tea Party’s unfavorables, but aren’t far off. Just 31 percent of voters view the Tea Party unfavorably, 45 percent unfavorably, and 24 percent haven’t heard enough.
Among independents, the Occupy Wall Street movement and Tea Party movement are now viewed equally unfavorably. Occupy Wall Street has a net -13 favorable rating with independents (29% favorable/42% unfavorable), while the Tea Party holds a net -11 favorable rating (34% favorable/45% unfavorable).
This is isn’t entirely surprising. Public opinion about the Tea Party peaked pretty early and has leveled off ever since then, it seems only logical the same thing would happen with OWS. The fact that it’s happened quicker is, perhaps, a reaction to some of the seedier elements that have been made public, such as yesterday’s near riot in Oakland. As with the Tea Party, radicalism doesn’t play well in American politics, it never really has.
On the other hand, CNN reports:
More Americans supporting Occupy Wall Street
Isn’t the CNN poll the first true “same question, two sample” poll on this?
@john personna: You really need to stop getting in the way of Doug’s 100% negative coverage of OWS.
@john personna:
I’m confused as to how CNN can poll the public on whether it agrees with the positions of Occupy Wall Street when Occupy Wall Street has yet to actually articulate any positions.
Why don’t those damn hippies make a list of their grievances?
Or if they did, why are they keeping it a secret?
O, if there were only a tool whereby one could search the Internetz!
Where o where could one possibly find out what these hippies are protesting?
@Liberty60:
Doug is unable to see your comment. It’s been hidden due to the fact that it contradicts his chosen view of reality.
@john personna:
Both polls could be accurate. It’s possible to agree with OWS’s positions (what the CNN poll asked) but have an unfavorable opinion of OWS itself (what the Quinnipiac poll asked).
@Doug Mataconis:
Weird, you post a poll yourself, and use it to claim a trend despite it being a one-time question (Q. 38 has no “trend” section). But then faced with a real trending poll you ask “why should I believe it?’
Seriously?
@Stormy Dragon:
That was not my complaint. It was the bizarre claim of a trend based on one measurement. It’s like going into the forest once to count squirrels and rabbits, then coming back and saying “squirrels in decline.”
Was it a goof, or simple dishonesty?
nice thing about polls, can always find one to match the point of the day.
Re: radicalism not selling, ponder Johnson vs Goldwater, Nixon vs McGovern, etc.
@Liberty60:
Yes I discussed that silly little manifesto you linked to last month.
@Liberty60:
That’s right, Liberty, Doug already dismissed your evidence. It doesn’t count unless it comes from Dick Armey or possibly the Cato Institute. Also, it should reinforce whatever Doug already believes. If it doesn’t, it’s both silly and little.
@michael reynolds:
That you consider that “manifesto” to be anything worth taking seriously makes me doubt my previous assessment of your intelligence.
Here is a lesson to OWS on how to really change things. Bank of America announced debit fees. Now they have reversed their policy. Why? The MCT (middle class taxpayers) simply closed their BOA accounts and went down the street to banks that offered no fee accounts. Took about 30 minutes and signing a form: no camping out in tents, marching in the street, or sitting around beating on drums. Very easy and simple. That’s how things get done. Next year, we can fire our leaders by simply marking a ballot. Time involved? Maybe an hour or two, but you can vote early and get out in less than an hour on most days. Again, quick, simple, priceless, but it works. Try it.
@clarence:
Actually, this Saturday, Nov.5, is a nationally coordinated day of action whereby various OWS and supporters are withdrawing their money from banks and switching to credit unions.
You are right, it is a very effective tactic.
@Doug Mataconis:
Well, ok then.
If you don’t like the viewpoint or if you take issue with the OWS logic and way they present their case, just say so.
Their manifesto may not have the clarity of “9-9-9” or the moral force of “Cut, Cap And Balance”, or the ease of use of” Flip, Flop and Fly”, or the epic sweep of “30 Minutes or Less” plans, but then they are not running for President, are they?
“Public opinion about the Tea Party peaked pretty early and has leveled off ever since then, it seems only logical the same thing would happen with OWS.”
I think you mean to say that positive public opinion about the TP peaked early and tailed off ever since then. I agree that the same should happen with OWS.
Jesus Doug, do your realize what a twit you sound like?
This leads me to ask, are you a twit, or are you just seriously unaware?
Can you provide links with more information?
@anjin-san:
http://moveyourmoneyproject.org/
@Doug Mataconis:
“I’m confused as to how CNN can poll the public on whether it agrees with the positions of Occupy Wall Street when Occupy Wall Street has yet to actually articulate any positions.”
You can’t be seriously using this position to discount the CNN poll. Couldn’t that same question be turned around and used on the Quinnipiac poll you spoke about? If you are going to use that kind of logic it completely undermines the argument and resource you used in the first place. Think about it.
Yes the protestors have a right to protest and should be provided a place to stay
and should be repaid for any property destroyed by police.