From Public Policy Polling:
A new Public Policy Polling survey covering 5 key Senate battlegrounds finds that voters are strongly opposed to a number of changes that Republicans might pursue to Social Security if they get total control of the government after this fall. 69% of voters say they’re concerned about the changes Republicans might make to Social Security, and by a 33 point margin they say they’re less likely to vote GOP this fall if they’re informed about what changes Republican control could bring to the program. In this closely contested election Democrats should be talking more about Social Security, which could be a winning issue for them in these pivotal states.
Key findings of the survey which included voters in Florida, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin include:
- Only 20% of voters would support privatizing Social Security by investing benefits in the stock market, to 68% who are opposed to that. There’s bipartisan agreement with Democrats (13/83), independents (24/64), and Republicans (27/53) all strongly opposed to privatization. By a 48 point margin voters say they’d be less likely to vote for a candidate who supported that - 63% would be less likely to, compared to only 15% who would be more likely to.
- Only 5% of voters support making any cuts to Social Security benefits, to 88% who are opposed to them. You’d be hard pressed to find any issue that Americans are in such strong agreement about. There’s more than 80% opposition from independents (5/91), Democrats (6/90), and Republicans (4/84) alike. 80% of voters say they’d be less likely to support someone who would cut Social Security benefits, to only 5% who’d be more likely to vote for someone wanting to do that.
- Only 28% of voters support raising the retirement age, to 62% who are opposed to doing that. Once again there’s bipartisan opposition with Democrats (18/74), Republicans (34/54), and independents (40/47) all firmly opposed to raising the retirement age. By a 44 point spread voters are less likely to support a candidate who would raise it - 58% say they’d be less inclined to vote for someone who wanted to do that, to only 14% who would be more likely to vote for them.
- Only 14% of voters support changing the formula that increases benefits for inflation, to 62% who would oppose doing that. Democrats (11/69), independents (14/69), and Republicans (19/52) all stand together in opposing such changes.
- When informed about the possibility that Republicans might pursue some of these policy changes if they end up with control of the White House, Senate, and House after the election 53% of voters say that makes them less likely to vote for the GOP in November, to only 20% who say it makes them more likely to support the party’s candidates. Particularly notable is that among pivotal independent voters, 50% say possible Republican changes to Social Security would make them less likely to vote for the party to just 22% who would be more likely to do so.
11 comments:
I doubt there would be as many red/GOP states, especially in the South, if voter's truly understood casting a GOP vote almost always directly contradicts their own best economic interests. I cannot tell you how many people have told me they exclusively rely on SSA Disability or Retirement just to live and pay bills, but repeatedly go and vote straight GOP every election cycle. Whenever I have felt brave enough to ask why, the most frequent reason stated is because my family has voted GOP all my life, and I never really considered anything else. I get this response across the board from all socio-economic levels. Each time, I am left shaking my head. I have watched political pundits through the years try to explain to so many of these individuals they are voting against their own economic interests, but the message never gets through. While some of these voter's are single issue voter's, e.g., abortion, against gun control, etc., many are not. Education appears to be the only answer, but I have gotten the same response from those with college degrees.
What poppycock. Democrats raise taxes which affects all. Trump has said he will not touch the Social Security system. Education is the answer, but truthful education, not biased BS education. The sky is falling is not education but playing on the fear of others, a Democrat ploy as we all know. Hillary urges caution regarding conclusions about bombings and then spouts of about rogue cops right after a shooting instead of urging caution about conclusions until investigations are completed. A true Racist attitude. Talk about dedicated voters voting against their own interests, how about 96% of blacks voting for Obama twice and they are in worse conditions then ever. What's with that?
@11:23 Name the last time a democrat raised taxes significantly. In regard to Trump not touching Social Security, he may not but the republican congress certainly will.
In regard to the sky is falling not being education and is just a "democrat ploy," it is a bipartisan ploy. The lack of education in this country is resulting in ignorant support of politicians of both major parties resulting ineffective federal and state government.
In regard to urging caution regarding bombings, yet "spouting of[f] about rogue cops" the difference is that there is no structural bias in regard to investigation of bombings, yet the investigation of police shootings are handled by the local police in-house. Your statements appear to suggest you have a mistrust of government, yet you trust the police to police themselves? "What's with that?"
Oh, and in regard to blacks voting for Obama, yet being in worse conditions then ever, I agree and direct you to my previous point regarding lack of education. Education should not be a partisan issue and I expect it would diversify both parties a great deal.
Most education in this country is managed and taught by liberals. Possible that is the problem with education?
everyone retreat back to your tribes, get out your lapel pins and spout talking points.
@12:30
12:19 here again.
Sure! Go find some conservatives to provide education. As I stated, education should not be a partisan issue.
@1:10 and 12:30
If most educators are liberals (let's assume that is true) it begs an interesting question. Why do more conservatives not become educators? Is there something about being conservative that makes them shy away from that profession?
@6:16
1:10 here. I never said more educators are liberal, only that it was a possible problem. Theoretically, if the field of education is dominated by one political ideology it would discourage individuals of another political ideology from becoming educators. That said, it has not been my experience. If I were to place a number on my college professors they were about 80% non-partisan, and 20% liberal.
In regard to why there might not be more conservative educators, I imagine it is because conservative politicians do not respect education any more. As politicans generally reflect their voter base, I think the most effective way to address the issue is to argue to the conservative base that education is important. Seriously, go compare the policies of Eisenhower, Theodore Roosevelt, even Nixon. Education used to be a part of conservative ideology. It no longer is. Modern conservative politicians see education as an expansion of government which is by definition (in their mind) harmful.
As for what Trump would do, no one knows-- not even Trump. He has made directly contradictory statements, often within just a few hours/days, on many issues. It depends on who is flipping him off, or who is whispering in his ear. Anyone who would expect Trump to maintain Social Security is a dreamer. He's a rich guy who doesn't understand the need for Social Security, nor the insurance/paid for aspect of it.
As for whether people of color are better off now than before Pres. Obama took office, that's not the proper question. The real question is whether they are better off now, than they would have been under a Republican President for the past 8 years. (Who knew Romney would look so good by now, even with his binders full of women?) Had there been a Republican President for the past 8 years, coupled with the Congress we had, Social Security would have been well on its way to being dismantled by now.
When Trump asks people of color "What have you got to lose?", how about answering "Our freedom & our lives". Not to mention, we all would lose with trigger-happy Trump on the nuclear button.
OMG, is the purple kool aide good????
Trump said he loves the poorly educated, right?
Post a Comment