John McCain Might as Well be Gay
| Wed Feb. 21, 2007 12:40 PM PST
Asked if they'd be willing to vote for a "generally well-qualified" candidate with the following characteristics, here's how Americans responded in a Feb. 9-11 Gallup poll.
Black 94%
Jewish 92%
A woman 88%
Hispanic 87%
Mormon 72%
Married for third time 67%
72 years of age 57%
A homosexual 55%
An atheist 45%
Several things stand out. First, Americans are much more tolerant of inherent characteristics (race, sex) than of things they view as a candidate's choice (religion, sexual orientation, marriage tendencies), which means we've moved past racism to simple prejudice. Take that for what it's worth.
Also, John McCain is old -- so old that his age puts him at the same disadvantage as a gay candidate for president, the very idea of which must horrify a huge portion of our (obviously) homophobic electorate and would galvanize the religious right. I suspect we should take these numbers with a grain of salt, but... wow.
(H/T Crooks and Liars)
Continues Below
Continued From Above
Comments
what do all you hyper-religious evangel'merican types have against us godless commies? at least we rest assured that 150 years ago this poll would have revealed:
Creationist 99%
Evolutionist 1%
ha! you so silly. who da fundamentalist/radical/extremist now?
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Europe_belief_in_god.png
Submitted by epaminondas (not verified) on Wed Feb. 21, 2007 3:12 PM PST.
"which means we've moved past racism to simple prejudice"..well on this planet that means we might have reached an ethereal plateau of modest hope. Take THAT for what it means.
Is that the good news or bad?
GOOD
Submitted by Matthew T. Jameson (not verified) on Thu Feb. 22, 2007 7:23 AM PST.
Social psychology has known for years that espousing an attitude does not predict actually behaving in accordance with that attitude. Therefore to treat these poll results as actual predictors of voter behavior is silly. Several studies have been conducted of late (starting with a seminal University of Michigan study conducted in the late 1990s) in which identical resumes were circulated to companies. The resumes differed only in the names written at the top (the credentials were identical). One set of resumes contained stereotypically black names (Tyrone, LaShaunda, etc.) while the other set contained more standard, biblically derived "white" names (John, Marc, Mary, etc.). Predictably, the employers were overwhelmingly more likely to offer interviews or offer positions outright to the Marc's and Mary's than the Tyrone's and LaShaunda's, despite their identical qualifications. Employers' self-reported attitudes toward race and hiring in no way predicted their actual behaviors.
Similarly, there is no reason to believe that 94% of Americans claiming they would vote for a qualified black candidate would actually predict voter behavior. Polls like this may give us hope that America is moving towards meritocracy, but they are hardly evidence that such a state has been achieved.
