The vast majority of Democrats are perfectly fine with removing Trump from the ballot for J6
Eighty-one percent are in agreement, to be exact. Here’s a link to the poll itself, which also asked about J6 itself:
Though most Republicans don’t condone the actions of those who forced their way into the Capitol [on J6], the strength of their disapproval has waned over time. Half of Republicans strongly disapproved just after the attack, and now just a third do. Meanwhile, outright approval in the party has risen.
The way the question was worded was designed to get the most disapproval possible, because instead of asking whether the respondent approved of the Capitol demonstration, the query was whether the person approved of “the actions of those who forced their way into the Capitol.” As we know, many demonstrators were let in by obliging Capitol Police, as though they were taking a tour of the place. But the poll only asks about those who “forced their way,” and the implication is that they all did.
And then there’s the question about states taking Trump’s name off the ballot: 81% of Democrats pro, 90% of Republicans con, and 56% of Independents con.
I wonder if the answers by Democrats would be similar if there were a poll asking how many are in favor of executing Trump.
NOTE: Here’s something that appeared in an interview with Tucker Carlson:
Tucker Carlson did an interview with Rep. Clay Higgins (R-LA) over the weekend about Jan. 6 and he asked him about the question Higgins had pursued with FBI Director Christopher Wray in 2022: How many FBI agents/informants were involved on Jan. 6?:
Higgins said that they had compiled a lot of evidence. He spoke about the involvement of people “to set the stage for what happened” and that there was a “large web” of people involved to “entrap” people. He said there was “conspiratorial corruption at the highest levels of the FBI.”
Then he started dropping bombs. He said that the FBI had human assets dressed as Trump supporters inside the Capitol prior to the doors being opened and the masses being “allowed in.” He said he knew even when he asked Wray the question that the FBI was heavily involved because it had embedded itself with various groups and was testing the waters to see who they could influence and suggest going into the Capitol.
Higgins said he believed the “Trump supporters” (FBI assets/law enforcement assets) inside the Capitol then helped wave Trump supporters in and to various areas in the building.
Tucker asked him how many ‘”assets” he was talking about here.
Higgins’ estimate was that the number was over 200. It would be nice to find out some day.
It’s pretty saddening that there’s evidently a huge number of people who hate having a choice and want those who they clearly assume to be their betters to remove this choice. I’m not sure what that says about human nature, but it doesn’t seem good.
The poll agrees with my anecdotal polling of my lib/D acquaintances. The hatred/fear is so strong they don’t care about broader implications. Add in MotR voters and I still think Trump has no chance in the general.
As always, Neo’s on the money.
I too reckon you could change the question to ask if Ds think POTUS Trump should be drawn and quartered you’d still get a majority ‘yes’ vote.
TDS is a weird phenomenon. Proof positive that propaganda works.
Another step along the road to armed conflict.
Democracy dies in Democratic Party darkness….
All that’s missing is the Leni Riefenstahl-inspired rallying (but Decent Joe seems to have that part down pat).
of course garbage in, garbage out, re questions and answers
I have to agree with Miguel here, and at best I think this can be taken as a weak reflection of reality if even that. Neo, you pointed out the deliberately loaded, inflammatory phrasing of one important question and we can see many other issues. This means that the poll is probably less about trying to gauge the actual level of support and more about “fishing” for a given result. I would be more impressed with this if it was a “bracket” poll coupled with a couple other polls worded (one “pro-conservative/Trump”, and one “neutral”) to try to assess the rough ballpark where things are.
That didn’t happen, and once we guess the makers had their preferred outcome and we’re trying to get at it that raises questions of other parts of their methodologies they could have tweaked to get their results, even before we factor in lying to pollsters (especially ones with such a clear agenda).
That said, even if I think it says little and proves even less it is still distressing, and it reflects at least some reality as physicsguy points out. One heartening point is the relatively strong Con response by the Independents given the stacked deck, which seems to dovetail with the disturbed responses to leftist screwing around like with Colorado.
But it is still an indicator that we live in “proverbially interesting” times.
“The hatred/fear is so strong they don’t care about broader implications.” physicsguy
Add ideological fanaticism to hatred and fear that strong… and there can be but one destination.
“Another step along the road to armed conflict. Richard Cook
“War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it; and those who brought war into our country deserve all the curses and maledictions a people can pour out.” General Tecumseh Sherman
“Public opinion” polls are rarely about taking the temperature of public sentiment, they are more about influencing it. Politicians would have no need for “internal polls,” i.e. polls that accurately reflect facts on the ground if public opinion polls were, you know, polls of actual public opinion.
Parenthetically, this reminds me of the ads that you see in local food & entertainment magazines telling you that XYZ Pizza was “Voted #1 pizza in Anytown!” By who? The employees of XYZ Pizza?
A third of the dems were 9-11 denialists, no, they are skilled in believing in things that are not true, what percentage went wacko in 2000 (many recquired therapy)
in 2004 and 2016 I guess the independents were a little more concerning they are aren’t that far apart from the hive,
Odd.
If asked if Biden should be removed from the ballot, how might they answer? Would they not appreciate all aspects of the consequences of taking anyone off the ballot?
My guess is that they would not. Tis that TDS thing again.
We are rapidly sliding into fascism. Do these take him off the ballot folks understand/want/support this? Most likely, they are blinded to it by the propaganda.
I do not think we can recover from the complete takeover of the main stream media, the K-12 and higher ed schools, and all of the “social” online junk.
A scientist/mathematician type fellow, whose name escapes me, can demonstrate (and has written a book about) how Google controls search results to match political objectives. Why don’t we hear more from him? Few of the electorate seem to care. Few of the elected seem to care. No one in the swamp wants this information to be seen and understood by all.
It’s curious to me that this desire on the part of Democrats is more or less for a result that is against their own interest – i.e., winning the election next year.
Trump is the candidate that Biden is most likley to defeat in November, especially if Democrats manage to win a felony conviction or two before the election.
If the poll is correct, many Democrats would rather face a stronger general election candidate then risk another Trump administration. Interesting if true.
Bauxite:
Recent polls have shown Trump to be ahead of Biden, including in swing states.
Projection again from the Concerned Conservative?
SUCH a KIDda!
“US says Bangladesh elections were not free and fair”—
https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/us-says-bangladesh-elections-were-not-free-fair-2024-01-08/
https://instapundit.com/625981/
Meanwhile, a bit closer to home…
“Right now Ecuador is experiencing an all-out cartel takeover….—
https://instapundit.com/625993/
Argentina, OTOH…is trying hard to get rid of the rot (even as “Biden” is trying mightily to institute—to the point of codifying—it….):
https://twitter.com/IanJaeger29/status/1744812986118631441
H/T Instapundit (for all links).
Two more people for “Biden” to go after (once “he”‘s able to free up some time from going after Musk….):
– Bill Ackman (no explanation necessary).
– Then there’s this courageous fellow:
“Hunter Biden’s art dealer gives latest evidence shredding WH narrative on Biden family finances;
“Georges Berges tells Congress he did not communicate with the White House about an ethics agreement for Hunter art sales and that most of the first son’s paintings were purchased by Democratic Party donors and at least one political appointee.”—
https://justthenews.com/accountability/political-ethics/art-dealer-latest-poke-holes-white-house-narrative-biden-family
No doubt there’s scads more brave souls for “Biden” to go after, persecute, destroy, tar and feather…but the day is only 24 hours long (though perhaps “Biden” will try to implement an EO to extend it…)
neo – I don’t put much stock I put in those polls. Biden is weak enough that a Trump victory is possible, but I still think it is very unlikely. The “vote Democrat because democracy itself is on the ballot” schtick comes across to us like a lead balloon, but we’re not the target audience. It worked in 2020 and 2022. I think it will work again.
In late spring/early summer, people are going to start paying attention. They’re going to see a return to the pattern of every news cycle being driven by whatever idiotic thing came out of Trump’s mouth that day, followed by Republican office holders humiliating themselves to avoid contradicting him. (“Yeah, Trump was completely right that immigrants ‘poison the blood’ of the country. No problem.” That’ll totally rally people to end Biden’s insane immigration policies!)
And then, probably over the summer, Trump is going to begin spending five days a week sitting in a courtroom as a criminal defendant. I know that the charges are bogus, as does most everyone else here. The problem is that Trump defenders have to make a distinction between bad behavior and criminal behavior. You’re not going to convince people outside of the right’s bubble that Trump did nothing wrong w/r/t the aftermath of the 2020 election. Ask Kari Lake, Doug Mastriano, and the other candidates who tried that path in 2022. (Or don’t ask them, just look at the results.) The optics of Trump sitting in a courtroom listening to testimony that re-hashes January 6th and Trump’s own repugnant behavior after the 2020 election is not going to play well. And that’s basically going to be the general election campaign. Defendants are required to attend their own trial. Trump’s calendar is going to be very full.
So, yeah. The polls have looked positive for the last few months. I think that will last until people really start paying attention, when Democrats’ “save our democracy” campaign gets into full swing, Trump’s rantings begin to drive news cycles, and his trials begin. By an amazing coincidence, this will also be right after Trump wraps up the nomination.
Instead of having a general election campaign about the failures of the Biden administration, we’ll have a general election campaign all about Donald Trump.
Contrast that with the scenario where we nominate Haley or (preferably) DeSantis. Democrats would go after them hard, no doubt. We’d hear a lot about the Civil War if its Haley, and the ridiculous “don’t say gay” smear and the phantom “book bans” would be front and center if its DeSantis. But there would be considerably more room to focus the campaign on issues rather than personality. I think Biden would be in serious trouble.
I don’t think it is outside the realm of possibility that Trump could win in spite of himself. Maybe this really is the election where Trump pulls 20% of the minority vote. But frankly, I seriously doubt it. The headwinds to Trump’s campaign haven’t really even begun yet. I think Trump will run behind his performance in 2020. (I also predict that his defenders will insist that losing by ~10 million votes was actually a victory because he won more votes than any other Republican.)
The whole thing is like watching a train wreck in slow motion.
He won last time.
Ergo, he won’t win this time either.
Barry Meislin – Unicorns and fairies are real too.
What will improve between now and then the cost of food the armies streaming into this country the international situation the planes falljng out of the sky everything will get worse
Bauxite’s analysis is spot on. Trump is a deeply flawed candidate and will be much easier to oppose than someone like Haley.
Trump says a lot of dumb and needlessly provocative things. If the Republicans are serious about winning he needs to go.
Why he gets this hyper loyal support in the US is deeply baffling. Why would anyone deliberately choose a candidate they know can be rude, egotistical and unpleasant? Particularly if that loses votes.
To CC™ any and all accusations against The Great Orange Whale are credible and damaging (even fatal) but accusations against any other Republican (or Hailey, exaggeration) are inconsequential.
We saw what romney let himself be subject to we know what happened with mccain (although he was no great shakes) of course we know who was doing the heavy lifting there
@Bauxite
It’s curious to me that you are so straitjacketed mentally that you cannot conceive of alternate explanations.
Firstly: Even if I accepted your premises (and I do not), you ignore the very essence of self-destructive virtue signaling and how the Left has done many things against their own material interest in order to feel good or seemingly gain power.
Secondly: At no point whatsoever do you consider that your evaluation of the matter might be wrong, or that Trump is a stronger opponent than you give him credit for. I’ve happily considered Trump is a weaker opponent than I think and have discussed this in detail, as have others. You on the other hand cannot even maintain an honest definition of what “GOTV” means.
I find this doubtful against at least hypothetical candidates like Haley (who self immolated in fairly spectacular fashion) and Christie (who is generally held to be unlikeable and in any case lacks much of a base).
Sure, and well worth considering. But the alternative potential explanations are also interesting and worth considering.
Neither do I, for similar reasons to the above. But it is at least interesting.
Unsurprising.
It is definitely a potent threat, and well worth considering. That also is why it demands a rather vigorous and preferably united response against it (which is something I do not see YOU proposing, notably). One does not have to like Trump or support him on the primary ballot in order to recognize this for what it is and the awful implications.
Sure.
Like they have worked to do with most Conservative and Republican candidates for the last half century if not longer, albeit usually with less spirited push back and less of an independent, grassroots media presence to help undercut it.
Also there’s a REASON why trust in the MSM is rock bottom. Even those that get influenced by their propaganda (which is a LOT of people) tend not to like them, and conscious trust (ie what people are willing to consciously say) is generally quite low. Hence the overcompensation by “Democracy Dies in Darkness” propaganda and demonization or even persecution of independent talking points.
Which is damning and ugly, but also happened before.
Considering how you shot off your foot underlining how much you don’t know about election auditing and the powers of the Executive in managing Congressional funding to foreign countries, I am doubtful of that, but for the sake of the argument let us proceed.
Indeed.
Like the Left has to do regarding the BIdens, albeit less convincingly by orders of magnitude. And has to do less because of both the pervasive echo chamber and narrative control (which I note FORCES THOSE WHO DO NOT BUY IN TO THE KOOL AID into a “right bubble” as we see with many other not-right-wing-but-independent thinkers). So how do we go about piercing that?
Trump’s style has issues and I can fully believe the left has learned a fair bit about how to counter it, but in its heyday it had a good effect of ju-jitsuing the left and using its own narrative control and propaganda against it. THIS IS NOT UNIQUE TO TRUMP, with DeSantis doing similar against the likes of the porn in grade school, but it is an accomplishment worth considering.
It certainly is a more universal concern and something ANY candidate we run has to deal with than splitting heirs.
Which is largely because of the wall to wall demonization and propaganda of the left. And if you can’t puncture that or point out how we are treating our own citizens worse than the Blind Sheikh for alleged crimes that are paltry, then you need to start asking
A: Where your priorities lie.
B: How to salvage others.
Riiight, That’s why they lost. And not Lake being in a public feud with Maricopa County (and its inordinately powerful, and corrupt or criminally incompetent and politicized machinery) or Mastriano’s host of weaknesses. Let’s ignore the fact that MTG (for all of her flaws) got elected right after, as did a host of others.
This is what we call selective obliviousness.
Depends on the truth. While polls are generally untrustworthy to the extent they matter he had a boost both in their results and in the subjective word of mouth I saw after his mug shot.
Moreover, conducting it in a court room at least THEORETICALLY opens the potential of getting major players under oath and forcing them to answer pointed questions about who Mr. Epps is, why Trump offered the National Guard to DC, why DC lied about Sicknick’s cause of death, and so forth.
There’s a reason why political martyrdom for your opponents is risky, and we’re already seeing a lot of controversy over the ballot abuse and the political persecutions. As many people predicted, the left overreaches and could not take measured victories like civil decisions over Alex Jones and Giuliani.
Agreed, and I think this is one of the key problems, and one of the biggest disadvantages given the stress and how it undermines Trump’s personal appeal and crowd draw (which for all of his personal flaws were quite evident in the ground game on 2016 and 2020 even with an arguably-to-probably worse organized ground game than Romney).
So the question is if Trump’s performance at Trial is good enough to offset.
We’ll see. In any case I don’t base much on it.
This is true, though it also causes the issue they had in 2016 and to a lesser extent of 2020 in overcommitting and focusing the spot light on Trump.
We were going to see the left try and make it about that anyway. You remember how much 2008 was about BusHitler in spite of McCain being a personal and political enemy of Dubya’s? And that was without the Trump effect magnifying this.
So we’re going to have to deal with Donald Trump one way or another, nomination or not. AND THAT INCLUDES MAKING A SPIRITED DEFENSE OF ABUSES AGAINST HIM AND OTHER SUPPORTERS LIKE THE JAN 6TH DEFENDANTS Especially since so many of Biden’s failures, weaknesses, and crimes either tie into his and his handlers’ abuses of Trump, or contrast badly with his policies (flawed or much less successful than ideal as they often were).
This is also why I will come down so hard on you for demonizing us and uncritically regurgitating claptrap that it is “corrupt” for a President to use money appropriated to a friendly country for things like armed defense and anti-corruption to demand said country investigate possible corrupt influence from the former administration on its policies, or calling Trump a “tyrant” for pointing out (in his bellicose and often ham-handed and less than comprehensive fashion) all the red flags for voter fraud and claiming he had really won the election in order to Triger AUDITS of
Agreed on the latter. Haley is less hated by the left but she is also much less supported with not much in the way of a base and a penchant to make gaffe bombs.
Biden’s in serious trouble even if the Republican party collapsed. He faces internal conflict within his party between those that want to continue using him as a masthead and face for the regime (centered largely around his wife) and those that want to replace him (such as the handful of Harris loyalists and leftist ideologues), with both camps dividing further into their own cliques. And that’s before we talk about his own health problems. He’s in a similar position to where Hillary would have been had she won 2016, but worse.
We can argue back and forth on whether or not a more Personality Focused campaign or a Policy focused one would play better, or if it would even matter in light of leftist vote rigging in its many different forms (UNLIKE say trying to argue that calling for freezes to EC counting or audits are “Tyranny” or that it is “corrupt” to use aid grants for pressure). But Biden is in trouble and so to a lesser extent is the wider left. The issue is how we best manage that.
But it would also be because of himself. He has glaring flaws to put it mildly and has screwed up, but not everybody is as active or energetic in fighting as he is (For better or worse).
Fair. We will see.
I doubt it. He’s been a political factor since 2018 and the battle lines are largely drawn, even if there is some shifting.
Possible. But we’ll see.
Which is a hell of a lot better than his demonizers insisting that Romney had a better Get Out The Vote Campaign in spite of bringing in millions fewer votes because of a few fractions of a percent in greater proportion of vote share.
And also ignoring the obvious point many of his defenders raise, of how…shall we say “creative” and “unusual” it would be for Biden to have won more votes than any Democrat in history, including Obama.
Better a train wreck than the Chernobyl Reactor Meltdown that seems obsessed with poisoning things and which trucks little engagement, just containment.
@DCL
Ah yes, if it isn’t the special soul who somehow managed to overlook decades of Dem demonizing of Republican candidates (including Trump’s predecessors and rivals) to argue it was Trump’s fault for his opponents’ vitriolic reaction to him.
Not really. It is better than his incoherent screed elsewhere where he accused Trump of being “tyrannical” or claimed that it is corrupt for a POTUS to use the powers vested in him by the Constitution and Congress to use financial aid as a lever for policy changes in an allied country, and it definitely has its points. But even beyond what I view as an unduly negative view of Trump (which can at least be debated) it also has holes in it you could drive a semi truck through.
I agreed until you wrote “Haley”, because Haley is probably one of the weaker of the Republican lineups, especially given her penchant for gaffes (and less ability to manage them than Trump), her real and perceived turnings of the coat, and lack of a support base. I’m FAR from an EverTrumper, and I have called them out before for smearing the likes of DeSantis and others. However, Haley is quite weak.
Sure, but there are worse things than “provocative” in Current Year, especially with the Left literally insisting we are Nazis that tried to destroy the Republic while they insist they will abolish the very concept of “White Race” and Western Civilization. Trump’s ability and willingness to fight fire with fire was generally an advantage, especially compared to more flat footed or genteel opposition like Dubya and Romney (or the oddly placid and left friendly McCain).
If we are serious about winning we need to do a whole host of things more important than that. I can support Trump either going or staying; desperate times call for desperate measures and if Haley were the candidate I would almost certainly vote for her. But obsessing about this being Trump personally is a weaknesses that ironically mirrors one of the Left and Trump himself and many of his cultists. Trump was potent and relatively successful because he tapped in to the groundswell of discontent.
Good luck convincing me that said groundswell is not still potential after years there.
If it’s so baffling maybe you should pay closer attention to what his supporters say or those of more perceptive critics. Trump is charismatic in his own way (which even the Left admits, even if they usually try to use it as a segway into “Trump is X Dictator” article pieces). He is also incredibly active and a “Man in the Arena” as Teddy Roosevelt said, a trait Americans have admired since before our country properly existed. He is also combative, which after seeing Dubya refuse to defend his own policies in Iraq (up to letting his political enemies write conclusions stating about how there were no “direct” links between Saddam and Iraq while downplaying “indirect” links between Saddam and the likes of Abu Sayyaf, who were sworn subsidiaries of Al Qaeda in OBL’s chain of command) or Romney and McCain with how they treated Goldwaterites versus how they confronted the left, is there any question why that might be appealing?
Especially now with so many people in the slammer for trumped up or outright false crimes? Just ask the January 6th Defendants.
He also vocally loves America, which is far from a given thing.
And I could go on, but it’s well worth researching. And even if you believe Trump is weak or probably to lose votes, understanding his support or (relative?) strengths is useful.
A similar percentage might tell you that they think Trump plans on becoming a dictator. They would tell you that Trump has to be taken off the ballot because Trump is a potential dictator, but I suspect that they think that Trump plans to be a dictator beause they want to take him off the ballot and need an excuse for what they want to do anyway.
___________
It would be interesting to see Higgins’ evidence. You can count on some of the FBI assets and agents bringing along a few loyal followers who aren’t actually on the payroll, so the figure of 200 may be too high.