Rasmussen: Dems least likely to know spending has risen over last ten years

posted at 2:41 pm on May 17, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

We see enough surveys that claim conservatives are either less intelligent or poorly informed, so why not take a look at the reverse?  Actually, Rasmussen’s most recent national poll didn’t aim to make claims over partisan fact-based realities, but to see how likely voters view spending issues in the run-up to a general election where debt and deficits will be big factors.  Let’s take a look at the toplines first:

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 76% of Likely U.S. Voters recognize that government spending in America has gone up over the past 10 years. Just nine percent (9%) think spending has gone down, and another nine percent (9%) believe it has stayed about the same. …

Fifty-seven percent (57%) of voters favor a law that would limit government spending so it could grow only enough to cover population growth and inflation. Twenty-four percent (24%) oppose such a law. Nineteen percent (19%) are undecided.

Findings on these questions are largely unchanged from the first time Rasmussen Reports asked them last May. Government spending in the United States has grown faster than the growth of population plus inflation every year but one since the Beatles played Shea Stadium in 1965. Most of that spending growth resulted from policies enacted while Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon were in the White House.

Among those voters who oppose a cap on spending increases, 31% want even stricter spending limits. But 40% favor looser limits on spending, and 25% more say there should be no spending limits at all.

More than three-quarters of Republicans (76%) want a spending cap that indexes spending to population growth, and half of those who don’t want a stricter spending cap.  Only 36% of Democrats want an indexed cap, and 49% of those who don’t prefer a looser cap, and another 22% want no cap at all.  The indexed cap gets 57% of independents, but only 31% of independents opposed to it want a stricter cap.  Nevertheless, support for caps of one sort or another add up to around 60% of the overall electorate — which would make it difficult for Democrats to run on a spend-more platform.

First, though, you’d have to make sure that people understand that we are spending more over the last ten years.  Nearly nine of ten Republicans know it (86%), and almost as many independents (81%).  Only 61% of Democrats correctly answer that question, while 16% believe it’s stayed the same.  Younger voters tend to follow the same pattern (66% and 10% respectively), while older demos have more than 80% each answering correctly.  Self-identified Tea Party members do a little better than non-members (87% to 73%), while the working-class incomes score higher than lower and higher brackets.

The most ironic part of the survey?  The political class, which should know this better than most, only gets 65% answering correctly, while 85% of the mainstream gets it right.  That tells us we probably need a new political class, eh?

In a similar vein, which nation spends more public funds per capita — the teetering EU nations of Greece, Spain, Portugal, Italy, or the United States?  The Republican caucus on the Senate Budget Committee provided this surprising answer yesterday, based on IMF data:

Four of these nations will probably get bailouts from the other.  One can’t possibly get bailed out by the other four combined.  Care to guess which is which?  Oh … let’s not always see the same hands ….


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

It’s just Rasmussen.

/angryed

Red Cloud on May 17, 2012 at 2:42 PM

Hence, we call them Dims.

hillsoftx on May 17, 2012 at 2:43 PM

YOU DON’T SAY?

tom daschle concerned on May 17, 2012 at 2:43 PM

Dems least likely to know spending has risen over last ten years anything

FIFY

Doughboy on May 17, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Doughboy,
You beat me to it. You must be a great thinker also.

Ufdaubet on May 17, 2012 at 2:46 PM

Not surprising, considering that Dembeciles ignore as much of reality as they possibly can.

stukinIL4now on May 17, 2012 at 2:46 PM

Most of the moronic sheep think that all the ‘free’ stuff is paid by…no one.

Schadenfreude on May 17, 2012 at 2:46 PM

Doughboy,
You beat me to it. You must be a great thinker also.

Ufdaubet on May 17, 2012 at 2:46 PM

I is. I is.

Doughboy on May 17, 2012 at 2:48 PM

The leftie looters, with Obama on top, love to keep the gnats, plankton and sheep ignorant in the modern day plantations, just for votes.

They hate people in general, women and minorities in specific.

They are never truly liberal or progressive…just stole the terms.

Schadenfreude on May 17, 2012 at 2:48 PM

But 40% favor looser limits on spending, and 25% more say there should be no spending limits at all.

Here come the trolls…here come the trolls
;-)

burrata on May 17, 2012 at 2:49 PM

Don’t miss the latest vetting piece on Breitbart.

DanaLynn on May 17, 2012 at 2:51 PM

D’oh

cmsinaz on May 17, 2012 at 2:51 PM

Only one way to describe these folks. I’m not in the mood to feel the breeze of the glorious hammer. So I’ll just sit here quietly and observe.

Bmore on May 17, 2012 at 2:51 PM

Only one way to describe these folks. I’m not in the mood to feel the breeze of the glorious hammer. So I’ll just sit here quietly and observe.

Bmore on May 17, 2012 at 2:51 PM

I’ll put a tick in the ‘coward’ column for ya. 8D

tom daschle concerned on May 17, 2012 at 2:54 PM

Dems least likely to know spending has risen over last ten years

Mission Accomplished!

- MSM

Flora Duh on May 17, 2012 at 2:54 PM

RIP Donna Summer

John the Libertarian on May 17, 2012 at 2:55 PM

tom daschle concerned

Hey, its not like there is any good music on these threads. ; )

Bmore on May 17, 2012 at 2:55 PM

Which is preferred “idiot liberal” or “liberal idiot”?

forest on May 17, 2012 at 2:56 PM

Don’t miss the latest vetting piece on Breitbart.

DanaLynn on May 17, 2012 at 2:51 PM

hmmmmm…
int…terrr……resting…

burrata on May 17, 2012 at 2:56 PM

Is this as yet going to be another troll free thread?

For it is an absolute article of ‘faith’, of the National Socialist that they knowth all and seeth all.

Just try and explain why we call the Preezy of the United Steezy Barack Hussein Downgrade.

If they don’t even know spending has risen over last ten years…

Chip on May 17, 2012 at 2:58 PM

Between Ed Klein’s book and the screaming red headline on Drudge right now, I’d say it has been a very, very bad week for Barack.

Urban Infidel on May 17, 2012 at 2:59 PM

The problem with a cap based on inflation is that government has a policy of generating inflation. Also, since the government gets to spend the new money first, they get a greater bang for the buck since it takes a while for the average consumer to become aware that the money trickling down to them has been once again devalued.

Laurence on May 17, 2012 at 3:00 PM

Which is preferred “idiot liberal” or “liberal idiot”?

forest on May 17, 2012 at 2:56 PM

They’re both redundant – and repetitive….

dentarthurdent on May 17, 2012 at 3:00 PM

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 76% of Likely U.S. Voters recognize that government spending in America has gone up over the past 10 years.

Frankly I’m surprised to learn that this number is that high. I would have bet money that it would be fewer. Is there hope after all?

Lost in Jersey on May 17, 2012 at 3:00 PM

Well, I suppose it’s nice to find out that I haven’t been surrounded by a particularly uninformed brand of Democrat. I guess that they just tend to be that way. Now I can quit worrying about the quality of the water around here.

Lily on May 17, 2012 at 3:01 PM

Rush said go to Drudge!!

bluefox on May 17, 2012 at 3:03 PM

It all started with the Beatles. Figures.

AubieJon on May 17, 2012 at 3:03 PM

“If the media was doing it’s job…

… we wouldn’t be $15 Trillion dollars in debt!”Andrew Breitbart (RIP)

Seven Percent Solution on May 17, 2012 at 3:06 PM

Don’t miss the latest vetting piece on Breitbart.

DanaLynn on May 17, 2012 at 2:51 PM

hmmmmm…

int…terrr……resting…

burrata on May 17, 2012 at 2:56 PM

A Caveat…

The errant Obama biography in the Acton & Dystel booklet does not contradict the authenticity of Obama’s birth certificate. Moreover, several contemporaneous accounts of Obama’s background describe Obama as having been born in Hawaii.

The biography does, however, fit a pattern in which Obama–or the people representing and supporting him–manipulate his public persona.

Del Dolemonte on May 17, 2012 at 3:06 PM

Blue fox, as soon as I heard Rush say that, I grabbed my iPhone. SHOCKER!!!!!!

karenhasfreedom on May 17, 2012 at 3:07 PM

The errant Obama biography in the Acton & Dystel booklet does not contradict the authenticity of Obama’s birth certificate. Moreover, several contemporaneous accounts of Obama’s background describe Obama as having been born in Hawaii.

The biography does, however, fit a pattern in which Obama–or the people representing and supporting him–manipulate his public persona.

Del Dolemonte on May 17, 2012 at 3:06 PM

If this document is legit(and I assume it is), it means Obama must’ve lied at some point about his background. Either in 1991 or when he entered politics later that decade. The question is if he was in fact born in Hawaii as he claims, why lie about that back in 1991 and pretend to be Kenyan?

Doughboy on May 17, 2012 at 3:09 PM

The errant Obama biography in the Acton & Dystel booklet does not contradict the authenticity of Obama’s birth certificate.
Del Dolemonte on May 17, 2012 at 3:06 PM

Probabely because it was in 1991 and Dan Rather hadn’t happened then ?

burrata on May 17, 2012 at 3:10 PM

Yeah, Drudge, Why? so I can be called names some more. Duh!

Bmore on May 17, 2012 at 3:11 PM

Dems least likely to know spending has risen over last ten years/

In other news, the sun rises in the east, and water is wet.

MidniteRambler on May 17, 2012 at 3:11 PM

Blue fox, as soon as I heard Rush say that, I grabbed my iPhone. SHOCKER!!!!!!

karenhasfreedom on May 17, 2012 at 3:07 PM

LOL, I logged on to HA. Doing yard work today…

Hannity is going to show more tape tonight from that book.

bluefox on May 17, 2012 at 3:14 PM

First, though, you’d have to make sure that people understand that we are spending more over the last ten years. Nearly nine of ten Republicans know it (86%), and almost as many independents (81%). Only 61% of Democrats correctly answer that question, while 16% believe it’s stayed the same.

When considering whether spending has gone up over the past 10 years, those Democrats who answer yes probably think that Bush increased spending, because he was President 10 years ago.

No matter that the Federal debt has increased more under Obama in 3 years than under Bush in 8 years, for the Democrats, blame BOOOOOSH!

Steve Z on May 17, 2012 at 3:16 PM

Dems are more likely to be ignorant of lots of things.

Like the fact that Obooba’s publicist put in print that his client was born in Kenya.

You know, stuff like that.

Akzed on May 17, 2012 at 3:17 PM

Spending? Was ist das Spending?

spiritof61 on May 17, 2012 at 3:18 PM

Austerity for libtards is higher taxes, increased spending and more regulations.

Wigglesworth on May 17, 2012 at 3:19 PM

I hate the idea of any ‘indexing’ – in fact, I’d like budgets reported in REAL numbers without any automagical increases. The truth is, even republicans hardly know what a ‘spending cut’ is anymore. We argue about ‘cutting spending’ when we really mean we’re cutting the rate of increasing spending. It’s insane.

I think all budgets should all follow Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and it should be illegal for the Govt. to use different types of accounting than could be acceptably used by any regular corporation. AND part ‘increases’ in spending – if they’re indexed at all – should only be indexed to a ‘standard’ dollar so as to be compared to all other budgets.

This whole question just reveals how insane our whole system is – even more than it reveals the ignorance of Liberals when it comes to money.

WashingtonsWake on May 17, 2012 at 3:22 PM

If this document is legit(and I assume it is), it means Obama must’ve lied at some point about his backgroundDoughboy on May 17, 2012 at 3:09 PM

Are you trying to sell me on the fact that, gulp, Obama has lied before??????? I don’t believe it!!!!!

search4truth on May 17, 2012 at 3:30 PM

Rasmussen: Dems least likely to know spending has risen over last ten years

Last 10 years??? I think most of em’ have a hard time remembering what happened yesterday.

BigWyo on May 17, 2012 at 3:31 PM

What I want to know is who told the publisher that obama was born in Kenya. If it was obama-is he lying about his heritage like Warren? If it was someone else why didn’t obama correct it? OR-maybe it’s true!. Either way the liar in chief strikes again.

Ta111 on May 17, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Del Dolemonte on May 17, 2012 at 3:06 PM

I think the Breitbart team is just trying to avoid the birther tag – kind of CYA.

dentarthurdent on May 17, 2012 at 3:35 PM

If this document is legit(and I assume it is), it means Obama must’ve lied at some point about his background. Either in 1991 or when he entered politics later that decade. The question is if he was in fact born in Hawaii as he claims, why lie about that back in 1991 and pretend to be Kenyan?

Doughboy on May 17, 2012 at 3:09 PM

Probably because Barry Soetoro Hussein Obama was dreaming of his father back then and trying to find his black identity, and being Kenyan would make him a bettah Communitay O’ganizah.

His 1991 biography also says that Barack Obama (Jr.) was the son of a Kenyan finance minister. Is there any independent documented evidence that Barack Obama Sr. ever served as Finance Minister (equivalent to our Secretary of the Treasury) in the Kenyan Government prior to 1991? That’s quite a high position–there should be some record of it!

Regardless of where Barack Obama was really born, Stanley Ann Dunham probably thought it wiser to register her son’s birth in Hawaii (which had only been a state for 2 years, so that record-keeping was not well established by then) so that she could keep him in America just in case his father went off the deep end in Kenya, which he eventually did.

Then, when Barack Obama Jr. wanted to run for President, that pesky little “natural born citizen” cause in that lil’ ol’ Constitution thingy could be a problem, so it wasn’t cool to be Kenyan anymore.

In retrospect, it would have better if Barack Obama Sr. HAD taken over the Kenyan Government. He could have passed the torch to his son, like a Kenyan Kim Jong-whatever, and the United States wouldn’t be stuck with him!

Steve Z on May 17, 2012 at 3:41 PM

Breitbart’s point is that the truth is irrelevant. If he was born in Hawaii and let them publish this, then he endorsed a lie. One way or the other, Obama lies about his biography. It doesn’t matter WHERE he was born, it matters that he lies about it to suit his needs at the time.

WashingtonsWake on May 17, 2012 at 3:44 PM

…Budget?…What’s a budget?…isn’t that some kind of car rental thingy I see at the airports when my limo picks me up?… (Dims)

KOOLAID2 on May 17, 2012 at 3:44 PM

What I want to know is who told the publisher that obama was born in Kenya. If it was obama-is he lying about his heritage like Warren? If it was someone else why didn’t obama correct it? OR-maybe it’s true!. Either way the liar in chief strikes again.

As your questions indicate, a thorough examination of the facts is in order. Where he was born isn’t the point – it’s that most people don’t feel they know with any degree of certainty and that is unacceptable. Common sense would dictate that we must err on the side of caution since we are talking about the leader of the free world!

Regardless of whether he turns out to be legit, no one should ever be able to be elected President when there are so many unanswered questions about their past. Especially considering what we do know about Obama, which is that his entire life has been dedicated to the pursuit of class warfare.

How does someone whose ideology is vehemently anti-American get elected as our president? That also should be prevented going forward. And if it takes restricting voting rights to those that actually fund the continuing operation of our nation, so be it. It’s flat out insane that the gimme’s have the same say as those that carry their dead weight.

DanaLynn on May 17, 2012 at 3:48 PM

Steve Z on May 17, 2012 at 3:16 PM

It’s because they read crap like this:

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/05/15/484767/obama-budget-chart/

It’s phenomenally stupid and dishonest–like the part about how the 2009 budget was from Bush–yet they all think these are FACTS!! that somehow resolve Baracky from any responsibility. It’s all the Republicans fault, dontchaknow…

If their entire philosophy wasn’t predicated on lies, they might not have these issues.

PetecminMd on May 17, 2012 at 3:56 PM

Most of the moronic sheep think that all the ‘free’ stuff is paid by…no one.

Schadenfreude

What are you talking about having to pay for it, it comes from the government, it’s free!

Kat_man on May 17, 2012 at 3:57 PM

OT:

Imagine that just being black wasn’t enough of an advantage for Obama. No, he felt compelled to embellish.

Did he lie about being born i Kenya as Warren did about being Native American?

Or is he lying now?

One thing is certain and incontrovertible:

He has lied about his place of birth.

BobMbx on May 17, 2012 at 3:57 PM

Dems least likely to know spending has risen over last ten years

In related news, they are also the least likely to be able to find their own a$$es.

Mr Galt on May 17, 2012 at 4:06 PM

In related news, they are also the least likely to be able to find their own a$$es.

Mr Galt on May 17, 2012 at 4:06 PM

They are much more likely to find someone else’s asses, though.

Archivarix on May 17, 2012 at 4:51 PM

Dumb leading the dumber.

SMACKRUNNER on May 17, 2012 at 5:03 PM

Liberals not being too informed but thinking they are for 250 years.

jukin3 on May 17, 2012 at 5:19 PM

Just nine percent (9%) think spending has gone down, and another nine percent (9%) believe it has stayed about the same. …

So 18% of LIKELY VOTERS are utterly clueless.

disa on May 17, 2012 at 5:36 PM

So 18% of LIKELY VOTERS are utterly clueless.

disa on May 17, 2012 at 5:36 PM

Pardon me, that must be 24% because the remainder had, one presumes, no opinion on this spending issue.

No. Opinion.

Imagine that.

disa on May 17, 2012 at 5:38 PM

And 6% have no opinion. Why would a likely voter not even have an opinion on spending? Come on.

disa on May 17, 2012 at 5:40 PM

The country comparison should take note of the military component that other countries don’t have (essentially). It’s real money to be sure. But, I’d guess more than a few people don’t mind that part of it. It would be interesting to see it broken down so we could compare segments of the spending (eg: social).

Pablo Snooze on May 17, 2012 at 5:41 PM

Liberals can thank the Democrat Media Complex and Jon Stewart for their ignorance.

OxyCon on May 17, 2012 at 5:45 PM