Rasmussen: Only 29% of Obama supporters think Supreme Court should decide cases based on Constitution
posted at 12:30 pm on September 9, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
A friendly reminder from the Enlightened of how much more profound their respect for the rule of law is than yours, to be filed away for the next time one of them deigns to lecture you about Bush’s constitutional apostasy.
During his acceptance speech last night at the Republican National Convention in Minnesota, John McCain told the audience, “We believe in a strong defense, work, faith, service, a culture of life, personal responsibility, the rule of law, and judges who dispense justice impartially and don’t legislate from the bench.” Most American voters (60%) agrees and says the Supreme Court should make decisions based on what is written in the constitution, while 30% say rulings should be guided on the judge’s sense of fairness and justice. The number who agree with McCain is up from 55% in August.
While 82% of voters who support McCain believe the justices should rule on what is in the Constitution, just 29% of Barack Obama’s supporters agree. Just 11% of McCain supporters say judges should rule based on the judge’s sense of fairness, while nearly half (49%) of Obama supporters agree.
Better yet, file this away for the next time some conservative asks you why he should turn out to vote for a guy who supports amnesty. So alarming is it that even TNR’s wringing its hands: “Now, since it seems unlikely that many Americans spend much time weighing the relative merits of different methods of judicial decisionmaking, it’s a fairly safe bet that voters are largely reflecting the rhetoric they hear from political elites…” Exit question: What rhetoric from The One could his disciples possibly be “reflecting” here?
Update: Headlines comments imported.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
we need to run like hell on that
it’ll scare the NRA and Pro-life people without even needing elaboration….
sven10077 on September 9, 2008 at 10:57 AM
and yet, these same people have been using as a talking point how “Bush destroyed the Constitution”
jp on September 9, 2008 at 10:58 AM
I’m surprised it’s that high.
Pasalubong on September 9, 2008 at 10:58 AM
That’s 29% higher than I would have expected. Sheesh.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on September 9, 2008 at 10:59 AM
Rasmussen has race tied again in their daily poll
jp on September 9, 2008 at 10:59 AM
whoa!
Umm….the constitution IS the USofA.
Those who don’t want it should move.
Yes. Move.
bridgetown on September 9, 2008 at 10:59 AM
What did you expect from people that think the Constitution is a “living, breathing” document?
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on September 9, 2008 at 11:00 AM
Maybe these geniuses should get clued in that the “fairest” way to rule would be according to some common guiding principle or document… good thing we have a Constitution for just that purpose. Nah, let’s just go with the O’Connor standard of ruling by going with what you “feel”…
Wineaholic on September 9, 2008 at 11:01 AM
No, that’s entirely believeable. Who are we talking about after all??
CurtZHP on September 9, 2008 at 11:02 AM
The Constitution survived the abortion, so Obama and crew just want to put it on the shelf ’til it stops twitching.
innominatus on September 9, 2008 at 11:03 AM
If anyone doubted the stakes on not electing Obama, who has already said that he’d appoint judges for the their sense of justice, not adherence to the Constitution, you’ve been duly informed courtesy of Rasmussen. Hold your nose, close your eyes and pull the lever for Maverick, the alternative will yield capricious judges who can’t be removed except by impeachment.
esperpento on September 9, 2008 at 11:03 AM
Completely believable. That’s why the Democrats want to control the courts: to pass de facto legislation via judicial fiat. It also gives some cover to the Democrats, because they can shrug and say, “It’s out of our hands” while not so secretly chortling with glee.
Actually, it’s not much different from Begala’s “stroke of the pen, law of the land; kind of cool” comment regarding Bill Clinton’s misuse of executive orders. Both ideas indicate that the left does not believe we are a nation of laws, but rather what they BELIEVE the laws should be. It’s a frightening thought.
Physics Geek on September 9, 2008 at 11:04 AM
We need to keep working….
Barack needs exposed on this.
sven10077 on September 9, 2008 at 11:04 AM
I’m surprised at your surprise
ballz2wallz on September 9, 2008 at 11:04 AM
I really don’t care what the Supreme Court’s approval rating is. There should not be a survey for that, truthfully. Their job is to make decisions under the constraints of the Constitution.
The branches of government are supposed to be co-equal with one another. The only way libs have been able to promote their socialist/Marxist utopian agenda is through the courts, and if the courts did their job properly, we would not be in this situation.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on September 9, 2008 at 11:05 AM
But remember, it is the Republicans and Conservatives that are uneducated backwood morons…
Queasy on September 9, 2008 at 11:06 AM
Well, we all knew they weren’t being serious then anyway. I am a little surprised though that they think it’s completely useless for a Supreme Court Justice.
Our country wasn’t made on a whim.
Esthier on September 9, 2008 at 11:06 AM
I’ve seen bumper sticks that said:
Vote Democratic, Pro-Constitution
jp on September 9, 2008 at 11:06 AM
I trade…
Barry 52.1
McCain 47.5
sven10077 on September 9, 2008 at 11:07 AM
I’m not surprised, Democrats are Commies after all.
Maxx on September 9, 2008 at 11:10 AM
And truth be told, they are the ones that will put a knife in the heart of the Constitution. I agree with everyone that says we need to run ads and expose His Holiness on this issue except that, from an advertising perspective, it’s not a sexy issue (lack taxes or the military). I can see an ad that has historical tones (recreating the signing in Philly) and then showing the stats of how His followers don’t believe it anymore.
Actually, I’d be happy with an ad that outlines the 10th amendment and how Barry is set to trash it with his massive spending proposals.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on September 9, 2008 at 11:10 AM
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
If for no other reason alone (and there are LOTS) this is reason enough to question the patriotism and SANITY of Obama supporters.
Yakko77 on September 9, 2008 at 11:10 AM
Lemme guess, their alternative is “social justice.”
Hannibal Smith on September 9, 2008 at 11:11 AM
Wow. That’s a contradiction…..and sorta hypocritical, too.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on September 9, 2008 at 11:11 AM
Well gee. One clue as to why these people who think this way .. think this way — they are already Obama supporters.
wise_man on September 9, 2008 at 11:13 AM
That is the scariest thing I have heard since the start of this campaign… And these people are allowed to vote…
pueblo1032 on September 9, 2008 at 11:15 AM
Hopefully this will be a debate question: should SCOTUS rulings be based on the constitution?
aunursa on September 9, 2008 at 11:16 AM
That makes 71% of Obama supporters a threat to the Republic.
petefrt on September 9, 2008 at 11:20 AM
This is easy to fix. They can have their way and from now on, all judicial rulings will be based on the judge’s sense of fairness. That judge’s name will be Scalia.
trubble on September 9, 2008 at 11:21 AM
When liberals complain about Bush “trampling the Constitution,” are they complaining or just making a detached observation?
frankj on September 9, 2008 at 11:21 AM
I think this comment is accurate and that’s saying a lot because LOTS of scary things have come up this election. The thought that so many Obama supporters feel this way is simply staggering. As has been pointed out, maybe I shouldn’t be surprised at all. The socialist tendencies of Obama and his followers is well known but to have it pointed out so clearly with real numbers is just… breathtaking. Maybe I was in denial about it.
Yakko77 on September 9, 2008 at 11:21 AM
Rasmussen’s tie while bithersome is not cause for alarm. It has always been within or near the margin of error. This means simply we must redouble our efforts and get the gorund game going.
sven
sven10077 on September 9, 2008 at 11:21 AM
So instead of our country’s legal system being based on an actual structure, they think it should just be based on some judge’s feelings? There’s some stability for ya. Geez. How reassuring.
CP on September 9, 2008 at 11:23 AM
It’s an admission by liberals that:
1) their ideas cannot survive scrutiny
2) they want non-elected overlords to have fiat
3) they can’t be trusted to guarantee the bill of rights
sven10077 on September 9, 2008 at 11:26 AM
And we should be surprised about this why?
thekingtut on September 9, 2008 at 11:27 AM
Apparently the Constitution is not a legal document but position paper.
John on September 9, 2008 at 11:29 AM
I’ll admit, that number took me off-guard… my heart skipped a beat when I read the headline.
I guess I never thought that people could be so uneducated on our Constitution.
Anna on September 9, 2008 at 11:32 AM
Democrats say: Oh, the Constitution… that old outdated thing.
Maxx on September 9, 2008 at 11:35 AM
Thank you, government education. Nowadays, it’s more touchy-feely stuff than actual education. Need to keep the electorate stupid to keep Dumbocrats in office.
I don’t think they really teach the Constitution all that much anymore, IMHO.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on September 9, 2008 at 11:35 AM
Under-40 products of public schools.
rockmom on September 9, 2008 at 11:38 AM
That’s the beauty of the “living document” asininity – you really don’t need the document … just any old piece of paper is good enough, because it’s alive, anyway.
I’d like to hear someone grill BHO on this – what he thinks (being the Constitutional “scholar” that he is) about the fact that most of his supportters don’t like the US Constitution. There’s nothing better than finding a wedge issue between your opponent(’s public stance) and his own supporters!
progressoverpeace on September 9, 2008 at 11:40 AM
Nine years ago, I was in my senior year of high school. Government/Economics was a manditory course for graduation. My class was taught by a conservative veteran… I never realized how damn lucky I was until recently that I had that man teach me the fundamentals of our government and our economic system! He did a fabulous job of teaching facts (and on how to become a millionaire by age 40, wish I had paid attention!).
Of course, my daughter is 6 days into Kindergarten, and I’ve already had to correct something her teacher was teaching (about polar bears and penguins). I can only imagine how much more fun it will get as my kids get older.
Anna on September 9, 2008 at 11:41 AM
Excellent, albeit quite disturbing analogy.
eea on September 9, 2008 at 11:43 AM
You folks just have to realize that the Constitution is so constraining. It doesn’t leave room for the Left to do whatever they want – whenever they want. To them, that’s not fair.
OldEnglish on September 9, 2008 at 11:45 AM
83% of the 29% wondered what the Constitution has to do with court rulings. Check Here.
Wade on September 9, 2008 at 11:48 AM
Laura Ingraham just picked this up.
CanadianGuy on September 9, 2008 at 11:52 AM
Even among that 29%, when they say “the Constitution”, they are not referring to the document that’s held in the National Archives. They’re referring to only a few excerpts from a handful of Amendments, distorted beyond all recognition by liberal Justices and spread across ten thousand pages of meandering decisions which are, in turn, infinitely re-interpretable.
The terms “liberal” and “conservative” are mostly just used as catch-phrases, with no real definitions aside from an amorphous list of policies. The real schism in America is between those who support a Constitutional form of government and those who oppose that.
The fact that the Socialists constantly scream “Constition” at the tops of their lungs doesn’t change anything – the last thing in the world they want is a limited federal government.
logis on September 9, 2008 at 11:54 AM
71% of Democrats are sheeple? Yes, of course – they prefer the faux “benevolent dictator” illusion than living free under limited government.
T J Green on September 9, 2008 at 11:58 AM
So, it’s ok for the Supreme Court judges to ignore the Contitution, but it’s not ok for Bush or the republicans. Riiight. And to think that these people will vote. Scary.
guitarplayer on September 9, 2008 at 12:33 PM
one of many Liberal bumper stickers with this theme, via the ACLU
https://secure.aclu.org/site/SPageServer?pagename=bumper_sticker&s_s=email1
“I am a Constitution Voter”
jp on September 9, 2008 at 12:34 PM
Obama’s Marxist regime would govern by dictate and the court would follow suit. This dolt is incredibly frightening and is a real danger to the Republic.
rplat on September 9, 2008 at 12:36 PM
another good bumper sticker
http://bumperstickers.cafepress.com/item/protect-the-constitution-bumper-sticker/23523360
jp on September 9, 2008 at 12:38 PM
Yeah, I remember reading that exact quote about Supreme Court qualifications in the Constitution, right after the part saying justices must consider world opinion in their decisions.
m064404 on September 9, 2008 at 12:38 PM
Out of the 71% of Dimocrats who don’t like the US Constitution, I’m willing to bet that 95% of them think that SCOTUS cases should be decided on the Geneva Conventions and “international law” (even though they have no idea what they mean when they say ‘international law’).
This is the scariest poll result I’ve seen. Not because of what it says, but because these blithering idiots weren’t embarassed to say it. Very bad stuff.
progressoverpeace on September 9, 2008 at 12:39 PM
Obama: Constitutional Scholar.
Lehosh on September 9, 2008 at 12:42 PM
Yup.
evenfarer on September 9, 2008 at 12:42 PM
Hmmm. Maybe the Intelligentsia isn’t so intelligent after all.
Cicero43 on September 9, 2008 at 12:42 PM
Hopefully this will a wakeup call to the Ron Paul bunch who seem to be supporting Obama.
RushBaby on September 9, 2008 at 12:43 PM
O/T, I just read a little juicy morsal about The Naughty Reverend Wright. Thought you might want to check it out.
Geronimo on September 9, 2008 at 12:44 PM
The SCOTUS is gonna be full of activist judges if Uhbama is elected. :/
lodge on September 9, 2008 at 12:45 PM
Smart money says that, thanks to the Democrat dominated teacher unions, only about 20% of Obama’s supporters even know what the constitution is.
snaggletoothie on September 9, 2008 at 12:45 PM
That’s odd.
evenfarer on September 9, 2008 at 12:47 PM
Well, from the liberal perspective, the Constitution says whatever they want it to that week. So, since Bush isn’t (generally) pushing the latest liberal government fads, he is indeed running roughshod over the liberals’ “Constitution”.
18-1 on September 9, 2008 at 12:47 PM
Frightening . . . and sad.
AZCoyote on September 9, 2008 at 12:48 PM
Gosh! Most of the commenters on this blog have known for a long time that the liberals think The Constitution should only be referenced when they feel it agrees with them. The vast majority of liberal trolls on this blog have evinced little knowledge of The Constitution. If The written Constitutional provisions are obviously at a variance with their feel good conceptions, they either re-interpret, mis-state the provisions, or use political power to unconsitiutionally re-frame the provisions. If this means relying on liberal Supreme Court Justices to reframe The Consitiution in liberal terms, thats OK with them. However if the re-framing is to be in conservative terms, that is where the 29% comes in.
Old Country Boy on September 9, 2008 at 12:48 PM
I was a senior in high school 18 years ago. We had a requirement for government/civics/Michigan history. I remember being taught about the branches of government. I do not remember talking about the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. If we did, they were only passing glances. I still remember my teacher’s name. Marvin Kozara. Wow! Why am I not surprised that he is a Democrat Township Supervisor, was accused of violating the Michigan Open Meetings Act, wants to raise property taxes for more parks and recreation funding and teaches political science at two community colleges? My guess is that he supports Barry.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on September 9, 2008 at 12:50 PM
It is obvious that the world wants us to elect the Messiah. How can we, in the face of world opinion, object to anything that He wants to do including appointing liberal justices who will use international law as the precedent for overruling constitutional law?
sdd on September 9, 2008 at 12:50 PM
They always liked to say that the Second Amendment was antiquated and outdated and an anachronism. My guess is they think the same of many of the other ones. Well, when they apply to other people. When they apply to them, well, come on, it’s THEIR rights!
THEIRS. Not YOURS.
MadisonConservative on September 9, 2008 at 12:50 PM
Uh…I’m usually pretty good at keeping up with the changing lexicon of politics, but I’m lost now.
What is “social justice”? Is it analogous to Sharia being recognized in a Democracy (UK)?
BobMbx on September 9, 2008 at 12:52 PM
I think the word is “projection”.
In fact it often explains the wide gulf between liberal words and actions.
18-1 on September 9, 2008 at 12:52 PM
Gooooood grief.
Drum on September 9, 2008 at 12:52 PM
More like wailing for dead trees.
BobMbx on September 9, 2008 at 12:53 PM
Are you sure it isn’t 2.9%?
Hening on September 9, 2008 at 12:53 PM
Since the Left believe in the religion of the State, the Court system is their Vatican. Judges from appellate up to SCOTUS are the priests, cardinals, and popes of the Left. Rather than rely on doctrine, they rely on the faith of the power of government to set the direction they move.
I don’t think that this number is any surprised except for the number of Leftists who are honest about it. Don’t get me wrong, I prefer honesty. The Left need to be more honest in what they think about the US and what it should be.
Weebork on September 9, 2008 at 12:53 PM
Well this is good news. The Constitution, that old rag?
I do believe I will start transporting my firearms to my land up north and have an underground storage box ready, just in case.
These people were creeping me out before, now they’re scaring me.
Bishop on September 9, 2008 at 12:55 PM
Sue him for malpractice.
BobMbx on September 9, 2008 at 12:56 PM
Neither. They’re making an experienced, well-informed observation.
Weebork on September 9, 2008 at 12:57 PM
Most Obama supporters probably think the Constitution is a boat.
Cicero43 on September 9, 2008 at 12:58 PM
Liberals very much view rulership by the self appointed elite as the best of all forms of govt.
MarkTheGreat on September 9, 2008 at 12:58 PM
Hmmm. Brings a whole new perspective to “Reverend” Wright’s “get Whitey” diatribes. As I have suspected about “Reverend” Wright, his main grievance with white people is that he is not one.
And why won’t this “minister” keep his hands off other men’s wives? He seduced his current wife when she was one of his congregants and she and her husband came to the “Reverend” for marital counseling. Now this. And this low-life presumes to lecture our country (at least the white part of it) about its sins? What a hypocrite.
AZCoyote on September 9, 2008 at 12:59 PM
For liberals our Constitution is just a piece of paper, just like our flag is a piece of cloth.
Zoltan on September 9, 2008 at 12:59 PM
McCain/Palin should attack both parties, or anyone who’d legislate from the bench.
This could be reason enough to vote for them.
Entelechy on September 9, 2008 at 1:00 PM
While I was in law school, I always heard from liberal students that the constitution should be changed every time they lost a case in the Supreme Court. It’s hilarious to see how much they don’t respect the constitution. And their the ones complaining about violations of constitutional rights. Come on. Who are they trying to fool. The ultra-left National Lawyer’s Guild, wants to destroy the constitution.
ThomasB. on September 9, 2008 at 1:02 PM
It appears that the River, Denial, runs deep in the Obama Campaign.
Aside from the recent ads and speeches that blatantly call McCain and Palin liars (while Obama neglects his and Biden’s records and all facts to the contrary), now Obama Campaign Manager has taken a dive into the same mighty river:
http://news.yahoo.com/story//nm/20080909/pl_nm/usa_politics_women_dc
Damiano on September 9, 2008 at 1:02 PM
Good thing only 1 of the UN’s 192 member states gets a vote in the Electoral College. Of course, Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Anthony Kennedy, David Souter & John Paul Stevens haven’t ruled on that yet.
Loxodonta on September 9, 2008 at 1:02 PM
They can have him.
MarkTheGreat on September 9, 2008 at 1:03 PM
All this time, I thought they were being critical of him.
[Hits self in head.]
capitalist piglet on September 9, 2008 at 1:04 PM
Yup. Liberals don’t trust themselves (as they know themselves), don’t trust their neighbors (as they think their neighbors are just like them – the ones that look like them, at least), and don’t trust religion (as religion is what makes them feel guilty about the worms they are) so there isn’t much left to trust. That leads them, inevitably, to place their trust in some black box (government entity, dictator, …) that they can then revolt against (as liberals just love the feeling of being revolutionaries) and finally bring down the society that bore them, that they hate so much. It’s a bit sick, but that what people with disembodied, uncontrollable guilt do.
The only answer is to get them back into the sandbox where they can play without hurting anyone.
This poll is why no one should be allowed to vote who does not have a basic understanding of the workings and mechanisms of the US government. No one benefits from ill-informed votes, contrary to what ill-informed lefties like to say.
progressoverpeace on September 9, 2008 at 1:04 PM
Socialism, communism, Marxism. Take your pick.
Social justice means we get rid of greedy “rich” people by confiscating their money to give to the slugs of society so everyone has the same amount of stuff……except for the rulers. Social justice dictates that some people are more equal than others.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on September 9, 2008 at 1:06 PM
Looks like a logical extension of “all truth is relative” postmodernism to me. Lob me in with the “I’m surprised 29% of Obama’s supporters agree” category.
Citizen Duck on September 9, 2008 at 1:07 PM
I nominate Barack Hussein Obama for the Presidency of the United Federation of Planets.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on September 9, 2008 at 1:08 PM
The Klingons will be none too happy about that. They’re conservatives, after all! :)
Weebork on September 9, 2008 at 1:10 PM
Klingons for Palin!
(Stabs self and yells some Klingon praise chat)
Weebork on September 9, 2008 at 1:14 PM
Wow, 29% think that – I can’t believe the number is so high! There is hope for them yet.
Aside from the terrorist threat – this is my main reason why I could not and would not vote for a Democrat. (There are a myraid of other reasons, but those two will do!)
kybowexar on September 9, 2008 at 1:17 PM
Apparently their Constitution has become completely unmoored. Free to float, cast about with every wind and wave and tide.
trailboss on September 9, 2008 at 1:18 PM
Obliged.
You can get a painstick on eBay.
BobMbx on September 9, 2008 at 1:19 PM
It is what Barack Obama believes our government (primarily our justice system and our tax system) should be trying to achieve. Achieving it will require massive amounts of tax dollars (taken from evil, greedy white people) and transferred to various “victim” groups (first in line will be the black community). It will also require new affirmative action and racial preference laws that give advantages to minority applicants over more-qualified white applicants. The purpose of this re-distribution of wealth and government-sanctioned racial discrimination is to redress past “social injustices” done to the ancestors of minorities by evil, greedy white Americans.
As Obama explained to Charlie Gibson in one of the primary debates, he realizes that raising capital gains taxes will result in decreased government revenues, but Obama thinks it is more important to be “fair” (to the victim groups) than to have a thriving economy.
What exactly constitutes “fair” and “just” will of course be up to Obama and his like-minded judicial appointees to decide.
Welcome to Obama’s New World Order.
AZCoyote on September 9, 2008 at 1:20 PM
CHANGE!!
evenfarer on September 9, 2008 at 1:22 PM
Scariest environment imaginable…thanks. That’s all you had to say, scariest environment imaginable.
BobMbx on September 9, 2008 at 1:23 PM
Obama says terrorist have “legitimate” claims.
(No, I’m not kidding)
Maxx on September 9, 2008 at 1:25 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »