Youth more radically opposed to present government than tea parties, poll finds A full 17 percent of those ages 18-29 said yes, that violence would be justified, while a further 15 percent were not “not sure.” Granted, while those figures come out to a clear majority of young people — 68 percent — saying violence is not justified, it also means that 32 percent either disagree or haven’t made up their minds.
Another statistic sure to surprise some beltway liberals were the responses of poor people, who tied with tea partiers at 13 percent in saying violence would be justified. A further 24 percent said they weren’t sure, bringing their level of certainty against violence down to just 63 percent.
Compounding the potential for civil unrest, the poor and the tea parties, according to prior statistics, were two very different, separate groups with virtually no cross-over.
In a survey of Americans who voted in 2008, the nonpartisan group Project Vote found that, by and large, those sympathetic to the tea parties were white, wealthy and affluent people, whose political views represented approximately 29 percent of the electorate.
By comparison, blacks, youths and low-income voters, who turned out in record numbers to support President Obama, make up 32 percent of the electorate — and their views could not be any more different than their conservative counterparts.
The poll, published last Sept., described tea party participants as “overwhelmingly white” and “universally dissatisfied,” even though having “the least reason for dissatisfaction.”
Youth more radically opposed to present government than tea parties, poll finds “Only six percent [of tea party participants] reported having to worry about buying food for their families in the past year, compared to 14 percent of voters nationwide, 37 percent of blacks, 21 percent of youths, and 39 percent of low-income voters,” they added.
Discussing the partisan rhetorical fray on MSNBC last night, liberal news anchor Keith Olbermann failed to mention these figures, focusing instead on tea partiers and violent rhetoric prevalent in many Republicans’ public discourse.
Global revolution?
Friday, January 21, 2011
Violence Justified say Young People Opposed to Present Government
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
There's so many basic errors here. For one thing, the young and the poor have completely different problems with the government than the entitled, elitist tea partiers do, so suggesting a trend is ridiculous. They are diametrically opposing forces, and it would likely be the young and poor facing off against the established wealthy (i.e. tea partiers) if it ever came to violence - and I doubt it would, but it would be nice (tea partiers wouldn't win fighting from their Hover-rounds, walkers and Rascals).
ReplyDeleteI could go on, but I could sum up the ignorance of the author of this quite simply by merely looking at the last line of what you quoted here: "Global revolution?"
Only a moron who views the US as the whole world would have the mental shortcomings necessary to find this "revolutionary."
Only a moron who views the US as the whole world would have the mental shortcomings necessary to find this "revolutionary."
ReplyDeleteThese trends with the young and the poor are taking place world-wide, not just in the U.S. There are already restless stirrings over rising food prices globally, for just one example.
Yes, there are riots in Europe. Do you happen to know why? Do you know what auterity measures are? They are less government, the cutting of social services provided at tax payer expense. These are the real reasons to revolt, when your government abandons you in favor of the wealthy elite, not because taxes are too high (a wopping 3% higher on only the wealthy, what an atrocity!).
ReplyDeleteYou're on the wrong bus going the wrong way if you think there's a revolution to end government coming.
No Bret, I'm not on the wrong bus. You really don't understand me very well, do you? How many times do I have to say I'm against the state/corporate/capitalist system?
ReplyDeleteI think a firm barrier should be placed between government and business, like there ought to be between government and religion (business and religion can be in bed all day long for all I care). I don't think government or business should be scrapped, and I don't blame "capitalism" for anything (which seems to set me apart from most liberals, but I'm comfortable wth that).
ReplyDeleteBased not on your words here and going by what you post day in and day out, I would say you align more closely to tea partiers, because you never fail to scapegoat government for everything, and I think you deny the very concept of governance as viable. Maybe not, but then I would say you might want to evaluate what you write.