Today in the National Review, Byron York lists the results of exit polling in the recent Democratic primaries. In particular, this really surprises me:
Question: Which one issue mattered most in deciding how you voted today?"
[ul]
[li]taxes[/li][li]education[/li][li]health care/Medicare[/li][li]the war in Iraq[/li][li]national security/terrorism[/li][li]the economy/jobs[/li][/ul]
How do you think Democrats answered that question? Well, in four out of five states reporting responses to this question, national security/terrorism finished LAST. In the other state (Delaware), it finished second from last.
From the article:
Have attention spans become so short that two years after 9/11 people really don’t care any more? Or is this just a Democrat thing? I have my suspicion that if Republicans were asked the same question, they’d put terrorism near the top of the list. Is this another example of the big divide in American politics? Or maybe I’m wrong, and Republicans don’t care either. In any event, this really is a frightening bit of information.
The war on terror is FAR from over, and it is the single most important issue facing the entire world right now. I find it astounding that the people who answered this poll question essentially don’t care about it at all.
Well, that’s some method of deduction you have there.
“What’s more important to you in a significant other, a good personality or good looks?”
“A good personality.”
“You mean you don’t care about looks at all?!”
We might be satisfied with current work. Heck, we might even look to the time of Clinton when it was a hot issue in the White House the entire time (only to be dismissed by GWB’s admin; ref other thread in GD which I can’t find this instant).
Attention span has little to do with it. It’s just that even fearmongering has its limits, and America is getting over the traumatic shock of 9/11. It’s past time for people to start to think about issues that have a more direct impact on their lives than dirty hateful people sitting in caves 12,000 miles away.
Uh, well, as I’m not a Republican, I can’t help you out there, but is it really so strange that many Americans correctly find that the risk of personal harm posed by a poor economy and a reduction in availability of social safety nets is far greater than the risk of personal harm posed by a few sporadic terrorist acts scattered over several decades?
I dispute your claim that terrorism is “single most important issue facing the entire world right now”. Firstly, you ought to ask a few people from outside the US whether they agree with your statement. It may in fact be the single most divisive issue facing the world right now, but that’s not the same thing at all. Issues that are of equal or greater importance, IMO, include (in no particular order):
AIDS epidemic in Africa
Possession of nuclear weapons by North Korea
Economic conditions in former Soviet Union
Chinese threats to take back Taiwan by force
Ongoing differences between India and Pakistan
Pakistani and/or North Korean export of nuclear weapons technology
Depletion of world hydrocarbon supplies
Also, I fail to see how placing terrorism last on a pre-selected list means that the respondents “don’t care about it at all”.
I believe your problem is your questionable priorities and your simplistic view of anyone who self-identifies as member of the Democratic Party, not that “Democrats don’t care about terrorism”.
Yeah, Sam, that’s a helluva lot of soup to make from one onion.
The simple fact is that ‘terrorism’ is a remote issue for the general public. And having the ‘threat level’ raised and lowered without any visible attacks just makes the public jaded about it.
Whereas losing one’s job, health insurance, and home is as real as a slap in the face to people. That’ll loom a lot larger than any overseas issue barring another spectacular attack.
Well, I’m not a Democrat, but I think people are just worn out over it all. Assuming this poll you mention is an accurate reflection that breaks down party lines of course (sounds reasonable to me, but I disagree with your assumption that Republicans ALSO wouldn’t put the economy at the tops of their lists).
Its been too much. Too much initial fear…too much hype afterward. Folks can’t stay that fearful or that hyped up forever or they snap. People are also smarting (especially the Democrats) at what they see as blatant manipulation of the situation following 9/11 by the administration. It seems that there really WAS no good tactical reason (as far as terrorism and AQ goes) for the US to go into Iraq, and folks are pissed off over the whole WMD fiasco. The administration lost a LOT of credibility over that, and a lot of folks lump it all together…Iraq, war on terrorism, the whole thing, and blame Bush for it big time. In addition, the entire issue has become politicized now, breaking down, once again, along party lines for just that reason.
Couple that with peoples very real worry about the economy, their jobs and such (I’d be surprised btw if Republicans didn’t ALSO put economy at the top of their list over terrorism) and it doesn’t surprise me a bit. You can only stay worrie about an amorphous threat like ‘terrorism’ for so long…then you have to worry about something closer to home like your job and the welfare of your family.
Oh well…thats my take on it, for whatever its worth.
Terrorism is little relevant to the world. Bush keeps hitting the same boring talk about AQ/Terror/Saddam. The world cares more about getting concessions from Bush in exchange for lip service against terrorism if at all. Like others have pointed out… jobs, health and regional issues are much larger. Terrorism even for americans isn’t the number one fear.
Somehow Bush’s reaction to terrorism has become more news than the terrorism itself.
So… It’s not a big deal? Taxes are more important? And the current state of education? Health care? None of these things are a crisis, and by most objective measures they are in better shape than they’ve ever been.
I can only think that if you believe that you are ignorant of the danger and cost. Worried about the economy? Well, the biggest risk to the economy right now is a major terrorist strike. 9/11 wiped out something like a trillion dollars of wealth after you factor in the decline in airlines, the physical damage in New York, the shock to the stock markets, the reduction in consumer confidence, etc. Now imagine what would happen to the economy if a dirty bomb went off in Manhattan. Do you know how much the cleanup would cost? Billions. We’ve just learned that a Pakistani scientist has been selling bomb plans to North Korea, Iran, and Libya. Bin Laden is still on the loose, and there’s a very large international organization (al-Qaida) that has as its primary goal the destruction of western democracy. The government of the U.S. is spending over 100 billion dollars a year fighting terrorism right now. It is a huge, huge issue. But it seems to have completely fallen off of most people’s radar. I find that troubling.
John: Well, if 14% of the public overall think terrorism is the major issue, but only 2-4% of Democrats do, wouldn’t that suggest that about 25% of Republicans think it’s the major issue? 25% to 3% is a pretty big difference.
But the reason I framed it, “Do Democrats believe this?” is because the data I had included only Democrats. I even said in my OP that I was surprised by it, and therefore had to conclude that it was possible that it was a universal feeling.
It’s an issue, but I don’t consider it the most important issue by a longshot.
Terrorism has been around for ages, and will continue to be with us. It cannot be completely eradicated, and in my mind our efforts against it do not constitute a “war” that can be won in the traditional sense. The “war on drugs” strikes me as much the same - look how much progress we’ve made on that.
Certainly we should protect ourselves and work to root out the causes of terrorism, and we’re doing that (sort of…). But I’m certain that our safeguards will fail eventually no matter who is running the country. There will certainly be more attacks - it’s only a matter of time.
That being the case as I see it, I’m concerned with other issues.
It will never be over, Sam. Terrorists have always existed, and will always exist. They scored a huge hit on 9/11, but they really aren’t a pressing concern of the average person, nor should they be. We don’t live in Israel.
Keep in mind, folks, that our friend here is ostensibly Canadian, with all the attendant social safety guarantees. Though that fails to explain his obsession with American politics and the Republican Daily Talking Point, which sort of undercuts my thesis here.
Oh, but minty, surely someone as conservative and opposed to government spending on social programs as our dear friend Sam diligently refuses to allow tax money to be spent on his own social needs! I can see him now, nobly declining to be treated by the national health insurance; refusing his share of Canadian social security when he reaches the age of eligibility; maintaining his own personal disaster relief fund so that he may selflessly prevent the government from insuring his home in case of flood or tornado.
Not at all, but you have to balance that cost against the cost of a “war on terror” that seems to habitually get things wrong to the point of limiting our God given rights and invading countries that have little to do with the actual threat of international terrorism.
This war on terror is starting to bear a striking resemblence to Bullwinkle’s rabbit-from-the-hat trick. After several iterations it becomes obvious that we’ve got to get ourselves a new hat.
You are equating “it is not the #1 issue” with “it is not a major issue”. That’s not a valid conclusion to draw from the data.
Check out the Newsweek poll on the page I cited in my first post, 3rd poll from the bottom. (I can’t cut and paste it and preserve the format.) It’s a few months old, and doesn’t address your exact issue, but it does cut the data by party affiliation and shows a distinct split between Dems and Pubs.
Understood. I just think inflamatory thread titles diminish the quality of the debate. Perhaps you didn’t think yours was inflamatory. At least you didn’t call it “Why do Democrats favor terrorism?”
I’m talking about terrorism, not about Republicans. And guess what? Canada is right in the middle of this war. We have 2,000 soldiers in Afghanistan. We have soldiers in Iraq. When the U.S. closes its borders, Canada gets hurt the most. When the U.S. economy takes a hit, Canada feels it just as much.
As for our social programs, I’d trade our health care system for the U.S. system in a heartbeat. I need to see an Ophthamologist right now. I have daily headaches due to some age-related issues with my eyes. Guess what? The waiting list right now is running about six months. My wife has arthritis that flared up a while ago and needed new medication from a Rheumatologist. She had to wait for four months for an appointment, in agony every day. And we’re in Alberta, which has a pretty good health care system compared to some other provinces.
In terms of health coverage, I have no choice. It is illegal to set up a private medical practice in Canada. If I need treatment, I have to go through government insurance. I’m firmly in support of allowing people who wish to opt out of the system seek private treatment, but our government won’t allow it.
But my family qualified for welfare for my entire childhood, and we refused to take it. Conequently, we were the poorest family in a welfare neighborhood. When the government offered student loans with 50% remission, I could have wiped out $10,000 in student loans overnight by filling out a single form. I was making minimum wage at the time. I refused, and it took me 10 years to pay off that debt. I put my money where my mouth is, thank you.
Stoid said:
That is exactly the kind of head-in-the-sand thinking that is going to cause us to lose this war, if indeed we lose it. I’ve got news for you - this is NOT business as usual. Terrorism has always been there, yes. The difference now is that A) it’s highly organized and well funded, and B) the growth of technology has given terrorists much, much more power. We could live in a world where terrorists hijacked the occasional plane or rammed a ship with a boat full of explosives. We could live in a world where limits of communication kept terrorist organizations from spreading around the world and organizing massive attacks.
Today, none of that is true. When terrorist organizations have state sponsorhip and access to hundreds of millions of dollars, and when communications tools like the internet allow them to organize globally and research vulnerabilities, you have a whole new ball game. And when they have access to fissile materials and biological weapons, the threat grows exponentially.
I’m talking about terrorism, not about Republicans. And guess what? Canada is right in the middle of this war. We have 2,000 soldiers in Afghanistan. We have soldiers in Iraq. When the U.S. closes its borders, Canada gets hurt the most. When the U.S. economy takes a hit, Canada feels it just as much.
As for our social programs, I’d trade our health care system for the U.S. system in a heartbeat. I need to see an Ophthamologist right now. I have daily headaches due to some age-related issues with my eyes. Guess what? The waiting list right now is running about six months. My wife has arthritis that flared up a while ago and needed new medication from a Rheumatologist. She had to wait for four months for an appointment, in agony every day. And we’re in Alberta, which has a pretty good health care system compared to some other provinces.
In terms of health coverage, I have no choice. It is illegal to set up a private medical practice in Canada. If I need treatment, I have to go through government insurance. I’m firmly in support of allowing people who wish to opt out of the system seek private treatment, but our government won’t allow it.
But my family qualified for welfare for my entire childhood, and we refused to take it. Conequently, we were the poorest family in a welfare neighborhood. When the government offered student loans with 50% remission, I could have wiped out $10,000 in student loans overnight by filling out a single form. I was making minimum wage at the time. I refused, and it took me 10 years to pay off that debt. I put my money where my mouth is, thank you.
Stoid said:
That is exactly the kind of head-in-the-sand thinking that is going to cause us to lose this war, if indeed we lose it. I’ve got news for you - this is NOT business as usual. Terrorism has always been there, yes. The difference now is that A) it’s highly organized and well funded, and B) the growth of technology has given terrorists much, much more power. We could live in a world where terrorists hijacked the occasional plane or rammed a ship with a boat full of explosives. We could live in a world where limits of communication kept terrorist organizations from spreading around the world and organizing massive attacks.
Today, none of that is true. When terrorist organizations have state sponsorhip and access to hundreds of millions of dollars, and when communications tools like the internet allow them to organize globally and research vulnerabilities, you have a whole new ball game. And when they have access to fissile materials and biological weapons, the threat grows exponentially.
