Racism in Republican Mississippi

By Michael J.W. Stickings

What, goes the old joke, has for 'i's and can't see? Mississippi.

It's not exactly the most progressive place:

Americans nationwide are evenly divided over the issue of same sex marriage. But Republicans in Mississippi are divided over a wholly different wedlock issue: interracial marriage.

In a PPP poll released Thursday, a 46% plurality of registered Republican voters said they thought interracial marriage was not just wrong, but that it should be illegal. 40% said interracial marriage should be legal.

It's easy to forget, given how far America has come, that such racism thrives all over the place, and not just in the overtly racist/Republican bastions of the Confederate Deep South.

But obviously it's pretty bad in Mississippi, or more specifically among Republicans in Mississippi (I shouldn't impugn the entire state, I suppose), and it hardly comes as a surprise that the leading Republican in that state is Haley Barbour, whose views on race are a tad, well, old-fashioned.

For more, see:

-- Haley Barbour, Jim Crow Republican; and

-- Haley Barbour and the KKK: A perfect Republican match?

Americans are stupid woefully misinformed

By Michael J.W. Stickings

From TPM (via Libby):

In a CNN poll of American adults released Friday, the median guess on what percentage of the federal budget goes to public broadcasting was 5%. With a $3.55 trillion budget last year, that would put funding for the CBP at approximately $178 billion.

In reality though, that's not even close.

The CPB received about $420 million last year from the federal government, making it roughly one one-hundredth of one percent, of the overall budget. That means that the median response was about 424 times higher than the actual amount of federal funding that went to public broadcasting last year.

Further, 20% of respondents thought CPB funding made up over 10% of the entire budget, including 5% who said it made up at least half.

This, of course, is how Republicans dominate the narrative over the budget, and how they achieve electoral success generally, namely, by feeding, and feeding off, widespread public ignorance.

With respect to the budget, it's how they try to convince you that they can offset their tax cuts (mostly for the wealthy) with spending cuts -- but not cuts to popular entitlement programs like Social Security, and not cuts to military spending, but cuts to "waste" (which never really amounts to much, despite their claims) and to such perennial right-wing targets as the NEA, NPR, and PBS (which are not nearly as significant in terms of federal funding as they suggest).

It's their vicious circle, you see:

-- People are ignorant.
-- Republicans make more people ignorant and people more ignorant.
-- More people vote Republican.
-- More Republicans make more people even more ignorant.
-- Etc., etc., etc.

The truth shall set you free. Which is precisely why Republicans don't want you to have it.

The new same-sex marriage majority

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Perhaps it was only a matter of time. Whatever the case, the time has come:

More than half of Americans say it should be legal for gays and lesbians to marry, a first in nearly a decade of polls by ABC News and The Washington Post.

This milestone result caps a dramatic, long-term shift in public attitudes. From a low of 32 percent in a 2004 survey of registered voters, support for gay marriage has grown to 53 percent today. Forty-four percent are opposed, down 18 points from that 2004 survey. 

Of course, the issue remains divisive, with the divisions largely generational and ideological. Republicans and especially evangelical conservatives oppose same-sex marriage, as do older age cohorts.

But the trend is clear: support for same-sex marriage is growing and the majority will continue to expand. It's only a matter of time before same-sex marriage becomes part of the American social landscape, accepted as, for lack of a better word, "normal."

Conservative opposition will remain, but, even there, it will weaken, just as conservative opposition to, say, civil rights has weakened over time. Ultimately, even conservatives (or future generations of conservatives) come to accept, however reluctantly, that which they vehemently opposed. Perhaps their energy wears out, perhaps they simply come to accept the new social norms, and, even if they don't admit it, come to see their opposition as retrograde bigotry.

Many younger Americans who support same-sex marriage now will get more conservative as they age, but this poll indicates that opposition among older Americans is weakening. Simply put, generations are, for the most part, getting more liberal.

And even those groups with the staunchest opposition are seeing changes:

The issue remains divisive; as many adults "strongly" oppose gay marriage as strongly support it, and opposition rises to more than 2-1 among Republicans and conservatives and 3-1 among evangelical white Protestants, a core conservative group. But opposition to gay marriage has weakened in these groups from its levels a few years ago, and support has grown sharply among others – notably, among Catholics, political moderates, people in their 30s and 40s and men. 

Looking ahead to the American future, there are many reasons to despair. Thankfully, though, there are a few indicators of progress. This is one of them, and America will be a much better place once it legalizes same-sex marriage -- from Alaska to Florida, from Hawaii to Maine -- and puts an end to the institutionalized bigotry of sexual orientation for good.

The good from Wisconsin

By Michael J.W. Stickings

The Republican assault on Wisconsin's public-sector unions is by no means a good thing, but there is actually some very positive news to report:

First, Republicans may very well have committed political suicide.

Second, the public is strongly behind the unions (and organized labor generally), and supportive of the right to bargain collectively, and against Gov. Walker and the Republicans.

Third, with a recall effort underway, a new poll shows solid majorities of voters against two Republican state senators, and the results of the poll, conducted before last night's vote, may actually understate the opposition.

Fourth, liberal-progressive groups are reporting huge fundraising boosts, particularly since last night's vote.

Fifth, according to Politico, "AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka is anointing [Gov. Walker] the 'Mobilizer of the Year' for galvanizing union members and supporters into action," a development that bodes well for the elections next year, both for Obama and for Democrats across the country, including in labor-heavy rust belt states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Indiana, West Virginia, and, of course, Wisconsin.

Sixth, Republicans may have broken the law in passing the bill, meaning legal challenges and more trouble for those troubled Republicans.

Remember what I said about political suicide?

Americans don't like Sarah Palin

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Politico:

Sarah Palin's unfavorable rating is off the charts.

The former Alaska governor's numbers are astonishingly upside-down, according to a new Bloomberg poll showing a 32 percentage point spread between those who have an unfavorable rating of Palin and those who view her favorably.

Of the 60 percent in the poll who have an unfavorable opinion of Palin, more than half of them – 38 percent among the whole survey – said they have a "very" unfavorable view of Palin.

We're a long way from being rid of her, what with Fox News and her rabid fans, but it's pretty clear she's done as a credible national figure, let alone as a viable national candidate.

And, yes, some of us saw this coming. It was only just a matter of time before her supernova collapsed into a black hole of self-delusional, albeit still self-glorifying, derangement.

Will Republicans actually listen to the American people and scrap their right-wing agenda?

By Michael J.W. Stickings

John Boehner, Sunday, February 13: "[I]t's not my job to tell the American people what to think. Our job in Washington is to listen to the American people."

The Wall Street Journal, Tuesday, March 2:

Less than a quarter of Americans support making significant cuts to Social Security or Medicare to tackle the country's mounting deficit, according to a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll...

In the poll, Americans across all age groups and ideologies said by large margins that it was "unacceptable'' to make significant cuts in entitlement programs in order to reduce the federal deficit. Even tea party supporters, by a nearly 2-to-1 margin, declared significant cuts to Social Security "unacceptable."

The Wall Street Journal, Tuesday, March 2:

Americans strongly oppose efforts to strip unionized government workers of their rights to collectively bargain, even as they want public employees to contribute more money to their retirement and health-care benefits, the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll shows.

Eliminating collective bargaining rights for public-sector workers over health care, pensions or other benefits would be either "mostly unacceptable" or "totally unacceptable," 62% of those surveyed said. Only 33% support such limits.

It's not my job to tell you what to make of these two polls, nor what to make of Republican efforts to cut entitlement programs and eliminate collective bargaining rights, nor what to make of the Republicans' claim that, coming out of the 2010 midterm elections, they have a mandate to implement their right-wing agenda.

You can draw your own conclusions.

I'm just sayin'.

Fox hates the facts

By Michael J.W. Stickings

The right-wing anti-union thugs in Wisconsin are losing, with public opinion solidly against Gov. Scott Walker's efforts, but that isn't stopping Fox News from pressing its ideological case with reckless abandon -- indeed, it's only encouraging the network of Beck and Hannity and O'Reilly to distort the facts in a way that makes "fair and balanced" even more of a bullshit slogan. Actually, this isn't just distortion, it's out-and-out disregard, turning the facts on their head so as to advance the network's cause:

[On Tuesday], USA Today and Gallup released a new poll that found that a whopping 61 percent of Americans oppose efforts like those of Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI) to strip public sector unions of collective bargaining rights. The poll also found that only a third of Americans support such a policy, indicating that Walker is pandering to the far-right of the American electorate and is hardly representative of mainstream political thought in this country.

This morning, during a debate about the situation in Wisconsin and collective bargaining rights in general, the Fox News show Fox & Friends referenced the USA Today/Gallup poll. With incredible brazenness, the Fox hosts actually reversed the results of the poll in order to claim that two-thirds of Americans supported Wisconsin-style laws rather than opposed them.

A simple mistake, one that anyone could make? More like wishful thinking, but certainly much worse than that, because what we have here is Fox making a "mistake" that oh-so-conveniently backs up its partisan, ideological agenda. It may not have been the dimwitted hosts of that dimwitted show, but it was someone there, and it makes you wonder just how things work at this unabashed organ of Republican propaganda.

As Colbert noted last night, Brian Kilmeade, one of the dimwitted hosts, corrected himself, which was the responsible thing to do, but the damage had been done, embarrassment was at hand, and Fox News had proven once again that its priorities lie not with reporting the facts, or reporting and commenting on the news in any genuinely fair and balanced way, but in lying to advance its own political agenda.

Birthers (heart) Palin

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Well, obviously. But Greg Sargent has the numbers:

The new poll from the Dem firm Public Policy Polling finds that a majority of likely GOP primary voters falsely believe Obama wasn't born in the United States. But this breakdown of their attitudes towards Sarah Palin is of particular interest:

A 51% majority of national GOP primary voters erroneously think President Obama was not born in the U.S. 28% know that he was. With the latter, Palin's favorability rating is 41-52 -- other than Ron Paul, the only candidate these voters view negatively. But with birthers, she has a soaring 83-12, far higher than for any of the others.

Birthers like Palin more than all the other 2012 GOP hopefuls to an overwhelming degree. And she is the only 2012 hopeful aside from Ron Paul who is viewed negatively by Republicans who know the President was born in America. I'd say this tells us a lot about the secret to Palin's appeal and about who she appeals to.

In other words, if you're a Republican, the crazier you are, the more you like Palin. But we knew that already, right?

Otherwise, things aren't looking good for the less-than-one-term governor:

Ben Smith and Jonathan Martin report[ed yesterday] that polls show Palin trailing significantly among GOP primary voters in early-voting states, folks who tend to take their role in picking a presidential nominee rather seriously. As Smith and Martin speculate, this suggests that Palin's general popularity among GOP primary voters -- which remains very high -- is rooted less in a desire to see her elected to a position of awesome responsibility and more in her ability to give voice to their contempt for Democrats.

Yes, that may well be right. She has her ardent followers, of course, and I'm sure many Birthers, Teabaggers, and others on the far right would support her were she to enter the race, but it does seem that more sensible Republicans either don't like her or would prefer she remained on the sidelines, where she can snipe away at her leisure at her (and their) hated opponents. Maybe even those who like her get that she's not presidential material and would be an embarrassment, not only to herself but to them and their party, were she actually to win the nomination, and would even be an embarrassment in the primaries.

Who knows what she's thinking, but I repeat what I've said again and again, namely, that she's not going to run. She simply has too much to lose -- and she'd likely lose a lot. Sure, she's surrounded by sycophants, and she may well be delusional enough, with their added persuasion, to think that she could actually win, but surely someone will tell her that she's have a tough time even winning hardcore Republican primary voters (unless, of course, the field is so weak, with the likes of Romney and Pawlenty, that they'd vote for her by default and in spite of their concerns). Or maybe not. Who knows what goes on inside the Palin bubble?

It's not like an appreciation for reality is one of her strengths.

Polls say America fears sodomy more than socialism

By Nicholas Wilbur

There is nothing profound in the pronouncement that politicians only cite public opinion polls that strengthen their argument, promote their cause, and reinforce their agenda.

What is rather interesting is how quickly Republicans have abandoned the "will of the people" rhetoric now that a majority of public opinion polls show growing opposition to the GOP's efforts to overturn President Obama's signature health-care reform law.

After spending the entire campaign season of 2010 railing against reform as a "government takeover" of the health-care industry – an allegation that earned Republicans the 2010 Bullshit of the Year Award from the Pulitzer Prize-winning PolitiFact.com – the GOP last week took the first step toward manifesting its campaign promise by passing a law in the House to repeal health-care reform.

But just as Republicans begin implementing the "repeal and replace" portion of their "Pledge to America" campaign manifesto – sans the "replace" part, of course, as that would require drafting actual legislation – the ever-fickle mob up and left the GOP corner.

It was as if the public suddenly started tuning out Fox News and tuning into the boring but accurate Cable News Network (CNN). It was as if, overnight, the lies about Obama's "job-killing, budget-busting" reform no longer had the effect of paralyzing Americans with fear of a Kenyan-colonialist-Communist takeover. And every Republican in D.C. was left staring cross-eyed at their lobbyist lovers, at the brink of tears, on the edge of sanity, in the shadows of doubt, wondering if the American electorate suddenly took up huffing ether as an after-work pastime. Whatever the cause of this curse, it seemed voters had turned into a gang of liberal goons. At least that's what it felt like to read the polls.

Nobody has an explanation for why it happened, but it happened nonetheless. Somehow, the populace started to understand what repeal really means: that without the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, insurance companies could once again revoke coverage on a whim, deny care based on pre-existing conditions, and go back raping patients on costs and premiums without cause or pause.

In short, Americans began to fear "socialism" much less than they did sodomy: 

• A CBS/New York Times poll conducted Jan. 15-19, 2011, shows that 48 percent of Americans support the health-care reform bill compared to 40 percent who oppose it.
• An Associated Press-GfK poll shows that 40 percent support the law versus 41 percent who oppose it, a significant shift from the 38-47 split in November, and that only one in four back full repeal of the law. 
• "Strong opposition stands at 30 percent," the Los Angeles Times reported, "close to the lowest level registered in Associated Press-GfK surveys dating to September 2009." 
• A survey conducted by NBC News/Wall Street Journal Jan. 13-17, 2011, recorded a tie at 39 percent between supporters and opponents of the law. Those who strongly favor repeal (35 percent) nearly tied with those who strongly opposed repeal (34 percent). 

Of course, fearmongers should rest easy knowing that polls don't really mean anything, which, coincidentally, is the new mantra of the Republican Party now that public opinion no longer reinforces the GOP's anti-anything-Obama agenda.

Polls don't educate the populace about policies. They merely ask for opinions. Opinions that are based on false truths mean nothing. And because Americans watch Fox News more than any other network, most American opinions exist in a galaxy far beyond reality, on a planet populated by other intellectually challenged simian playmates. For Democrats, public opinion should be generally ignored, as it is the job of the intellectual elite to identify the ills of society and seek to correct them via reform. For Republicans, such a shift in public opinion is an omen of the eroding support of the party's base.

As an aside, it would be nice if pollsters recorded only the opinions of educated, intelligent human beings, as it would save us from having to independently decipher how many of the respondents actually knew what they were talking about, but this would necessarily exclude Sarah Palin fans and Glenn Beck followers, Tea Partiers and most libertarians, which would undermine the Republican Party's love of citing polls. What use is public opinion if you can't inflict the populace with blood-sucking parasites that penetrate logic and infiltrate reason with the apocalyptic rhetoric of socialism? If idiots are barred from the polling pool, of what use is the poll in pushing a conservative agenda?

Polling only educated, intelligent people is admittedly ridiculous and unrealistic – not to mention repetitive, as most polls already segregate respondents by party affiliation, and what Republican cares what Democrats think?

With the "will of the people" argument now rolling slowly but steadily into the Democratic Party's court, don't expect Republicans to give public opinion much credence in coming weeks. Like an incarcerated drug dealer, vox populi is no longer a convenient talking point for the politicians who've spent the last year upholding health-care polls as irrefutable gospel and unquestionable evidence for why they're advocating repeal.

Instead, look forward to a post-election continuation of the Republican Party's campaign offensive, equipped with all the scary rhetoric, math manipulation, and hyper-demonization of Obama's "socialist" agenda that characterized the last year or more of right-wing sound machine.

Or, if there is any shred of intelligence within the Republican Party's leadership, they will stop trying to appease the Tea Partiers with a repeal of health-care reform and move on to repealing Wall Street reform, revoking stimulus spending, protecting "traditional marriage." or any of the other bullshit policies they promised to pursue in their "Pledge to America."

(Cross-posted from Muddy Politics.)

Here's hoping Speaker Boehner learns to speak the truth

By R.K. Barry 

A CNN / Opinion Research poll conducted between December 17 and 19 indicated that 56% of Americans hold either a positive view of Obama's health-care reform or are of the opinion that it is not liberal enough. More specifically, 43% like it as it is and 13% would probably have liked to see a public option. That leaves 37% who are opposed because the reform package is too liberal and 7% who have no opinion.

Let's be clear here. Of those expressing an opinion, 56% reject the Republican critique of "Obamacare" and only 37% side with the GOP.

Given those numbers,  it is rather difficult to understand what Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va) was talking about when he said of health-care reform that "we just need to repeal it as the American people have spoken out and said."

I'm sure if I spent just a bit of time doing some Google searches I could find a dozen more Republicans saying that their midterm gains were in large part about Americans rejecting health-care reform. I know recently-installed House Speaker John Boehner has been saying similar things. You will forgive me if I don't dig up all the relevant quotes. It hardly seems necessary. 

John McCain recently railed against the repeal of "don't-ask-don't-tell" as an affront to the electorate despite the fact that polls put support for gays serving openly in the military at upwards of 80%. Same idea. Say the opposite of what is demonstrably true and a lot of people will believe the lie and repeat it either because they want to believe what is untrue or because they are too lazy to do a bit of research.

We're not talking about differences of opinion about things that cannot be shown empirically but about things that are, by modern and generally-recognizable standards of truth, considered to be matters of fact. And before you take issue with polling as a source of gathering information of citizens preferences, I assure you that it has become pretty darn accurate over time.

But just think about the idiotic ideas that have fairly recently been in circulation amongst far too many Americans: Obama is a Muslim; he was not born in America; he is a socialist; he hates America; climate change is an elaborate hoax; and almost any piece of weirdness that comes out of Glenn Beck's mouth. And then there are the claims by various Republicans that Americans reject health-care reform or gays serving openly in the military.

Conservative politics in America seems to be far too much about just saying shit, no matter how absurd, just to see who is either stupid enough or lazy enough to accept it as truth.

I once read something, which I admit may not be true but struck me as plausible and at least suggestive. It was a claim that the KGB, the intelligence agency of the former Soviet Union, would work through its networks to put clearly untrue information in circulation that would support its interests simply because a certain subset of the population will always accept as plausible anything they hear and repeat it.

In my experience, it is not uncommon to hear someone offer an opinion contrary to all facts with the commnt that they had heard it somewhere, though they could not tell you where or what proof was provided.

For the longest time, the suggestion that tobacco did not cause cancer was in this camp, though thankfully that is now a part of the past.

As I say, just put it out there and some people will believe it and repeat it. Too much of politics is done this way, which, when bending the truth, seems to be about the maxim "go big or go home."

What I would say to the Eric Cantors and John Boehners of the world is that they should go ahead and work for the legislative agenda of their choice or the choice of those they think got them elected. But please do try to keep the bullshit to a minimum about the extent to which you are speaking for "the American people."

Although if you want to attack health-care reform, which seems to be pretty popular, and fight for tax cuts for the super rich, which seem to be pretty unpopular, that's fine with me. See you in 2012.

(Cross-posted to Lippmann's Ghost.)

Elephant Dung #7: Huckabee calls out Palin over FLOTUS food flap

Tracking the GOP Civil War

By R.K. Barry

(For an explanation of this ongoing series, see here. For previous entries, see here.) 

You may have noticed that former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee took a little shot at Sarah Palin for her bogus claim that Michelle Obama doesn't want Americans to eat dessert – or some such nonsense. All of this was in the context of the First Lady talking about combating childhood obesity in America and the need to encourage children to consider healthier eating choices.

This is what Huckabee had to say:

With all due respect to my colleague and friend Sarah Palin, I think she's misunderstood what Michelle Obama is trying to do. Michelle Obama's not trying to tell people what to eat or force government's desires on people. She's stating the obvious: that we have an obesity crisis in this country. 

Palin was doing what she always does, which is to fire up her base by pointing to what she would consider an instance of government telling people what to do. In contrast, Huckabee was presenting himself as the voice of reason in defending Ms. Obama who was only suggesting the obvious point that public education about healthier food choices for our children is a good idea.

Okay. But what I found interesting is that this little flare-up, such as it was, comes only a few weeks after new polling indicated that Huckabee would give Palin a run for her money for the Republican presidential nomination and would appeal potentially to much of the same constituency, but also perhaps to much-needed voters beyond the base.

A Quinnipac poll on November 22 showed Huckabee in a statistical dead heat with Obama and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney. In a Marist College poll on November 24, Huckabee and Palin were virtually tied in popularity among Republicans who were not college graduates. But Huckabee pulled ahead significantly -- 18 percent to Palin's nine percent -- among respondents with college degrees. Huckabee came in second to Romney, who registered 25 percent among college-educated Republicans.

According to Janine Parry, director of the Arkansas Poll at the University of Arkansas, Huckabee is in a good position to separate himself from the rest of the pack.

His unfavorable numbers are significantly lower, he's penetrated the mainstream culture without becoming clownish, and he's demonstrated a willingness – even eagerness – to be a practical, truly bipartisan leader. In this environment and in a general election at least, those seem like substantial assets. 

Maybe this dessert flap is nothing. But it could be an early attempt by Huckabee to stake out some territory that takes in not only the conservative base but also independent voters, while Palin continues to say and do stupid things that appeal only to the same narrow constituency. 

I noticed a particularly idiotic comment on the Fox Nation website by an unnamed poster in response to Huckabee's statement, which said it all for me. It read: 

Governor, with your inability to see through to the real motives of the Obama's agenda to destroy freedom and America, you have lost my vote. 

There you have it. Taking away our freedom one double-chocolate raspberry cheesecake at a time.

The smarter types in the Republican Party understand full well that the road to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue does not go through Crazy Town.

Mike Huckabee seems to get this. Sarah Palin, and those who hang on her every word, not so much.

Polling and public policy: DADT

By R.K. Barry

There are many things about politics that are really annoying. One of them, as I have previously noted, is the tendency of political parties just coming off of significant electoral success to suggest that they have a mandate to implement every last one of their platform planks. You know, the American people have spoken, blah, blah, blah, and everything we - the newly elected majority - want to do has been sanctioned.

This is a given. We know. But with the accuracy of polling being what it is, it becomes increasingly hard to make statements of this kind that are so clearly inconsistent with what the American people appear to be saying at any given moment.

Such was the case recently when Arizona Senator John McCain blasted the Senate as it moved to repeal "don't-ask-don't-tell (DADT)," which would enable gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military.

Of those who would repeal DADT, McCain said the following:

"So here we are about six weeks after an election that repudiated the agenda of the other side," [and those who would repeal don't-ask-don't-tell] are acting in direct repudiation of the message of the American people."

Well, no. According to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll, nearly eight in ten Americans favour gays and lesbians serving openly. Significantly, this cuts across partisan and ideological lines, with majorities of Democrats, Republicans, independents, liberals, conservatives and white evangelical Protestants in favor of homosexuals' serving openly.

The question is, what do we make of all of this? McCain can read polling numbers as well of the rest of us so he understands that on this issue the tide has turned and that his view is in the minority. But in a certain sense this goes back to an old political debate between the idea of instructed political representation versus representation, which, once elected, believes that it owes those who have voted them in only their best judgement. (Check out Edmund Burke on this.)

Those who would argue that they owe the electorate only their best judgement typically suggest that issues, taken one at a time, are far too complicated for the average voter to comprehend (even if they would never say that publicly). To run the government by taking the pulse of the nation on any given initiative would surely, they argue, lead to chaos. Government by referenda never works, only those who represent the people know how it all needs to hang together.

On this view, the voters, in the last election rejected something called "the left" and embraced a competing view coming from the right. Challenging the repeal of DADT is, for many conservatives, the kind of stance that defines this newly embraced conservatism - the polls of the moment be damned. Republicans who are off side, previously supportive voters - they just don't get it, or so the argument would go.

The problem is that it is not that simple. And when you govern in a way that indicates that you are only responsible to the electorate on voting day, you really start to piss off a lot of people who don't identify particularly strongly with the left or right, the so-called "swing voters" or independents.

I am simply saying that in an era when we poll everything, it's that much harder to govern. Sometimes polling numbers are so strong in one direction or another that we ignore them at our peril. Sometimes polling numbers are driven by effective mis-information campaigns and have to be taken with a grain of salt. Sometimes poling numbers indicate a strongly held view that a government would do well to ignore such as attitudes among white soldiers in the late 1940s opposing racial integration of the armed forces just before Truman did exactly that.

Politicians who trail in opinion surveys going into an election like to say that the only poll that counts is the one on election day. If that was ever true, it no longer is.

But how to use polling information in the construction of good public policy does remain a thorny issue. How to respect the views of the electorate on any particular issue while knowing that governments have to balance countless programs and initiatives, that's hard work. And then there is just the need to do what's right.

Polling: Can't live by it, can't live without it.

(Cross-posted to Lippmann's Ghost.)