The effect of large or small sample size is reflected in the margin of error. The OP reports a 5% margin of error so its 95% likely that the true percentage is between 41% and 51%. Since 41% is still way too high for this question in this day and age, I don’t think you can discard the conclusions based on solely sample size.
That’s basically my point. Even assuming that we’re at the bottom of the confidence interval and the bottom of the margin of error, it’s still likely that a third of Mississippi Republican primary voters think you shouldn’t mix white meat and dark meat, as it were.
Is the subject intended to be this particular poll, or is the subject intended to suggest that only Republicans would be likely to have such discriminatory ideas in such lopsided percentages?
I live in Mississippi and I don’t find this terribly surprising, unfortunately. But, I do think attitudes are far different in the younger generation. Also, if my experience is anything to go on, a lot of the people in that 46% have mixed race grandchildren that “don’t count.” Race is a complicated thing here…
ETA: I mean race relations, not race. Hope I didn’t offend
The wingnuts always vote, it’s the moderates who are less likely to vote in primaries for either party, I’d guess generally because they just aren’t invested as much in that party or either party in general.
At least here in Virginia, when I’ve looked at primary results for my polling location, I’ll see results in the low hundreds, where even non-presidential years easily bring out numbers well into the thousands. So, at least from my anecdotal experience, we’re probably talking about less than 5-10% of the population fitting into the polled group anyway.
Either way, it’s no surprise that there’s racists in Mississippi, but as racists are probably much more likely to be wingnuts than not, and thus, probably more likely to vote in primaries than any other random individual, I could easily see them making up a substantial percentage of that group, and yet really only being a relatively small percentage of the total population less than, say, 5% or so.
I wonder, if the blacks of Mississippi were polled about this, how many of them would be opposed to interracial relationships? As I understand it, it’s not at all uncommon for blacks to feel the same way about it as these racist whites. I see comments online all the time from blacks bitching about black men “neglecting the sisters” in favor of white women.
Who said the guys polled were whites (ETA: or guys for that matter, heh) ? It only says “primary Republican voters”. Unless you’re assuming no black would ever vote (R) ?
Kobal2, this is a matter of probable vs possible. I doubt we need to cite the fact that the OVERWHELMING majority of african americans vote D and not R. But if you do, I’m sure someone will provide one.
About 7% of blacks support the Republicans according to Wiki, unsurprising given how racist the Republicans are.
Ba-ziiiing!
I guess I’m not seeing the surprise either. You take a sample of 400 from the most conservative of conservative white people from Mississippi and 46% are against interracial marriage? That’s about what I would have guessed.
Go to Southern WV and ask the same question of Dem primary voters and I would guess around 60% against.
In 2000, Alabama had a state-wide vote to remove the long-irrelevant ban on miscegenation in the state constitution. It passed, but it was like 69% of actual voters. And:
Times are changing, but not at the same pace everywhere.
It’s an interesting brush they’re painting with. That a sizable percentage of any population carries these views is worthy of derision.
But is it a Mississippi thing? A Republican thing? A Mississippi Republican thing? An American thing? Not that the polled population isn’t shameful, but without other polls (which may be out there) for comparison, isn’t attributing the characteristic to a particular group a mistake–one that relies on preconceived notions of what the Mississippi Republican party is made up of?
Talk about provincial. This is a human universal. Ingroup good, outgroup bad.
But what counts as “ingroup” and “outgroup” changes.
Dopers = ingroup
Yahoo! Answers (etc.) = outgroup
As the product of an interracial marriage myself, and from stories my mom tells me about her and my dad’s experiences, and those of her mother who lived in Alabama and Mississippi, the only thing I’m surprised about the number is that it seems low to me.
If it were a poll inclusive of all segments of all parties, 46% would sound about right. But if you’re telling me that only 46% of Republican primary voters, Republican primary voters in Mississippi no less, believe that interracial relationships should be illegal, I question the results, not the validity of the poll, but the veracity of the responses. It seems likely to me that a number greater than zero would not be comfortable admitting to such an abhorrent belief publicly.
Hooray! Progress!
The subject is this particular poll. I’m sure if you asked a similar number of likely Democratic voters, you’d get a non-zero number of yes votes… but I’d be surprised if it was 46%.
If there is such a poll of Mississippi (or wherever) Democrats, I would be just as fascinated to see it - and probably even more horrified if the result was the same.
There is a distinct difference between opposing interracial marriage and believing it should be illegal.
I oppose gun ownership, chronic cannabis use, shitty Hollywood remakes of classic British films* and scat porn, but I don’t think any of those things should be illegal.
Let me know when you see a black woman bitching about how black men should go to prison for neglecting the sisters.
*See, eg., The Italian Job.
I’d love to see a broad-based poll like this, myself, rather than limiting it to Republicans.
My sneaking suspicion is that if “likely Republican primary voters” are at 46%, the state as a whole is probably above 30%–I don’t think this is totally a political affiliation issue.