Polls

First the Good News: Most Voters Want 'Radical Change.' Now the Bad News…

The state of the electorate

|

Watch the parking meters.
D.A. Pennebaker

Just how dissatisfied are Americans right now? A new poll from Quinnipiac asked voters if they believed "The old way of doing things no longer works and we need radical change." Sixty-seven percent of the respondents agreed, including a majority of almost every candidate's supporters: 83 percent of Trump's, 76 percent of Sanders', 60 percent of Cruz's, 54 percent of Kasich's. (With Trump, a majority—55 percent—"strongly" agreed.) Only Clinton's supporters tended to reject radicalism.

Of course, the nature of that radical change varied from one movement to another. As you might expect, for example, Republican voters were more likely to agree that "The government has gone too far in assisting minority groups." And the Trumpites were the only group where a majority strongly agreed that we need "a leader who is willing to say or do anything to solve America's problems" (though if you combine the "strongly" and "somewhat" agreers, Cruz also exceeded 50 percent).

Everyone seems to be putting their faith in leaders, though—or at least they'd like to. Witness the responses to this question:

Quinnipiac

The Trumpsters may be the furthest over the top on that question, but a majority of all five candidates' backers agreed. A depressing result, at least for those of us who want the sort of radical change that dispenses with powerful leaders rather than puffing them up more.

NEXT: Ban Pro-Palestinian Group from CUNY Campuses, 35 NY Lawmakers Say

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. You better be careful, you are coming dangerously close to disproving Matt and Nick’s Libertarian Moment theory. One more article like this and you’ll get Lucy’ed

  2. Nobody asked, but i’m pretty dissatisfied.

    1. Add a couple more X’s?

  3. Who in the hell could be satisfied with this?

  4. plus ?a Clinton, plus c’est la m?me fucked up

    1. Je vois ce que vous avez fait l

      1. This is an American website, guys, we speak American here.

        1. And we eat freedom fries!

      2. GET THE HELL OUT OF HERE FOREIGN SCUM

      3. Voulez-vous coucher avec moi (ce soir)?

  5. The more people like Trump, the more they want a strong man to fix their problems.

    The more ideological they are (establishment, you might say), the more likely they are to support a Tea Party candidate like Cruz or a more establishment candidate like Kasich.

    This election is about the rejection of ideology–but it’s just as much about rejecting the social justice ideology of a Barack Obama as it is anything else. Hillary better watch out for Trump in the general election. In a competition for the strong man vote, I’m not sure she wins, and Trump appeals a lot more to white, blue collar, traditional Democrats than Hillary appeals to any form of Republican.

    1. Hillary better watch out for Trump in the general election.

      Yeah, she might “only” win about 300 electoral votes if she’s not careful.

      1. Her negatives are almost as high as Trump’s.

        Trumps’ negatives just get more press.

        “On the Republican side, Trump scores a net negative of -33, with a favorable rating of 24% compared to 57% of voters who view him unfavorably. On the Democratic side, Clinton fares only slightly better with a net negative of -21, registering a 31% favorable rating and a 52% unfavorable rating, according to the poll.”

        http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/22/…..y-clinton/

        1. From your link:

          In a Clinton-Trump election, Clinton leads the billionaire businessman by 10 points. Against Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, Clinton is ahead by 3 points. And her lead disappears when matched up against Ohio Gov. John Kasich, who would beat Clinton by 4 points.

          There is no way I would vote for Hillary, but if the Republicans are stupid enough to nominate Trump, they deserve to lose.

          1. Why are Trump’s numbers so negative? Isn’t it becasue of the things he’s said? November is a long way away. Trump can start saying conciliatory things if and when he wins the nomination.

            Why are Hillary’s numbers so negative? It isn’t because of what she’s said. It’s because of who she is and what she’s done. If and when she wins the Democrat nomination, she can’t change that.

            And I’m also going by cross-party appeal. Like I said, Trump appeals a lot more to white, blue collar, traditional Democrats than Hillary appeals to any flavor of Republican. Hillary should watch out.

            1. It’s definitely because of who Trump is. The things he’s said are things that most people who dislike him aren’t going to forgive. He will not make much headway on his -65 net favorability with Latinos, for example. If he wins it will be because people end up hating Hillary more, but I am skeptical he can make that happen.

          2. Yes, and Carter led Reagan by around 20 points six months out from the election. Polls right now don’t mean much, 7 months is a long time when it comes to elections.

            1. The Trump-Reagan comparison has several problems with it. This article elaborates on most of them. To paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen, Mr. Trump is no Ronald Reagan.

              http://fivethirtyeight.com/fea…..ld-reagan/

      2. I don’t know where this Hillary is going to trounce Trump talk is coming from.

        Sure she might win but it is hardly a foregone conclusion. As Ken notes her negative ratings are just about as high as Trumps and she has just as much of a civil war going on in her base as there is in the Republican base only she represents the establishment side so there are a lot of progressives who will either not vote for her or vote for the Green party candidate instead plus another big part of her base, blue collar union workers are likely to break ranks and vote for Trump over the Democrat in large numbers because frankly he is going to be a lot more appealing to them than Hillary will.

        So in a Trump v Clinton general election she might win in the end but it ain’t going to be a landslide.

        1. And Trump hasn’t really been running against her yet. In a general election he will savage her over her various scandals, corruptions, and incompetence in a way that more mainstream Republicans wouldn’t dream of doing.

          1. I’m not voting for Trump. Ever. But he freestyling on Hillary during a debate would be funny.

            1. Oh hell, that would actually be the best part of Trump being the nominee.

        2. If Clinton wins, it will be the end of the world as we know it…

          1. +1 and I feel fine

    2. Most General Election polls have Hillary getting far more support from Republicans than Trump gets from Democrats. Not because Hillary appeals to Republicans, but because a significant portion of Republicans are that turned off by Trump. White, blue collar men are not that big of a slice of the Democratic Party these days, and they’re not all going to vote for Trump.

      1. “White, blue collar men are not that big of a slice of the Democratic Party these days”

        That’s the point. Those guys aren’t turning out for Hillary.

        “Most General Election polls have Hillary getting far more support from Republicans than Trump gets from Democrats.”

        I’d like to see those polls.

        Trump tends to win by wider margins in states with open primaries–because then registered Democrats can vote for him, too.

        1. “That’s the point. Those guys aren’t turning out for Hillary.”

          Obama has won the last two elections (by 7 and 4 percentage points) where the Republican candidate won the blue-collar white vote by large margins. This isn’t the 1960s anymore. The Democrats can lose blue collar white men by a huge margin and still win an election easily by doing well with other demographics.

          “I’d like to see those polls.”

          This is a recent Fox poll that has Trump down 11 overall (which is in line with current polling averages). If you go to the breakdown at the bottom, Clinton wins among Dems 92-5 and Trump wins among Republicans 73-16. Clinton’s favorability among Republicans is about the same as Trump’s is with Democrats. Both Cruz and Kasich do better than Trump with Democrats, Independents, and Republicans.

          http://tinyurl.com/zum22e5

          “Trump tends to win by wider margins in states with open primaries–because then registered Democrats can vote for him, too.”

          A lot of people who vote in open primaries are Independents, not necessarily members of the opposing party. Also, Independents and cross party voters who vote in open primaries aren’t necessarily representative of the people in those groups who vote in general elections. Trump has huge negative favorability among Independents, worse than any other candidate. Cruz and Kasich both do significantly better among Independents in general election polling.

  6. “The old way of doing things no longer works and we need radical change.”

    No longer? Never did.

    1. That is heavily dependent on what you mean by ‘works’.

      Get elected to congress and before your first term is up you are a multi-millionaire with a lifetime salary and medical care. If you were sitting in congress you would probably think it works pretty well.

  7. “The old way of doing things no longer works and we need radical change.”

    No longer? Never did.

    1. Siiiiiigh.

    2. Siiiiiigh.

    3. When libertarians say, “Things aren’t working”, we mean that the government isn’t protecting our rights.

      When other people say, “Things aren’t working”, they mean the politicians aren’t cutting up libertarians to use for fishing bait.

    4. The squirrelz, however, are diligent.

      Judging by the last couple of days, you must have pissed off the squirrel god.

      1. I keep rebooting my mouse and replaced the batteries, in case it was me.

        I don’t think it’s me.

        How do I make it stop?

        1. Sacrifice two trolls to the squirrel god?

          1. +2 Shriek

        2. Stop? There is no stop. The squirrels only know hunger. And they feast on your double-post shame. Their hunger is a pit that can never be filled. Your shame and the dismay of the rest of the commentariat drives them as no emotion can drive man.

  8. “Is not this simpler? Is this not your natural state? It’s the unspoken truth of humanity, that you crave subjugation. The bright lure of freedom diminishes your life’s joy in a mad scramble for power, for identity. You were made to be ruled. In the end, you will always kneel.”

    1. Whedon was speaking from experience there.

  9. I want radical change. I want a near-complete dismantling of the federal government’s bureaucracy.

    1. But…but..that’s not incremental!

      1. First they came for the IRS and I did not speak out because I was not an IRS agent.
        They then came for the EPA and I did not speak out because I was not an EPA regulator.

        They then came for me and these was no one left to speak out for me.
        -FDA poultry inspector

    2. There was a time once when your view was THE view of this very journal.

      But today, Welch, Gillespie, and most of the other “libertarians” here at Reason would indeed find your view radical and appalling.

  10. Is it at the possible that the poll is biased towards a leader in that the questions presume one exists?

  11. OT & apologies if already covered…

    First Panama Papers political fallout? Icelandic PM resigns.

    1. Viva la revolucion.

    2. European leaders are like European football league executives.

  12. I’m not sure radical change is ipso facto a good thing to begin with. Generally radicalism has not been a pro-social force in human history, however justified it might be.

  13. “The old way of doing things no longer works and we need radical change.”

    I blame the Do-Nothing Congress!

    Autocratic rule by a strong-willed philosopher king will make this country… well, you know….

    1. Ivy League Constitutional scholar!

  14. Bloody skwerlz.

  15. I am not sure that the phrasing of these questions is completely impartial.

    “The government has gone too far in assisting minority groups.”

    and

    “we need “a leader who is willing to say or do anything to solve America’s problems””

  16. RE: First the Good News: Most Voters Want ‘Radical Change.’ Now the Bad News…

    This is wonderful news.
    Finally, our republic can finally find perfect happiness in a socialist slave state if the people have their way.
    Now please excuse me.
    I’ll be packing my bags to live in another country if this happens.

    1. Sorry, there aren’t really any now, and there definitely won’t be if the world’s leading superpower falls to socialists. Once that happens, “fight or flight” gets downgraded to just “fight”.

  17. And progressives’ call for food freedom abruptly reverses itself when trans fats, genetically modified foods, or large sugary drinks are in question?they think all should be banned or strictly regulated.

    Could this be the stress cracks that show progressives have gone too far?

  18. You know who else wanted a leader who is willing to say or do anything to solve the country’s problems…

    1. The Galactic Senate?

    2. Wreck-it Ralph?

    3. Julius Caesar?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.