Pro-choice v. pro-life map (SUSA poll)

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The SUSA thingy (whatever you think of the figures) has data by race and party and such!

Alabama
younger people much more pro-life than olders (63% among those under 35, 49% among those over 55)
Whites 59% pro-life
Blacks 46% pro-choice
Republicans 68% pro-life
independents 48% pro-life
Democrats 45% pro-choice
regular church goers 69% pro-life
those that don't ever go to church 54% pro-choice

And so on for other states.

MOE is high on subsamples.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I think I said this earlier, but calling this a "pro-life v. pro-choice" map is kinda simplistic.  For example, I am in favor of banning all abortions except risk of health and rape situations.  And I would call myself pro-life.  I think if the map showed that statistic, it would look very different.

Well if you'd answer "Pro-life" to "On abortion, are you pro-life? Or pro-choice?", then you're obviously "Pro-life" for the pourposes of this poll.

[Ebowed]

I have always believed that Nebraska and South Carolina were borderline pro-choice.  It's really a well-kept secret.  In fact, people will go out and vote for politicians just because they are pro-life, but then when SUSA asks them about the issue they'll admit their true feelings.  Maybe it's something in the water.

[riceowl]

OK, so what I'm saying is that everyone has their own definition of the term, which is why they're VERY stupid terms in the first place.  I doubt any "pro-choicers" hate life, and I doubt any "pro-lifers" hate the ability to choose things. 

So the results aren't reliable...at all.

[minionofmidas]

OK, so what I'm saying is that everyone has their own definition of the term, which is why they're VERY stupid terms in the first place.  I doubt any "pro-choicers" hate life, and I doubt any "pro-lifers" hate the ability to choose things. 

So the results aren't reliable...at all.

Well yes, obviously few people are absolutely anti-legal abortions or absolutely pro-abortions anytime you want them ... so it's simplistic.

[Smash255]

CBS News Poll. Jan. 5-8, 2006. N=1,151 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.

"What is your personal feeling about abortion? (1) It should be permitted in all cases. (2) It should be permitted, but subject to greater restrictions than it is now. (3) It should be permitted only in cases such as rape, incest and to save the woman's life. OR, (4) It should only be permitted to save the woman's life."

Abortion should be permitted...
Never (Vol) 5
Woman's Life 17
Rape, incest, Woman's Life 33
Greater Restrictions than now 15
All cases 27

That's 55% for no abortion outside rape, incest, and womans life, and 70% wanting more restrictions on abortion.  This is why the Democrats are losing on this issue.

Lets look at other polls shall we  :

Gallup Jan 9- Jan 12

"Would you like to see abortion laws in this country made more strict, less strict, or remain as they are?"

More Strict 38%  Same 39% less Strict 20%

Total Less Strict or same 59% 
Total More Strict 38%

Gallup Jan 6 to Jan 8th 

"With respect to the abortion issue, would you consider yourself to be pro-choice or pro-life?

Pro-Choice 53%
Pro-Life 42%

ABC News/WP Dec 15-18

"Do you think abortion should be legal in all cases, legal in most cases, illegal in most cases, or illegal in all cases?"

Legal All cases 17%
Legal Most cases 40%
Illegal Most cases 27%
Illegal All Cases 13%

Total Legal All or Most Cases 57%
Total Illegal  All or Most cases 40%

NBC/ WSJ Dec 9-12

"The Supreme Court's 1973 Roe versus Wade decision established a woman's constitutional right to an abortion, at least in the first three months of pregnancy. Would you like to see the Supreme Court completely overturn its Roe versus Wade decision, or not?"

Overturn 30%
Not Overturn 66%

[Jake]

See Smash, all of those polls refer to generalities. Do you support Roe, would you like stricter laws, do you support in most cases, etc. The poll Preston posted actually asks people if they support various specific positions.

The first Gallup:

Could the average person even give the status-quo for abortion in this country? If they can't, they're more or less strict answer means nothing.

The second Gallup:

The worst question ever. One man's pro-choice is another man's pro-life. What ridiculous tags anyway.

The third poll:

Ask the person to define most cases. I'll bet the farm that you'll get just as many answers as responses.

The fourth poll:

Support for Roe DOES NOT EQUAL support for abortion. Most believe that eliminating Roe ends abortion (both sides seem to believe this for some reason).

[minionofmidas]

All but the third sentence of what Jake says is correct.

[Josh/Devilman88]

I don't like polls to start with, and plus they only ask a few people which more then likely not be how the whole state feels.

[angus]

Support for Roe DOES NOT EQUAL support for abortion. Most believe that eliminating Roe ends abortion (both sides seem to believe this for some reason).

an excellent point.  one that I try to make often.  You see, there are two ways to divide people on this debate.  One is the classic Pro-Life versus Pro-Choice (with apologies to rice owl, who makes an excellent point, but I don't want to sprinkle my post with subtle but important complexities at the moment).  The other way, the way that lawyers, and smart posters like Emsworth and Richius, and even congresspeople when they're talking among themselves and not to sound-bite hungry journalists is Federal rule versus State rule.  And I agree with Jake's tacit position that it would make more sense to take the issue out of the hot, emotionally charged We promote the culture of the Sanctity of Life versus Git yer laws offa my uterus fascist pig arena.  And put it into the more sophisticated arena of those who think.  In this view, it is simply a matter of sovereignty.  An overturn of Roe verus wade does not make abortion illegal.  (Democrats often omit this important fact when talking to the great unwashed masses)  And upholding Roe doesn't mean you'll ever be able to get an abortion in a state like MS.  (Republicans often omit this important fact when talking to the great unwashed masses.)  But it's true.  Many of those blue states are states in which you cannot now have the procedure performed.  This would not change with an overturn.  Many of those red states are states in which you can get the procedure performed now, and will still be able to have the procedure performed in case of an overturn.  I have never let a candidate's position on abortion affect my vote.  I personally think it should be legal in all cases, but have voted for all sorts of candidates depending on their positions on issues which I do find important.  But I recognize some voters do vote on this issue.  And jfern correctly points out that most single issue abortion voters are decidedly anti-abortion.  he misconstrues its practical manifestation, however.  And it's important to keep this in mind.  No one among us can say which of these states would immediately outlaw the procedure.  Admittedly my number was lowballing, and opebo's was highballing, and both of us have a habit of using hyperbole to make a point anyway.  Still, keep in perspective Jake's excellent reminder that the overturn doesn't mean outlawing the procedure.  It then becomes incumbent on the debaters to think long and hard about federalism, and the role of the federal government vis-a-vis the various legislatures.  Framing the debate in these terms not only more accurately describes the real debate among legal scholars, but also helps avoid (but not alleviate) emotionally charged confrontations from which everyone will emerge angry and less likely to hear the other's side.

[The Duke]

I've never founbd these SUSA abortion polls to be very credible.  Just prima facie, am I seriously supposed to think that Texas, Georgia, South Carolina, Wyoming, Nebraska, and Kansas are pro-choice states?

I think the reality is that people who want drastic restrictions on availability of abortion are still describing themselves as pro-choice, and it makes the map very skewed in that direction.  That's the only way to rationalize that states that keep voting conservative, largely because of cultural issues, are listed as pro-choice on the map: People who hold mostly pro-life views are still calling themselves pro-choice because they think abortion should be available in extreme circumstances.

[Smash255]

Few things

One as far as Jake's post.  The point you make about mostly legal, is only good to a point, mostly illegal pretty much covers the grey area on that one.  Their was another poll by the way that said 55% Woman & Doctor should make the choice.

As far as John Ford's response.  Part of it could simply be that those who are pro-life tend to be quite a bit more passionate about it & vote on the issue much more than those who are pro-choice.  Also their is probably quite a bit of middle ground where someone may really not like the whole concept of abortion but lean towards a pro-choice view (might be repusled by abortion, but believes the decision should be the woman's)

[12th Doctor]

CBS News Poll. Jan. 5-8, 2006. N=1,151 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.

"What is your personal feeling about abortion? (1) It should be permitted in all cases. (2) It should be permitted, but subject to greater restrictions than it is now. (3) It should be permitted only in cases such as rape, incest and to save the woman's life. OR, (4) It should only be permitted to save the woman's life."

Abortion should be permitted...
Never (Vol) 5
Woman's Life 17
Rape, incest, Woman's Life 33
Greater Restrictions than now 15
All cases 27

That's 55% for no abortion outside rape, incest, and womans life, and 70% wanting more restrictions on abortion.  This is why the Democrats are losing on this issue.

The answer is simple, Preston... most people have no idea what Roe v. Wade acctually does.

[opebo]

angus, apparentely there is one abortion clinic in Mississippi.  And isn't it possible for upper-middle-class women to simply have their gynocologist provide them with an abortion privately?

I think you are drastically underestimating the effect of a loss of a basic constitutional right would have on the country.

No doubt the religious terrorists have made it more difficult to get an abortion in many of the more backward states, but placing the power of the state fully behind the oppression they advocate would make a huge difference in the lives of not just women, but every American.  I also think you underestimate how much further the loss of any of our (very few) constitutional rights takes us down the road towards a total Police State.

[minionofmidas]

CBS News Poll. Jan. 5-8, 2006. N=1,151 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.

"What is your personal feeling about abortion? (1) It should be permitted in all cases. (2) It should be permitted, but subject to greater restrictions than it is now. (3) It should be permitted only in cases such as rape, incest and to save the woman's life. OR, (4) It should only be permitted to save the woman's life."

Abortion should be permitted...
Never (Vol) 5
Woman's Life 17
Rape, incest, Woman's Life 33
Greater Restrictions than now 15
All cases 27

That's 55% for no abortion outside rape, incest, and womans life, and 70% wanting more restrictions on abortion.  This is why the Democrats are losing on this issue.

The answer is simple, Preston... most people have no idea what Roe v. Wade acctually does.

Did.

[angus]

I think you are drastically underestimating the effect of a loss of a basic constitutional right would have on the country.

possibly.  but it is equally possible that you are drastically overestimating one.  some would even go so far as to suggest that you are completely ignoring one:  the right to be born.  Which again just goes to show we need to move the debate out of this prochoice vs prolife arena and back into the legal arena.  Let's argue over whether the constitution says it's a basic right.  There's a pretty good case to be made that it is, but there's an equally good case to be made that the matter is left, by the framers, up to the states.  I think any supreme court revisit of Roe will rest on those terms. 

Still, I recognize that's not the point of this thread.  This is merely a presentation of polling data.  So a comment on topic:  none of it is surprising.  In Elazar's political culture terms, most of the traditionalist area is blue, most of the individualistic and moralistic areas are red.  If you take a look at Elazar's model, the result is easily explained.  There are fringes, of course, where two cultures meet.  e.g., Is Texas more Cowboy or more Southerner?  There's a long standing debate between Al and M about this.  The data herein would suggest Al is correct.  Individualism trumps Traditionalism in the lone star state, for example.  Utah is an anomaly.  Very cowboy, and thus very individualistic.  But on this issue the prevalence of Mormon culture trumps cowboy culture.  SD is also kind of strange.  And Virginia?  Well, the influx of New Englanders and folks from the middle atlantic and upper midwest to the DC metro area has occurred since Elazar first published the model.  Makes perfect sense to me.  The model isn't perfect, but goes a long way toward explaining most intranational political trends, including this one.

[Sam Spade]

If you believe Texas is majority pro-choice, I have a bridge to sell you somewhere.    Frankly most people, in analyzing Texas, underestimate its social conservatism and overestimate its fiscal conservatism, simply because residents of the state don't like taxes.  Texas is roughly in the realm of Oklahoma, Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama in terms of its social beliefs.

Seriously though, adult polls are not to be trusted in the Texas, since nearly one-third of the adult population aren't registered voters and the only time in the elections that even one-half of the adult population votes (sometimes) is in the Presidential elections.  Tends to skew the sample.

[opebo]

I think you are drastically underestimating the effect of a loss of a basic constitutional right would have on the country.

possibly.  but it is equally possible that you are drastically overestimating one.  some would even go so far as to suggest that you are completely ignoring one:  the right to be born.

That isn't a constitutional right.  The government can't arrange for hypothetical persons to be born. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What the hell?  What do you mean move the debate into the legal arena?  That is where it has been since 1973.  If the Supreme Court had any decent respect for precedent the issue should now be closed forever.   

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why on earth should they revisit it?  They already decided the issue decades ago.

[angus]

I'm really not the one to argue with you.  I happen to agree that we're better off allowing abortions in all cases.  But I think you are mistaken if you think it won't ever come up again.  And when it does, in an appellate court, or the supreme court, because some legislature decides to restrict the procedure, it will be argued, at least in part, based on the Bill of Rights, which can be argued to show it's not a federal matter.

If the US supreme court agreed with what you typed about precedent then Plessy v Fergusson would still be law.  You know better than this opebo.

[Brandon H]

I'm really not the one to argue with you.  I happen to agree that we're better off allowing abortions in all cases.  But I think you are mistaken if you think it won't ever come up again.  And when it does, in an appellate court, or the supreme court, because some legislature decides to restrict the procedure, it will be argued, at least in part, based on the Bill of Rights, which can be argued to show it's not a federal matter.

If the US supreme court agreed with what you typed about precedent then Plessy v Fergusson would still be law.  You know better than this opebo.

I am surprised no one brought up Plessy vs. Fergusson and Brown vs. Board of Education during the Suprme Court hearings since there was all this talk about precedent. In this case precedent was wrong but was overturned.

[12th Doctor]

CBS News Poll. Jan. 5-8, 2006. N=1,151 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.

"What is your personal feeling about abortion? (1) It should be permitted in all cases. (2) It should be permitted, but subject to greater restrictions than it is now. (3) It should be permitted only in cases such as rape, incest and to save the woman's life. OR, (4) It should only be permitted to save the woman's life."

Abortion should be permitted...
Never (Vol) 5
Woman's Life 17
Rape, incest, Woman's Life 33
Greater Restrictions than now 15
All cases 27

That's 55% for no abortion outside rape, incest, and womans life, and 70% wanting more restrictions on abortion.  This is why the Democrats are losing on this issue.

The answer is simple, Preston... most people have no idea what Roe v. Wade acctually does.

Did.

What do you mean?  It is still doing it, no?

[Jake]

Few things

One as far as Jake's post.  The point you make about mostly legal, is only good to a point, mostly illegal pretty much covers the grey area on that one.  Their was another poll by the way that said 55% Woman & Doctor should make the choice.

In your interpretation. I consider allowing first trimester abortions to come under the mostly legal umbrella. No doubt many consider it as coming under the mostly illegal umbrella. Again, interpretation.

[A18]

I'm really not the one to argue with you.  I happen to agree that we're better off allowing abortions in all cases.  But I think you are mistaken if you think it won't ever come up again.  And when it does, in an appellate court, or the supreme court, because some legislature decides to restrict the procedure, it will be argued, at least in part, based on the Bill of Rights, which can be argued to show it's not a federal matter.

If the US supreme court agreed with what you typed about precedent then Plessy v Fergusson would still be law.  You know better than this opebo.

I am surprised no one brought up Plessy vs. Fergusson and Brown vs. Board of Education during the Suprme Court hearings since there was all this talk about precedent. In this case precedent was wrong but was overturned.

Actually, they did.

[Brandon H]

I'm really not the one to argue with you.  I happen to agree that we're better off allowing abortions in all cases.  But I think you are mistaken if you think it won't ever come up again.  And when it does, in an appellate court, or the supreme court, because some legislature decides to restrict the procedure, it will be argued, at least in part, based on the Bill of Rights, which can be argued to show it's not a federal matter.

If the US supreme court agreed with what you typed about precedent then Plessy v Fergusson would still be law.  You know better than this opebo.

I am surprised no one brought up Plessy vs. Fergusson and Brown vs. Board of Education during the Suprme Court hearings since there was all this talk about precedent. In this case precedent was wrong but was overturned.

Actually, they did.

OK. I didn't sit through the whole thing. I can see Kennedy talking about important it is to uphold the precendent of segregation and how horrible it was that the court went against established precedent. (sarcasm)

[minionofmidas]

CBS News Poll. Jan. 5-8, 2006. N=1,151 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.

"What is your personal feeling about abortion? (1) It should be permitted in all cases. (2) It should be permitted, but subject to greater restrictions than it is now. (3) It should be permitted only in cases such as rape, incest and to save the woman's life. OR, (4) It should only be permitted to save the woman's life."

Abortion should be permitted...
Never (Vol) 5
Woman's Life 17
Rape, incest, Woman's Life 33
Greater Restrictions than now 15
All cases 27

That's 55% for no abortion outside rape, incest, and womans life, and 70% wanting more restrictions on abortion.  This is why the Democrats are losing on this issue.

The answer is simple, Preston... most people have no idea what Roe v. Wade acctually does.

Did.

What do you mean?  It is still doing it, no?

No.