Disrupting New Domains
sethbannon.com
sethbannon.com
I keep on seeing this number quoted, but looking at the survey it looks like it was limited to Florida, Connecticut, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Virginia. I wonder how the question would go in Texas, for example. Is there a standard definition of a national poll?
I do appreciate Seth linking to the poll's press release. If anyone's interested, the poll data is available at http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes--centers/polling-instit...
Nonsense. Yesterday was how things are supposed to work, when a small minority cares passionately about an issue in the face of a lukewarm majority.
The politicians involved realized that this was a 'time to organize to throw the bum out' voting issue for the portion of the population against it, while the larger portion of the population that was tepidly for it will end up basing their votes on other issues. They therefore made the correct call.
But since I live in Texas and I'm a life member of the NRA, I do know a lot of people who are very passionately against any form of gun control, especially when coming from the federal government. I also trust the political instincts of Bill Clinton, who always struck me as a sharp politician:
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/bill-clinton-warns-democrat...
While some polls show that the public by-and-large supports several proposals for increased gun control, Clinton said that it’s not the public support that matters — it’s how strongly people feel about the issue.
“All these polls that you see saying the public is for us on all these issues — they are meaningless if they’re not voting issues,” Clinton said.
If the vocal minority rallied their forces as suggested below (by gyardley), and the tepid majority didn't, then I agree that things worked the way they're supposed to. If you don't care enough to vote, then why should your voice be heard? And if the majority wasn't as tepid as they appeared, then they'd prevail.