Are you …
Male: 66%
Female: 30%
“Other”: 4%
How old are you?
Under 20: 10
20–29: 50
30-39: 15
40-49: 9
Over 50: 2
Pick one: Capitalism …
Isn’t fundamentally evil; it just needs to be regulated: 46
Can’t be saved; it’s inherently immoral: 37
Didn’t answer: 17 Pop quiz!
The proposal to prohibit banks from engaging in both client trading and proprietary trading is called …
Glass-Steagall Act: 40
Volcker Rule: 6
Buffett Rule: 11
Elizabeth Warren Bill: 11
Didn’t Answer: 32
The correct answer is “Volcker Rule.”
What do you think of Obama?
I believed in him, and he let me down: 40
He’s doing great: 1
I never believed in him: 27
He’s doing the best he can: 22
The country with the best government in the world is …
"Canada. It’s most like the U.S. but more the way I want.”
“Denmark.”
“I don’t accept the premises of this question.
Did you vote in the 2010 midterm elections?
Yes: 39
No: 55
No, but only because I wasn’t 18: 5
Explain how you would fix Wall Street.
“A maximum-wage law.”
“President Elizabeth Warren."
“Burn it down.”
Rank yourself on the following Scale of Liberalism:.
Not liberal at all: 6
Liberal but fairly mainstream (i.e., Barack Obama): 3
Strongly liberal (i.e., Paul Krugman): 12
Fed up with Democrats, believe country needs overhaul (i.e., Ralph Nader): 41
Convinced the U.S. government is no better than, say, Al Qaeda (i.e., Noam Chomsky): 34
Has the occupation been a success so far?
79: “Yes. We’re still here.”
13: “No. We’re still here.”
So what did we learn?
Well the majority of the protestors (at least as indicated by this rather tiny sampling) are predominantly males, under 30 years old, who are NOT huge supporters of President Obama, but loves them some Elizabeth Warren, and don't really seem to enjoy being polled by a magazine that is so closely tied to the same kinds of Wall Street corporations that they are currently protesting against.
Perhaps a poll conducted by a magazine that was not so clearly looking down their nose at the protestors might actually learn something noteworthy to share with their readers.
Yeah, this seems like a poll that Fox will use against them, against Obama, and against changing anything at all. Where was the question about whether these folks are currently employed, about their level of education, and any question about a solution?
ReplyDeleteMy husband and I went to Occupy Wall Street last Sunday. Yes, there are many young males, but we didn't feel out of place. There were plenty of aging boomers like ourselves, engaging in discussions, showing support for those able to be there during the week. Maybe the age is skewed because the under 30s have finished college in this recession and can't find a job.
ReplyDeleteThe backlash against the rich - The backlash against the rich is the start of debate, not the end. Are the rich to be punished for succeeding or merely asked to pay their “fair” share? Who is wealthy or who’s just well-off? Is $250,000 a reasonable cutoff for couples, as Obama once indicated, or has that been repudiated? If taxes do rise, what approach would best preserve incentives for hard work, investment and risk-taking? Are Obama’s assaults on wealthy business leaders just desserts or political cheap shots? However measured, the rich are besieged; the attacks almost certainly will intensify.
ReplyDeleteGREAT GRAPHIC!
http://thecynicaleconomist.com/2011/10/10/daily-readings-10-10-2011/
My guess is that they interviewed the most visible and least retiring of the protesters. Having lived in Eugene, OR, I recognize this demographic. It's the anarchists. Males under 30, didn't vote in the last election, anti-capitalism, anti-government. And yes, these are the ones who would have pushed forward to say something. Fortunately, I believe there are lots of regular people out there too, who do vote, who want to build our nation instead of kicking in windows. I'm not too fond of anarchists (one of them called me "just a liberal" once, which I find absurd). And while I'm a fan of Chomski, to a point, his world view is skewed by a lifetime of frustration, and the anarchists only pick up on the broad-stroke "evil" brush that paints EVERYBODY as the same. Chomski's ideas about Democratic Socialism have been lost in the fog. Just as Nader was wrong about all politicians and people in power being exactly the same, so are these people. Call me an optimist. If I actually thought the liberals I've known throughout my life are just like the people on the right, then I would give up, stop voting, and stop caring. I don't believe that. Yes, corruption from power and money does tend to bring out the worst in those touched by it, and make them seem more similar, and some of them certainly lose their way and should be held accountable. The the baby/bathwater crap has always pissed me off. When we are trying to save our democracy, we don't need a fucking hatchet, we need a scalpel.
ReplyDeleteOkay, rant over. Just a liberal, and proud of it.
If these poll numbers are true - and I am a cynic about most polls - how sad. More mainstream Dems ad Progressives need to get out there and support these young people. I am going to figure out a way to get to the nearest one!
ReplyDeleteYou can almost always count on Republican presidential candidates to be united in their opposition to more taxes for the rich. But this time around, the 2012 field is standing lockstep behind a less traditional idea: the middle class pays too little in taxes.
ReplyDeleteThanks to a strange convergence of conservative ideological trends since President Obama’s election, Republicans now are expected to protest the entire bottom half of taxpayers’ contributions as too stingy even while they proclaim Americans are “Taxed Enough Already.” And they’ve yet to figure out a policy that will satisfy both complaints at once.
In recent months, nearly every major Republican candidate has name-checked a popular statistic that 47% of Americans who file taxes paid no income tax in 2009. Given the GOP’s anti-tax zeal you’d think they’d be celebrating. Nope!
“Right now we know that 53% of Americans pay income taxes and 47% do not,” Michele Bachmann told Bloomberg TV on Tuesday. “I think we definitely need to change the tax code. We need to get more in line. Everybody benefits from this magnificent country. Everybody pay something.”
Not only do statements like Bachmann’s seem to defy past Republican orthodoxy, but the candidates are explicitly making the argument on the same fairness grounds that progressives like Elizabeth Warren have used to demand greater taxes on the rich. The idea isn’t just that tax breaks for the rich trickle down the poor — it’s that they also deserve them more than freeloading Americans. Rick Perry made this moral outrage a key line in his campaign kickoff.
“We’re dismayed at the injustice that nearly half of all Americans don’t even pay any income tax,” Perry said in his announcement speech. “And you know the liberals out there are saying that we need to pay more.”
Now the 47% number only tells part of the story: most of those “non-payers” pay payroll taxes, gas taxes, state and local taxes, etc. And in an ironic twist, the phenomenon is almost entirely a result of Republicans’ own enthusiasm for tax cuts. In the 1980s and 1990s, GOP lawmakers demanded that any programs aimed at helping poor and middle-income households be structured as refundable tax credits, like the Earned Income Tax Credit, rather than as direct payments like welfare. President Bush added to the trend by lowering marginal rates across the board. Then Obama structured large chunks of the stimulus as tax breaks in order to garner bipartisan support. The non-payer rate, which had hovered around 20% - 25% since the 1950s, shot over 30% in 2002 and never looked back. And because the tax credits are refundable, many taxpayers aren’t just paying nothing, they’re actually gaining a net positive on their income tax.
But now that Obama is playing hardball on raising revenue, Republicans are rethinking the idea...
http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/10/gop-demands-middle-class-tax-hikes.php?ref=fpblg
What they want is fairness -- fairness before the law; fairness as far as tax rates are concerned (Why does Warren Buffet pay 15 percent when teachers pay 25 to 35 percent?)
ReplyDeleteAnd they are tired of the banksters flushing our country and our future down the drain for short term profits.
Isn't she bosom buddies with Joe 'the vaguely bearded one'?
ReplyDeleteVictoria Jackson Goes To Occupy Wall Street, Inflames Protesters (VIDEO)
Former "Saturday Night Live" actress, conservative columnist and avowed enemy of both "Glee" and gay people, Victoria Jackson took a video camera to the Occupy Wall Street protests in New York City, predictably trying to inflame the supporters camped out in Zuccotti Park.
She dove right into her particular brand of hateful commentary early, pointing out Ground Zero from her car window and saying "some Muslims flew in to" the Twin Towers.
Once Jackson got down to the protests, she began interviewing both the protesters and those that happened to be passing by. She began by asking what they were protesting, then seizing on their responses. She often brought up President Obama's connection to GE, calling him a Marxist and socialist.
"Right now, 50% of people pay taxes and 50% do not. So if everyone gets free stuff who is going to pay for it?" she asked one protester, who said the government "should end the wars and tax the super rich" to end the deficit. Her response? "Class warfare is Marxist."
Continuing her argument with the same protester, she said, "If you want everyone to be equal, how are you going to make them equal in good looks and smart brains? Everyone's not created equal." She later called Van Jones a communist, and then said, "So you don't think Obama is stirring up racial and class warfare and its straight out of Rules for Radicals written by Saul Alinsky?"
Then she brought out Jeremiah Wright, devolving into the old anti-Obama arguments.
VIDEO
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/12/victoria-jackson-goes-to-occupy-wall-street_n_1007822.html
"Did you vote in the 2010 midterm elections?
ReplyDeleteYes: 39
No: 55
No, but only because I wasn’t 18: 5 "
55 out of 100 did not vote??? UGH! Assholes! It is YOUR fault the republicans got elected in 2010 & the economy stalled! The Unions thank you! My uterus thanks you! The country thanks you! Obama broke their hearts because he didn't do everything they emailed him and to him to do, so they spited him by not voting, and now they are protesting---what, exactly?
If you think you're too small to have an impact, try going to bed with a mosquito in the room.
ReplyDelete~Canuck~
Paul Krugman Refuses To Speak At Occupy Wall Street
ReplyDeletePaul Krugman told his readers on Tuesday that they will not see him addressing Occupy Wall Street crowds or marching by their side. The New York Times Op-Ed columnist may have disappointed some with this news, but shared his thoughts on why he finds it imperative to remain on the sidelines.
Krugman has dedicated his past two columns to the Occupy Wall Street movement. He wrote that the protesters are, "angry at the right people" and that the "protests have already elicited a remarkably hysterical reaction from Wall Street, the super-rich in general, and politicians and pundits who reliably serve the interests of the wealthiest hundredth of a percent."
On Tuesday, Krugman took to his blog, writing that readers had been asking him to speak at one of the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations. While Krugman said he would use his column to advocate on behalf of the protesters, he wrote that officially joining the protest would be crossing the line. "I’ve been granted the enormous privilege of expounding my own views twice a week in the world’s greatest newspaper...There are, however, some restrictions that come with the privilege; one of them is not crossing the line between advocate and activist," Krugman wrote.
VIDEO
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/12/paul-krugman-occupy-wall-street_n_1006952.html
Tea party goes after Occupy Wall Street
ReplyDeleteThe tea party isn’t about to make room for the new protesters on the block.
Big tea party groups have launched an attack against the Occupy Wall Street protests, challenging the line that the anti-corporate uprising is the “the tea party of the left.”
Tea partiers and their allies are looking to de-legitimize the protests circulating in the anti-Wall Street crowds, hunting for evidence of union ties, fringe rhetoric and bad behavior — ranging from news of arrests, to recordings of incendiary speeches, to tales of littering, drug use and debauchery.
They’re posting what they find online, like a photograph of a demonstrator apparently defecating on a cop car that has circulated widely, and are accusing the mainstream media of ignoring extremist elements.
Meanwhile, tea party groups are rallying their activist members by pointing to the new threat in pitches to raise money.
The tea party’s swift counteroffensive — which is remarkably similar to the left’s response to the fledgling conservative movement when it burst onto the scene in 2009 — suggests that the onetime rag-tag operation has matured and feels the need to protect its reputation as the nation’s leading grass-roots protest movement.
“The left is trying to create a counter force to the tea party, but it’s almost laughable that anyone is comparing the two, because they’re totally different,” said Sal Russo, chief strategist for the Tea Party Express.
Brendan Steinhauser, campaigns director for FreedomWorks, evoked leaders of the civil rights movement in distinguishing the protests, saying the tea party’s tactics resemble those of Martin Luther King Jr., while the Occupy Wall Street protesters are more like Malcolm X and Stokely Carmichael.
“They just seem really, truly very unhappy, angry,” he said of the anti-corporate protesters. Tea partiers, on the other hand are for the most part “kind of cheerful, happy warriors,” he said.
Like tea partiers, the occupy protesters see themselves as an anti-establishment uprising, spurred partly by the federal government’s bank bailout, but they also embrace a range of liberal causes.
“We’re both populist movements, but this is not an answer to the tea party,” asserted Kevin Zeese, an organizer of an anti-war group that has affiliated itself with the Occupy D.C. protests. “This has nothing to do with the tea party. We welcome them to come participate if they share our anger about economic insecurity.”
But some of the loudest voices in the tea party movement seem more focused on pointing out the differences...
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/65826.html
Watch...the NYPD is going to try to shut the occupation down tomorrow:
ReplyDeletehttp://witsendnj.blogspot.com/2011/10/occupy-wall-street-evicted.html
Occupy Wall Street: Tea Parties For Smart People
ReplyDeletehttp://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/10/12/occupy-wall-street-tea-parties-for-smart-people/
The Occupy Wall Street demonstrations have the potential to change the game for the progressive movement, but only if we play it right. One reason the progressive movement has largely been toothless for more than a generation is because we create opportunities and let them slip away. One reason we let such opportunities slip away is because we are often so enamored of our own ideals that we fail to consider their effect on everyone else.
ReplyDeleteI Believe in REAL American Values
We're Bringing Back the REAL American Dream
Last night I Tweeted that I thought we were losing the messaging game. The immediate response from many liberals was largely hostile, as if I'd kicked their dog, which I would never do. That brings up another problem with the progressive movement that I’ll get to in another post; we’re too reactionary. I also got a number of absolute declarations that this was “the beginning of a movement.” Sorry, but unless it plays to Joe, who's working three jobs to keep his inner city rat trap, Ma and Pa Kettle down on the farm, and Jill the soccer mom in Outer Suburbia, it doesn't matter how gooey it makes the average progressive inside; it can't become a "movement."
Seriously, how many times have we heard that before, anyway? Wasn't Barack Obama’s election also supposed to be “the beginning of a movement"? We’re always “beginning movements;” wouldn’t it be nice to finish one for a change?
At the end of a long drive home Monday, I listened to All Things Considered on NPR, where they discussed the lack of a clear message. It wasn’t just conjecture, either; they spoke to organizers, who reiterated that everyone there had a different reason for being there, and that it was hard to encapsulate all of those reasons into one central theme. The reporter, who was being very fair, asked one protester what he thought the message was, and he responded with, “Well, for me personally...” Yikes!
In the vernacular of the Internet Age, the entire report was an “epic fail,” and a serious sign that the organizers of this protest are failing at the number one purpose of a demonstration; to change hearts and minds with a message that is concise, clear and resonates with EVERYONE.
One of the responses I received in my Twitter stream was a link to a page showing a “list of demands”, which presumably was to demonstrate that protesters were “gaining focus.” If THAT is what progressives consider “gaining focus,” it’s no wonder the movement has been stalled.
(By the way, I looked at the Occupy Wall Street website, and there are ZERO statements of any kind to be found there, which is beyond depressing. How many thousands of average Americans have already...
http://pleasecutthecrap.typepad.com/main/2011/10/its-only-a-movement-if-everyone-understands-supports-it-we-need-to-focus.html
Well they didn't vote in the midterm elections in order to get a majority on both isles of congress.....what the hell did they expect? How can the President get his initiatives thru if he has to continually fight and be sidelined by the party of no?
ReplyDeleteAnyone in the Prez's position would be gridlocked...
fuck em.
OWS is not a political movement. It will not be co-opted by Soros, unions, Koch bros, or Tea-partiers. This is an economic movement calling for reform of the way our bought-and paid-for-politicians ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE do business with the corporatocracy, who happen to own the media. This is not a left vs. right 50% vs. 50% political movement, it is a bottom vs. top 99% vs. 1% economic one. Now if you want to join Gryph and put on your war paint, you will end up with a right vs. left shooting war. CIVIL WAR. This is not what I want, I'm sick of war.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you 6:12am; those who stand on the sidelines and don't participate in the electoral process have absolutely no reason to complain. That 55% that didn't vote in the midterms has further tainted this whole fractured movement.
ReplyDeleteIt's only a matter to time before the coming winter disperses these folks and then we don't have to hear about their whining disenchantment each and every day.
The folks that organized in the Middle East had legitimate life-threatening concerns. They organized to take their countries back from strongmen; dictators of the worse sort. Now the same age group is looking to do the same in America, but really they just come off as whiners with an agenda that is all over the map.
Visit a third world country and then get back to me and tell me how hard life in America really is. I thought so.
That's the state of journalism today. Only read one small blip about Sarah's flub in Korea, yet they report this biased bullcrap about people who need their voices heard loud and clear.
ReplyDeleteShame it isn't sarcasm, but the bias is undeniable.
Pathetic, isn't it?
Has the occupation been a success so far?
ReplyDelete79: “Yes. We’re still here.”
13: “No. We’re still here.”
Absolutely the best answer for humor,self deprecation, and honesty and a measurement of the confusion and frustration and hopelessness that is instilled by the people who run this country,elected or self appointed, (think Koch).
How many responses is this poll based on?
ReplyDeleteWhat samping techniques were uaed?
Was there any attempt at normalization?
I suspect that this poll is the living, breathing embodiment of the term "unscientific."
the market can regulate it's self did't quite work guys. reinstate the glass-steegle act of 1933.act was killed in 1999.look where that got us.
ReplyDeleteSee kids, you HAVE TO vote in a little thing called MIDTERM ELECTIONS.
ReplyDeleteCONGRESS is our problem, not the 'unwillingness' for the President to become a dictator.
President Elizabeth Warren would get just as socked by those DO-NOTHING douche-bags as anyone. You gotta vote EVERY YEAR, kids!!!