Posts Tagged ‘Polls’


(First, apologies for not yet delivering the promised Part 2 of the material on Hillary Clinton — I’ll deliver it eventually. The severe insomnia continues, and I’ve been spending my energy finishing the first edit of Chris Mato Nunpa’s very valuable Great Evil. I hope to finish that tomorrow and get on with the second edit. As an aside, I did the first edit on screen, but will print out the ms. after finishing that edit, as it’s considerably slower to edit a printout, but I tend to spot a lot more than I do when doing all of the editing on screen.)

Anyway, here’s the good news: The Pew Research Center just released a new poll on religious affiliation in the U.S., “In U.S., Decline of Christianity Continues at Rapid Pace.” The really good news is that the percentage of Americans who describe themselves as Christian declined by 12% over the last decade, but from 77% to 65%. That’s still far too high for comfort, but it’s a major improvement.

As well, self-identified Catholics declined from 23% to 20% of the population over the last decade, while “nones” (atheists, agnostics, spiritual but no religious, none of the above) increased from 17% to 26% since 2009 — and they (we) now considerably outnumber both Catholics and white evangelicals, who declined from 19% of the population a decade ago to16% today.

This is great news. Today, evangelical and conservative Catholics are doing their best to stifle democracy, prop up their utterly corrupt enabler Trump, and install a theocracy through whatever means at their disposal, no matter how foul (gerrymandering, voter suppression, foreign interference in elections). They probably won’t succeed, and if they don’t Christianity will continue its well-deserved downward spiral.

Once the authoritarian evangelists, Trump cultists, and other authoritarian religious fanatics are defeated (quite probably in 2020), we’ll likely (well, could) make some progress on climate change and other real social and economic problems, and move on to creating a more fair, peaceful, and sustainable world.

If the Christian religio-fascists don’t succeed in destroying democracy next year and cementing their rule, they’re doomed.

(At the risk of sounding like a mean, vindictive s.o.b., I wish we could disarm them, put them all on an island along with all of the Islamist religio-fascists, lace the water with contraceptives, and hand out machetes.)


Two months ago we reported on Hillary Clinton’s favorablity vs. unfavorability ratings. At the time, fully 53% of the public viewed her in an unfavorable light. Since then, her unfavorability rating has risen to 55%, with only 40% of the public viewing her favorably. Further, 49% of the public say they would not even consider voting for her.

Meanwhile, Bernie Sanders’ favorability and unfavorability ratings are a mirror image of Clinton’s. The most recent poll puts his favorability rating at 55% and his unfavorability rating at 40%. The Huffington Post’s average of 10 polls over the last three weeks has Sanders’ favorability rating averaging 47% and his unfavorability rating averaging 42%.

Which candidate is more electable?

It’s all too possible that Clinton could lose the general election if, as now seems quite possible, Sanders continues to pile up victories in the remaining primaries and caucuses, and the superdelegates hand the nomination to Clinton. Fully 25% of Sanders voters say they will not vote for Clinton, should she win (or be handed) the Democratic nomination. If it is in fact handed to her following a stream of losses, that percentage would almost certainly rise.

Clinton seems to be banking on the Republicans nominating a candidate the public loathes even more than it loathes her. It could happen. They could nominate either Donald Trump (69% negative, 26% favorable) or Ted Cruz (59% negative, 26% positive.

In such a case, Clinton would probably win a squeaker, the Republicans would retain control of the House and Senate, and we’d have four more years of the status quo: no serious moves toward reducing economic inequality; no real moves toward addressing the climate crisis; continued kid-glove handling of Wall Street criminals; continuation of the disastrous Bush/Obama interventionist foreign policy; and continued assaults on civil liberties and persecution of whistle blowers.

To make this more palatable to her backers, Clinton would throw them a few sops on social issues — especially gay rights and women’s rights. These are good things, but they’re also things she could deliver without angering her corporate backers, including those who have “paid” her $5,000 a minute to deliver speeches at their events.

This is the best we can hope for if Clinton gets the Democratic nomination.

But if, as now seems certain, the Republicans have a contested convention, and if they end up nominating anyone but an ogre (such as Trump or Cruz), all bets are off. Dislike of Clinton is so high that she could well lose to any Republican who sounds remotely reasonable.