POLL: Charge of the Other Side of Netroots

Every once in a while, you get so immersed in your conservative circles, like Huck's Army, the F3 Coalition, the Huckabee Alliance, and the like that you forget that there's another side to the "netroots" coin. Obviously, I never really get a chance to forget about it, because I hear about MoveOn.org all the time. But I rarely see it personally.

Well, I got to see just a little bit of it in action recently with my latest poll. Someone commented on a popular liberal blog about my poll, and voila!

I asked: Which of the following best summarizes your reaction to the recent events relating to marriage in California?

The response:

A incredibly lopsided 242 (89%) said that "California's finally gotten it right. Now for the rest of the country."

The second-place group, consisting of 24 (8%), said that it "Just goes to show how much we need a federal marriage amendment."

A couple people each said that it "Just goes to show had bad activist courts can be" and that it's "Just a blip on the screen; stick with states' rights," neither attaining one percent of the vote.

With one vote, "Just goes to show how far-left California is" came in last.

You all may be interested in what my reaction was. Well, as the administrator of the poll, I have the luxury of not limiting myself to one answer. Needless to say, I do not agree with the 89% majority. I also don't think that it's proof of how liberal Californians are, although I think many of them are very liberal. This was a court decision, overriding the will of the people, who had already chosen to protect marriage and who will have an opportunity to do it again this November with a state constitutional amendment on the ballot.

Although I understand the point of view which urges us to stick to states' rights, I, as a proponent of a federal marriage amendment, do not concur, and I fear that this may be more than a blip on the screen in the long run if strong action is not taken.

I'm split somewhat evenly between seeing the need for a marriage amendment and recognizing the extent and effect of activist courts. Of course, the former is remedial action which one can take, whereas the latter is more just a realization.

Please vote in the next poll!

POLL: Credentials, Of Course!

Okay, time to get some of these old polls out of the way, and get a new one up and running.

First, I asked: In your opinion, what is the primary factor which McCain should take into account when selecting a running mate?

Overwhelmingly, you responded that Conservative Credentials were of the utmost importance. 37 (77%) of you chose that option.

Executive Experience came in a distant second with 7 (14%) votes. Yet, that was a solid second, for Youth/Freshness came in third with only 3 (6%) votes. State/Region captured a single (2%) vote. Neither Race/Ethnicity nor Gender garnered a solitary vote.

VP POLL: Huckabee's Main Man,but by a Plurality

As always, thanks to everyone--all 206 of you--who participated in the latest poll.

Not ignoring the small, unscientific sample size which this site provides, the poll seems to suggest fervent support for Governors Huckabee and Romney, while a plethora of candidates have solid support.

Here's the rundown:

1. Fmr. Gov. Mike Huckabee (R, Arkansas): 73 (35%)

2. Fmr. Gov. Mitt Romney (R, Massachusetts): 51 (24%)

3. Secretary of State Condileeza Rice: 24 (11%)

4. Other: 16 (7%)

5. Sen. Joe Liebermann (D, Connecticut): 14 (6%)

6. Gov. Sarah Palin (R, Alaska): 9 (4%)

7. Gov. Haley Barbour (R, Mississippi): 8 (3%)

8. Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R, Minnesota): 7 (3%)

9. Gov. Charlie Crist (R, Florida): 4 (1%)


Note: I should point out that I did unintentionally leave out some very viable candidates, such as Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal and South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford, among others. Fortunately, the "Other" option was provided for supporters of those candidates.

Please vote in the next poll, once I get it up and running.

POLL: McCain has a tough row-to-hoe

61 people voted in the latest poll.

Question: What will it take for John McCain to gain your support/approval?

An important factor to keep in mind is that this poll began before Huckabee suspended his campaign for the presidency. With that said, the largest percentage of voters said, "As far as I can tell, there is nothing that can make me support him. My mind is made up." 27 voters (44%) chose this option.

Constituting the second-highest total of votes, 24 (39%) said that "McCain needs to lose the nomination to Huckabee. Then I'd like him more."

Coming in a distant third, 8 of you (13%) said that "McCain needs to be a strong conservative during the rest of the campaign."

1 of you (1%) said that "McCain needs to drift more to the middle/left during the general election," and 1 of you (1%) said, "Huckabee and/or Paul just need(s) to drop out. Then I'd support McCain."

Please vote in the new poll, and e-mail me or comment on the blog, explaining why you think your choice should be McCain's choice for VP.

POLL RESULTS: Your Course of Action, if Huckabee Fails to Win Nomination

Thank you for the record participation in WWCP's latest poll. 134 votes!!!

The question is one weighing on many conservative minds right about now: If Mike Huckabee doesn't win the Republican nomination, what will you do?

You didn't have to be a Huckabee supporter to vote in the poll. The point was, IF McCain gets the nomination, what will your course of action be?

The vote was extremely split, which is bad news for John McCain.

"Vote for McCain" was still the most popular answer, but it only garnered 29% (39 votes).

27% (37 votes) are still undecided, but they aren't happy with their options. "I don't know which; in any case, I'd feel terrible."

19% (26 votes) will go with Obama or Clinton. This is extremely bad news for McCain, unless these voters were Democrats to begin with.

14% (19 votes) will simply sit out this election.

9% (13 votes) will vote third-party.

If McCain wins the nomination, he's going to have to work himself to death trying to get the votes (and support) of the undecided, the sitters-out, the third-party voters, and those about to cross-over to the Democrats.

A new poll will be up shortly.

POLL RESULTS: Faith and the Presidential Campaign

I've been too busy lately to post the results of the last poll, so now I have two polls to cover. This post covers the first.

Question: When you hear presidential candidates say they are Christians or speak of Judeo-Christian principles, what do you do?

Total Votes: 73

In a victory through a plurality of votes, 32 (43%) of you said, "If they have consistently acted and spoken in such a way, I believe them. Otherwise, I don't."

In second place, 27 (36%) of you chose a somewhat similar answer, saying, "I listen carefully to see whether or not it sounds like they know what they are talking about."

Coming in at a distant third, 9 (12%) of you said that faith shouldn't have a part in the presidential campaign. "I don't like it: candidates shouldn't be talking about faith and religion."

A few (4%) of you find it amusing, saying, "I usually burst out laughing. I just can't take most of them seriously."

Finally, a couple (2%) of you feel cynical about politicians trying to come off as religious. "I usually shrug it off with some or a lot cynicism/skepticism."

Idealists, You Are!

Wow, thank you to all who participated in the latest WWCP poll. With 65 votes, it topped the previous high of 49 votes, which were cast in this site's very first poll. Clearly, WWCP is going in the right direction, popularity-wise.

I mistakenly thought I had chosen a very polarizing, divisive question in this poll: "In a President, what type of conservatism is most important to you?"

I figured that we'd either see a split between economic, foreign policy, and social conservatives, or see a general gravitation to social conservatism, since many of my blog readers may feel most strongly about that area. Instead, by a wide margin, you chose the utopian idea of a totally conservative President.

67% (44 votes) of you said that "A President has to have ALL for me to support him." That's a higher percentage than the 65% which said Hillary Clinton would make the worst President.

Next in line was "Defense Conservatism (Foreign Policy/Immigration)" at a distant second place. It brought in 12% (8 votes) of the votes.

After that, a pack of options runs together, each choice carrying only a few votes. 6% (4 votes) voted for "Social Conservatism," and another 6% voted for "Theological Conservatism." 3% (2 votes) cast their ballot with "Economic Conservatism (free markets)", while another 3% (2 votes) wasn't conservative ("I'm NOT a conservative, so none!")

Rounding out the poll was "Fiscal Conservatism" with one lonely percentile (1 vote).

A few notes:

1.) I ambiguously worded the most popular answer choice: "A President has to have ALL for me to support him." "Support" is a relative term. Wholehearted support, or support period?

2.) A lot of types of conservatism can be defined relatively, as well. There are degrees of conservatism.

3.) I can see that I can't give you all a cop-out if I want to see your feelings when forced to make a decision.

Please vote in the new poll.

Deep, Independent Thinkers, You Are!

Thanks to everyone for participating in the third WWCP poll--a double edition.

Both parts of the poll pertained to celebrity and high-profile endorsements. The first asked, simply, how do they affect you?

As I suspected, they don't really affect you at all. Out of 30 total votes cast, a whopping 69% (21 votes) said that endorsements have absolutely no impact on them, with 46% (14 votes) saying, "They never affect me. I study the candidates independently and couldn't care less what 'big-name' people think." The other 23% (7 votes) clarified that endorsements don't affect who they support, but they "appreciate them because they can help my [their] candidate[s]."

29% (9 votes) said that endorsements do affect them. 3% (1 vote) pointed out that it depends on the endorser, and 13% (4 votes) further defined that position by stating that only "endorsers with credibility and credentials"--not celebrities--impact them. The remaining 13% (4 votes) noted that some endorsements make them less likely to support a candidate. Not one person said that endorsements "almost always affect" them--that they "put a lot of stock in a celebrity and high-profile endorsements.

The second part of the poll was very intriguing. In this part, I wanted to know people's specific reactions to particular endorsements. Here are the results:

10 people were less likely to support Obama because of Oprah's endorsement. 2 were more likely.

4 people were more likely to support Huckabee because of Chuck Norris' endorsement. 5 were less likely.

3 were more likely to support Mitt Romney after the National Review's endorsement. 8 were less likely.

1 was more likely to support Mike Huckabee after Jim Gilchrist's endorsement. 5 were less likely.

There were a total of 25 votes cast in the second part, yet the most reactions to any endorsement was twelve. How can this be? Well, 13 said that none of the endorsements they didn't check influence them one way or another. That still doesn't seem to be proportionate to the percentage which said, in the poll's first part, that endorsements has no impact on them. However, that seeming contradiction can be explained in two ways:

1) Different people voted in the different parts of the poll.
2) In the second part, you were recording your reactions--whether positive or negative--to an endorsement, rather than how they actually influence you.

Please vote in the new poll.

A More Divisive Question, Perhaps?

Thanks to all the participants in the most recent WWCP poll.

There were only 19 votes in this "election." I credit that fact to the blog's recent inactivity, the lack of publicity the blog has gotten in the past few weeks, and the poor placement in the sidebar. Hopefully, none of those issues will influence future polls on this site.

Even with the relatively few number of votes, the results of this poll were quite interesting. Unlike the last poll, which had a clear consensus, this poll split the votes. The question was simple: "What do you dislike the most?"

7 of you (36%) answered that you disliked "Flip-Flopping" the most, perhaps residue from John Kerry or a present rebuke of Mitt Romney.

6 of you (31%) said that you disliked "Lying about or obscuring one's track-record (or current political views)" the most. I should've clarified this, but it refers both to one's own record/views and one's opponents'. I don't know whether that clarification would've garnered this answer more support or not.

There was a two-way tie for third, with 3 people each (15%) saying that they most dislike "Attack Ads" and "Perpetuating the idea that only certain candidates can win in the general election." I'd be interested to see what just Huckabee supporters would have to say if these two choices were the only options, since he's been the victim of both ploys. Although, the "Attack Ads" against him have still been somewhat tame so far.

What do I take out of this poll? Well, I think it's probable that all of you dislike all of those things, and you simply had to pick one based upon your strongest feelings.

Please vote in the next polls (notice the plural).

You have spoken UNMISTAKABLY!

I want to thank all of you who took part in WWCP's first ever poll.

When asked who you think would make the worst President, you answered overwhelmingly that Hillary Clinton would. With 32 votes (65%), she received almost double the amount of votes of all the other candidates combined!

The only person even remotely resembling a challenger for the throne was Rudy Giulani, who received 7 votes (14%).

I found it particularly interesting that almost nobody caught on to the fact that "Other" includes the likes of Dennis Kucinich, Mike Gravel, and everyone else in the world. The hodge-podge category got only 1 vote (2%).

Also, it is clear that Mrs. Clinton maintains her position as Public Enemy Number One among conservatives, as Barack Obama (4 votes: 8%) and John Edwards (3 votes: 6%) didn't stand a chance.

Mitt Romney received 2 votes (4%).

Please vote in the new poll.