5 Senators Take Serious Dive In Polls After Voting No To Backgrounds Check

Author: April 29, 2013 4:53 pm

conn-protest

There are polls and there are polls. Then there are more polls. It can be daunting to figure out which to trust, especially after the 2012 Presidential Campaign when the country was barraged with new polls everyday. It was especially painful for Democrats to hear some of these polls that showed Mitt Romney very far ahead of President Obama – or a sure winner. Regardless of whether the polls were legitimate, fabricated, or made no sense, many Americans started to believe them. Having gone through that, many more voters are skeptical polls these days. Polls have to make more sense.This poll by Public Policy Polling, (say that fast three times) does just that. It makes sense. Five of the senators who voted against the recent gun background checks bill, are already showing a decline in constituent popularity, weeks later. Given the majority of Americans are for more gun safety (especially after the Sandy Hook massacre) a backlash against politicians who voted no to the bill –was inevitable. This poll news is bad for some of the Senators, and very bad for others.Here is the Full Poll and Press Release form Public Policy Polling


Here are a few excerpts from the poll:

Arizona:

After just 3 months in office Jeff Flake has already become one of the most unpopular Senators in the country, taking that label from Mitch McConnell.

70% of Arizona voters support background checks to only 26% who are opposed to them.

52% of voters say they’re less likely to support Flake in a future election because of this vote, compared to only 19% who say they’re more likely to.

Alaska:
When we polled Alaska in February Lisa Murkowski was one of the most popular Senators in the country with a 54% approval rating and only 33% of voters disapproving of her. Murkowski has lost most of her appeal to Democrats in the wake of her vote, with her numbers with them going from 59/25 to 44/44. And the vote hasn’t increased her credibility with Republicans.Mark Begich is down following his no vote as well. He was at 49/39 in February and now he’s at 41/37.

60% of Alaska voters support background checks to just 35% opposed, including a 62/33 spread with independents

Ohio:We saw serious improvement in Rob Portman‘s poll numbers in the second half of 2012 following his consideration as the Republican Vice Presidential candidate, but he’s taken a nose dive in 2013.

72% of Ohio voters support background checks, including 87% of Democrats, 73% of independents, and 56% of Republicans

Nevada:And in Nevada Dean Heller has seen a more modest decline in his approval numbers, from 47/42 right before the election to 44/41 now.

70% of voters in the state support background checks compared to just 24% who are opposed to them. That includes 87% of Democrats, 65% of independents, and 54% of Republicans.

 

It’s baffling why these senators would vote against the gun background check bill, knowing their constituents wanted the bill to pass. And it will be interesting to see how the same vote will affect other lawmakers.

Regarding polls, for the inquiring mind, here is a study about how to discern Good Polls/Bad Polls (from the University of South Carolina Institute for Public Service and Policy Research)

(Leslie Salzillo is a political commentator, activist, diarist and visual artist. She often writes diaries at The Daily Kos, and began contributing to AddictingInfo.org, March 2013)

 

Help us get the word out!
Share on Google+Share on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestShare on LinkedInShare on TumblrEmail this to someone

facebook comments:

3 Comments

  • Ever notice that the only time folks question a poll, is when the poll reaches a conclusion they don’t like?

  • The conservative fools often speak of having our ‘liberties taken away’.

    Every single liberty that I can detect having been taken away- has been by Republicans.

  • Will a significant of the electorate remember a year from now? Prescott Bush was a banker for the Union Banking Corporation which was a money laundering operation for the Thyssen family of Germany who laundered money to double and triple cross Nazi Germany.

    This should have stained Bush for Trading with the Enemy but by 1947 the voters of Connecticut let it go and he was elected to Congress.

    The American voter has a short memory. Will a load of money make their constituents forget in 2014? Will they even be able to claim the opposite and say they voted for the background checks. Or voted for them before they voted against them when the Democrats went too far or something like that?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

x
Click "Like" to get the latest updates