In U.S., Socialist Presidential Candidates Least Appealing

ChrryBlstr

Registered User
Forum Member
Feb 11, 2002
7,407
54
48
Hoosier country
Some interesting results from a recent Gallup poll.

More Americans would elect an atheist, Muslim, or gay person president than a socialist president. I guess the implication is that most respondents assume that the atheist, Muslim, or gay person is a capitalist as well.

Most interesting to me, however, are the results from the 18-29 crowd. Aside from the lower percentage who would vote for a Black president as compared to the other demographics, this particular group appears to be much more tolerant, progressive, and accepting of change.

I guess it's just a matter of time. Times, they are indeed changing!

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- As the 2016 presidential election field takes shape, more than nine in 10 Americans say they would vote for a qualified presidential candidate who is Catholic, a woman, black, Hispanic or Jewish. Less than half of Americans would vote for a candidate who is a socialist.

A June 2-7 Gallup poll updated the question -- first asked in 1937 -- about the acceptability of presidential candidates of various background characteristics. The general trend is that Americans have become significantly more accepting over time.

Among religious identities, while the large majority of Americans would vote for a Catholic or Jewish presidential candidate, smaller majorities say they would vote for a candidate who is Mormon (81%), an evangelical Christian (73%), Muslim (60%) or an atheist (58%).

These dynamics can affect 2016 candidates' efforts to attract American voters in the upcoming primaries as well as the general election next year, particularly because the field is shaping up as one that will have some diversity in terms of race, gender and, particularly, religion.

Five declared candidates are Catholics -- Republicans Jeb Bush, George Pataki, Marco Rubio and Rick Santorum, and Democrat Martin O'Malley. Two are women -- Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton and Republican Carly Fiorina. Republican Ben Carson is the sole black candidate in the race, while two candidates are Hispanic -- Republicans Rubio and Ted Cruz.

Independent Bernie Sanders, who is seeking the Democratic nomination, is the only Jewish candidate in the race. And while a large majority of Americans are willing to vote for a candidate of his faith, Sanders' self-identification as a socialist could hurt him, as half of Americans say they would not vote for someone with that background.

In addition, several candidates have heavily courted the evangelical community -- including Republicans Mike Huckabee, Rick Perry, Carson, Santorum and Cruz.

Democrats and Republicans Vary in Support for Candidates From Religious Groups

Democrats and Republicans vary in their support for candidates of particular religious affiliations.

Republicans (84%) are significantly more likely than Democrats (66%) to say they will vote for an evangelical candidate. But Democrats are more likely to say they will vote for a Muslim (73%) or an atheist (64%) than are Republicans, of whom less than half say they are willing to vote for a candidate with either of these belief systems.

Republicans and Democrats differ most in their willingness to vote for a socialist candidate, by 33 percentage points, but socialist ranks last for both parties. The two parties also differ significantly on voting for a gay or lesbian candidate, by 24 points. Majorities of Democrats are willing to vote for a candidate with any of the characteristics mentioned in the poll.

There are no meaningful party differences in willingness to vote for a female, black or Hispanic candidate.

Americans Under 30 the Least Particular on Candidate Characteristics

Gallup also finds wide differences in support for gay or lesbian, atheist, Muslim and socialist presidential candidates by age. Americans between the ages of 18 and 29 are much more likely than those 65 and older to support these four types of candidates. Younger Americans are also slightly more likely to say they will vote for women and Hispanics, by eight points each.

At least two-thirds of adults younger than 30 say they are willing to vote for a candidate with any of the characteristics included in the survey.

Bottom Line

With more than a dozen candidates running for president, the 2016 field is one of the most diverse Americans have ever seen. On the heels of the historic election and re-election of the nation's first black president, Americans are just as likely to lend their support to black candidates as to women and Hispanics. This suggests that another historic election could be on the horizon with Hillary Clinton, Carly Fiorina, Rubio and Cruz in the race.

Americans' notions about whom they would give their support to are widening, but they are still less than fully supportive of candidates with certain characteristics.

The news is likely worst for Sen. Bernie Sanders. At one point, Americans might have withheld their votes from him because of his Jewish faith -- fewer than half said they would support a Jewish candidate in 1937 -- but today his socialist ideology, given Americans' views on voting for a socialist candidate, could hinder his candidacy more.

To a lesser degree, evangelical Christian candidates may suffer, in that one in four Americans say they will not vote for an evangelical Christian. Candidates of various faiths who court American evangelicals, like Southern Baptists Cruz and Huckabee, or Catholic Santorum, could suffer from their association with the evangelical faithful and the social issues they take firm stances on.

Survey Methods

Results for this Gallup poll are based on telephone interviews conducted June 2-7, 2015, with a random sample of 1,527 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. For results based on the total sample of national adults, the margin of sampling error is ?3 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. All reported margins of sampling error include computed design effects for weighting.

Each sample of national adults includes a minimum quota of 50% cellphone respondents and 50% landline respondents, with additional minimum quotas by time zone within region. Landline and cellular telephone numbers are selected using random-digit-dial methods.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/183713/socialist-presidential-candidates-least-appealing.aspxCf.

Peace! :)
 

Duff Miver

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 29, 2009
6,521
55
0
Right behind you
Well, I don't suppose I'll get the chance, but I'd gladly vote for Bernie Sanders. He's possibly the only honest man who might run for President.

By the way, there was a recent article in the NYT about how inaccurate polling has become. Most folks have unlisted cell phones, and most of the rest won't answer. So present polls are based on a tiny majority who have landlines and will answer questions. Old folks, poor folks and nutjobs.

The next election may prove un-forecastable, even by the experts.
 

ChrryBlstr

Registered User
Forum Member
Feb 11, 2002
7,407
54
48
Hoosier country
By the way, there was a recent article in the NYT about how inaccurate polling has become. Most folks have unlisted cell phones, and most of the rest won't answer. So present polls are based on a tiny majority who have landlines and will answer questions. Old folks, poor folks and nutjobs.

The next election may prove un-forecastable, even by the experts.

That's a really good point, actually. Perhaps they'll have to revert back to live person-to-person interviews when polling to increase accuracy.

Or maybe move to Skype or other social network platforms.

An interesting dilemma to be sure.

Peace! :)
 

theGibber1

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 27, 2001
8,615
64
0
Dallas TX
Well, I don't suppose I'll get the chance, but I'd gladly vote for Bernie Sanders. He's possibly the only honest man who might run for President.

By the way, there was a recent article in the NYT about how inaccurate polling has become. Most folks have unlisted cell phones, and most of the rest won't answer. So present polls are based on a tiny majority who have landlines and will answer questions. Old folks, poor folks and nutjobs.

The next election may prove un-forecastable, even by the experts.

Curious why you seem then to put so much stock into the polls propping up Hillary?


Or are those threads started for the simple pleasure of poking Skul with a stick? HA
 

Duff Miver

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 29, 2009
6,521
55
0
Right behind you
Curious why you seem then to put so much stock into the polls propping up Hillary?


Or are those threads started for the simple pleasure of poking Skul with a stick? HA

Polls supposedly aren't accurate as in the past. However they may at least be an indication. They're all we've got. I wouldn't put much faith in a poll that showed a few percent lead for one candidate. Double-digit might mean something.

Poking Skul? Naw. I poke all right-wing nutjobs.
 

hedgehog

Registered
Forum Member
Oct 30, 2003
32,897
708
113
50
TX
Hillary has been a liar since the 60's, why anyone would vote for her is beyond me:shrug:
 

fatdaddycool

Chi-TownHustler
Forum Member
Mar 26, 2001
13,738
286
83
61
Fort Worth TX usa
Hillary has been a liar since the 60's, why anyone would vote for her is beyond me:shrug:
You know hedge, you always post statements like this and all they do is diminish your own credibility. You make demeaning statements about an entire group of people simply because they don't carry the same political views as you. You're widely considered a racist and a bigot on this forum because of the very well documented statements you've made here over the years, yet you make no attempt to display even a shred of self awareness. It truly boggles my mind how you can be so careless wirh your reputation and integrity. You don't have to adhere to every tenet of a cultist ideology because you think it makes you part of something.
 

hedgehog

Registered
Forum Member
Oct 30, 2003
32,897
708
113
50
TX
You know hedge, you always post statements like this and all they do is diminish your own credibility. You make demeaning statements about an entire group of people simply because they don't carry the same political views as you. You're widely considered a racist and a bigot on this forum because of the very well documented statements you've made here over the years, yet you make no attempt to display even a shred of self awareness. It truly boggles my mind how you can be so careless wirh your reputation and integrity. You don't have to adhere to every tenet of a cultist ideology because you think it makes you part of something.

:142smilie:142smilie:142smilie
Hillary-I-am-a-liar-128533714008.jpeg
 

hedgehog

Registered
Forum Member
Oct 30, 2003
32,897
708
113
50
TX
You know hedge, you always post statements like this and all they do is diminish your own credibility. You make demeaning statements about an entire group of people simply because they don't carry the same political views as you. You're widely considered a racist and a bigot on this forum because of the very well documented statements you've made here over the years, yet you make no attempt to display even a shred of self awareness. It truly boggles my mind how you can be so careless wirh your reputation and integrity. You don't have to adhere to every tenet of a cultist ideology because you think it makes you part of something.

1361139682.6118_600x480_the-liberal-brain.jpg
 

Duff Miver

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 29, 2009
6,521
55
0
Right behind you
You know hedge, you always post statements like this and all they do is diminish your own credibility. You make demeaning statements about an entire group of people simply because they don't carry the same political views as you. You're widely considered a racist and a bigot on this forum because of the very well documented statements you've made here over the years, yet you make no attempt to display even a shred of self awareness. It truly boggles my mind how you can be so careless wirh your reputation and integrity. You don't have to adhere to every tenet of a cultist ideology because you think it makes you part of something.

Sorry, FDC, but he DOES have to. Incapable of starting with facts and reaching a valid conclusion is beyond his mental ability. So he parrots that which he hears.


He reminds me of a hamster, forever trying to scramble up an ever-turning wheel.
 

JT

Degenerate
Forum Member
Mar 28, 2000
3,597
81
48
61
Ventura, Ca.
All presidential elections since Nixon/Kennedy are mostly personality contests in the end regardless of politics. Put a stiff like Gore next to Bush see what happens. Vice versa, Romney next to Obama. Or a McCain. Next one we shall see. For entertainment purposes I would love to see a Sander/Trump final. THAT I would watch all the debates.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top