Hope Becoming Complacency?

by: Chris Bowers

Wed Apr 22, 2009 at 15:00


Nate Silver nabs an important poll finding: now that Barack Obama is President, large numbers of Democrats and Independents think that the environment is getting better, even though it totally is not:




This is very worrying, as it is a sign of how complacency can set in among grassroots supporters once their preferred political party takes power. Even though Obama has only been President for three months, even though his major environmental legislation largely remains bottled up in the Senate, many of Obama's supporters seem to think that the environment is improving simply because he is President now.

This is, of course, crap. The level of carbon dioxide, and other greenhouse gasses, in the atmosphere continues to increase. Water scarcity problems are getting worse. Soil contamination is getting worse. Mass extinctions are continuing apace. These problems are not going away, or even stabilizing. As Nate writes, at best, the "environment is getting worse less quickly, not that it's actually improving."

This is a problem that can also be seen in the audience for progressive media declining since the election. Once an individual's preferred political party takes power, oftentimes that individual seem to think that the problems that made them support that party are just solved.  The truth is that taking political power just gives you an opportunity to finally work on those problems, and doesn't mean anything is actually solved.

While Obama's presence in office probably isn't the only factor in the newfound, unjustifiable Democratic and Independent optimism on sustainability and the environment, it is still disturbing to think about how "HOPE" can quickly turn into complacency. This is a fine line for politicians to walk, as they know both that they need their very presence in office to instill confidence (otherwise, why would people vote for them?), and that they need continuing grassroots pressure once in office to help pass their agenda. In this case, we need to do a much better job of continuing to rally the troops, because winning the election didn't solve anything. All it did is provide us an opportunity to solve the problems we face. On that front, a lot of work remains to be done.
Chris Bowers :: Hope Becoming Complacency?

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Hope Becoming Complacency? | 11 comments
you've got a majority of all voters and of Dems (0.00 / 0)
A majority of Democrats agree with you and Nate. I am sure that the minority (about a quarter of Dems and Independents) who have changed their views can point to significant changes at the EPA, which it is their right to consider important.  Why is their view "unjustifiable?"


New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.
It is unjustifiable (0.00 / 0)
It is unjustifiable because all of the major environmental problems--greenhouse gasses, water scarcity, soil contamination, mass extinction--are still getting worse. They might be getting worse at a slower rate, but they are still getting worse.

To use a sports analogy, its like saying the 3rd quarter was better than the second quarter, because you fell ten points further behind in the 3rd after falling 30 points behind in the second. Falling behind at a slower rate is still falling further behind.

The environment is not getting better.  

[ Parent ]
Definition of "better" (0.00 / 0)
I might have answered "better" to a poll off the cuff, thinking relative to Bush era versus the administrative reversals and policy initiatives started by Obama, and wanting to show Obama's efficacy to a pollster.

Two steps forward when a billion steps are needed makes the word "better" a poor polling answer in this context.

John McCain won't insure children

[ Parent ]
well (0.00 / 0)
Again, emphasizing that the majority of the country agrees with you, it is almost certain that the numbers last year are artificially suppressed by Bush.  

How could people think the environment is improving? Here's an example: It's undeniable that air quality is improved over the last generation. (So much so that it may be hurting us on the warming front.) Since that was perhaps the major battle government was engaged in, maybe people give credit. Companies pollute less, rivers don't catch on fire, etc.

New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.

[ Parent ]
Of course we are more complacent... (0.00 / 0)
We're tired!

We've been fighting uphill for the past 8 years, and we had one heckofa fight last year...

We've got our guys in there.... we no longer have to worry about Republicans creating more mayhem (although they can still block stuff).. and we need a break...

It's completely understandable...

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!

ok take a break (0.00 / 0)
.
[ Parent ]
Aspirations (4.00 / 3)
Poorly designed polls produce poor data. Asking people whether some objective fact is true or not is meaningless if they don't have the knowledge needed to answer correctly.

So when faced with a "do you think" question people interpret it as aspirational: "do you hope".

This is worth knowing, but only proves something other than what is being asked. In this case that they are hopeful that Obama will effect more change than the prior administration did.

It may be that hopefulness translates into complacency, but that can't be deduced from the questions. To do that would require follow up questions about people's intentions (also someone aspirational) and, even more important, their present political activities.


Policies not Politics

Turns on the definition of "better" (0.00 / 0)
I think part of why Democrats feel good about the state of the environment is the billions and billions poured into green energy and other environmental programs as a part of the stimulus. Those programs may take decades to have an effect, but they are still something that makes now "better" then 4 months ago.

I doubt the people who took that poll thing that everything is wonderful, but that kind of poll is more a "right track"/"wrong track" sort of thing, and although we've only had 3 months of Obama on the environment, it's still pretty fantastically better then Bush.

Baby Steps (0.00 / 0)
The environment has been getting better but over a longer time span than 3 months. Try 20 years.  20 years of legislation have improved this country but we must find a way to get the rest of the world to do their part.

Waterless Carwash

there's an enormous gap (0.00 / 0)
in the public's understanding of what will be necessary to solve the problem.

I doubt your average voter understands even the idea behind a carbon cap. Rebuilding the transportation system, rewiring the electric grid, passing a revenue-neutral carbon tax, etc. are not even within the scope of debate. Let alone a new series of international treaties and agreements to control greenhouse gases.

Until the gap is closed, nothing much will happen.

This is a primary reason (0.00 / 0)
why I give no credence whatsoever to public opinion polls about the new administration. Sky high approval for Obama right now is based more on ignorance than anything else. Because not only is the "complacent left" not as active since Obama won, they aren't paying very much attention either.
Hope Becoming Complacency? | 11 comments
Donate to Open Left







QUICK HITS

Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.
As an anti-spam measure, there is a 24-hour waiting period after registering before new users can comment.
blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
LIBERAL INSTITUTIONS
STATE BLOGS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2009, Powered by SoapBlox