Some say that the main priority of every elected official is to be re-elected. Taken to the extreme, that would mean carrying out policies that you firmly believe are very bad for your constituents and even the nation as a whole, but doing so anyway in order to win re-election.

On most issues, voting for your political survival is not difficult; especially since politicians can rationalize that there will be many other issues where their decisions will better serve the public good than that of anyone who might beat them in the next election.

But some issues are of such magnitude that we would hope a politician with a conscience would sacrifice their electoral survival and “do the right thing”   as he or she sees it.

Is healthcare reform such an issue? Will any members of Congress base their vote on how the bill will impact the nation, even if that vote will be used against them and could, on its own, defeat them?  Let me be clear that such a vote could be either for or against the bill.

Some of you will post responses that will point out how good or bad the evolving healthcare bill will be, but I’m hoping you will also focus on these questions.

Do you believe there are any members of Congress who see the outcome of this bill as more important than their own re-election?  Does history show any cases where a politician did sacrifice re-election because of a vote taken based on principle?

Paul health, politics

We at Zogby have noticed that it is not uncommon for political analysts to treat moderate and independent voters as equivalent. However, in our recent Huffington Post article, we show that these two groups, while overlapping, are not the same. And in the case where main parties are strategizing to attract more voters, this distinction can be important.

Moderates are an ideological group that sits in the middle of ideological continuum between conservatives and liberals. On the other hand, independents are a group of people that doesn’t belong to the two main parties. Many of them are ideologically moderate, but important numbers of them aren’t, and the overall ideology of independents is tilted towards the right.

This fact is relevant for the discussion of whether Republican Party should become more or less conservative. On one hand, its members clearly want it to be more conservative, and this could attract some independent conservatives. On the other hand, if it moves too far, it will alienate independent moderates, a crucial swing-vote.

So the answer is, in a sense, that it should be both. This might sound impossible, but look at the Democrats! They have managed to capture both moderates and liberals.  Such a large coalition is not always the easiest thing to manage but it is the only way for either party to be in power.

Zeljka future, ideology, politics ideology, war, zogby

We recently included several winning Top Question Tuesday selections on an interactive poll. Stay tuned to this blog as we’ll be releasing the results over the next several weeks! And don’t forget to submit your own nominations for Top Question Tuesday using the box on the right of this blog.

One question asked whether Americans should be allowed to smoke marijuana for medicinal purposes. Overall, 68% of the sample believed yes,  Americans  should be allowed to smoke marijuana for medicinal purposes, while 22% of the sample believed they should not, and 10% were not sure.

Groups that were more likely than average to say yes included those 18-29 (83%), progressives (96%), liberals (92%), and Democrats (83%). Groups that were more likely than average to say no included conservatives (37%),  very conservatives (49%), and Republicans (37%). However, even most of  these groups had more respondents answer yes than no; in fact, the very conservatives were the only group in our survey that had more people answer no than yes.

What are your feelings on medical marijuana? Why should people be allowed or not allowed to smoke for medicinal purposes?  Does it surprise you that majorities of most groups in America believe people should be allowed to smoke marijuana for medicinal purposes, but relatively few locations have laws which permit this? Is this likely to change in the future?

Katy health, politics culture, elections, future, health, politics, Top Question Tuesday

So what did we learn from Tuesday’s elections? And what lessons should Democrats and Republicans draw from the results?

The big races resulted in Republican wins in the gubernatorial contests in New Jersey and Virginia, and the first win by a Democrat this century for the Congressional district that comprises most of northern New York State.

Read all of John Zogby’s take on Tuesday’s elections at Forbes.com.

Paul John Zogby, elections, politics elections, John Zogby, race, zogby

In a recent Zogby Interactive survey of adults nationwide, respondents were asked to choose a statement that came closest to their view on the War on Terror. About 45% of the respondents strongly or somewhat agreed that our efforts in the War on Terror should focus on addressing anti-American sentiment in the world, compared to 37% of the respondents who strongly or somewhat agreed that our efforts in the War on Terror should focus on using military force. About 18% of the respondents chose “none of the above” or “not sure.”

Significant differences were found between ideological groups. Seventy-seven percent of liberals are in favor of focusing on anti-American sentiment, compared to 18% of conservatives who think so. Moderates are leaning towards liberals on this issue; sixty-one percent of them believe that dealing with anti-American sentiment should be the priority. Around two-thirds (67%) of conservatives believe that the focus should be on using military force, compared to 22% of moderates and 4% of liberals who believe so.

Where do you stand on this issue? If you believe that anti-American sentiment in the world is the primary issue here, what do you think should be done to address it? If you think that our efforts in the War on Terror should focus on using military force, what do you think would be the best course of action for the government?

Grace military, peace, politics, war military, war, zogby

This may be an off-year election, but two governor’s races and one congressional district are making national news. From my perspective, there will be three themes coming out of Tuesday’s governor races in New Jersey and Virginia, and the election to fill a vacant House seat in northern New York state.

First, most elections are seen as a referendum on the president, and that’s especially true for Barack Obama, who in his first year in office is taking up major issues. Second, two of the races, for New Jersey governor and New York’s 23rd Congressional District seat, include third-party candidates, and how well they do will have significance. Third, the congressional election is splitting the national Republican Party, with some big names in the GOP backing the third-party candidate.

Read all of John Zogby’s thoughts on next week’s elections at Forbes.com.

Paul John Zogby, politics elections, John Zogby, Obama, race, zogby

Every week, John Zogby grades the performance of President Barack Obama for U.S. News and World Report. Read the full report card by clicking on the quote below.

Paul John Zogby, politics John Zogby, Obama, zogby

The November election is fast approaching and multiple races are gaining steam. One of those battles is a special election in our own neighborhood, New York’s 23th Congressional District, where a three-way race features Democrat Bill Owens, a Republican Dede Scozzafava, and one Doug Hoffman, who failed to secure Republican nomination and is now running as a Conservative Party candidate. However, this congressional race raises  a lot of passion all over the country as well, with prominent Republicans, such as Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin taking opposing sides, and many notable commentators weighing in.

According to some commentators, the race is important because it might be a sign of things to come in the next election. The congressional seat in question has been in Republican hands for over a hundred years. If it turned blue, it would, at the very least, diminish some Democratic anxieties regarding the next election. However, many commentators also see the race as a gauge of the strength of conflicting strategic and ideological currents within Republican Party, with one side arguing for moderation and a move to the center, and the other side arguing for less compromise on principles and more ideological clarity. However, the interpretation of this election as a clash of visions has also been challenged.

Are you following this race? Do you think it will be a reliable sign of the things to come in 2010? Which  strategy do you think would bring Republicans more power: moving towards the center or articulating a clearer ideology at the cost of moving away from the center? Do you think the importance of that narrative has been exaggerated?

Zeljka future, ideology, politics ideology, race, war

After many months of talking about health care legislation, Congress now moves to the real action phase. But don’t expect the arguments to end when a bill is passed.

Democrats want voters to believe that their plan will achieve their set goals, and our recent polling shows large majorities of voters believe those goals are important. Republicans will continue raising fears about what reform might reap, and our polling also shows a majority of voters share the doubts expressed by Republicans. So expect a whirlwind that will pick up intensity the closer we get to the 2010 midterm election.

Read all of John Zogby’s analysis of this recent polling data on healthcare reform at Forbes.com.

Paul John Zogby, health, politics health, John Zogby, politics, zogby

A few weeks ago, we at Zogby blog discussed a proposal that a national measure of happiness be added to GDP. Many commentators, including some on our own blog, argued that measuring happiness is, in essence, impossible.

Not satisfied with anecdotal evidence, we turned to more rigorous data collection. In our recent Interactive survey of almost 4000 American adults, we asked American adults to indicate their agreement with the view that happiness can be measured. It turned out that a plurality (49.9%) of American adults disagree with the view while 40.6% agree (9.4% are not sure). Perhaps surprisingly, there are no noticeable patterns between genders, age-groups and political parties.

Many social scientists routinely measure (what they believe is) happiness, usually by asking people to indicate on a scale how happy they are. Given the fact that a large portion of Americans do not believe that happiness is measurable, do you think that it should have an impact on the public finding of such research? Or do you think this is an issue best left to experts?

Zeljka politics, science zogby