« | Main | Voters moving against Occupy movement »

November 16, 2011


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


My personal theory is that once the story becomes you vs. the cops, you lose. See also: Issue 2.

Phil Perspective

One point about Speaker Boehner I think you, and everyone else, miss. Speaker Boehner hasn't been subjected to the same negative name-calling in the corporate media that Nancy Pelosi was subjected to. Every year since early 2006, we've been subjected to ads trying to any local candidate to Pelosi, basically equating her to Hitler. I don't see the same happening to Boehner. It's very telling.


In my opinion, the movement original message has changed because of all the "bad apples" who are among the protesters. You can't defecate on a police car and expect to be respected. Besides, how long did they expect to congregate in the parks? It's simply not healthy or hygienic.

Michael Goldman

Great analysis. While fingers of blame can be pointed against the conservative media or the police for painting the protesters in a bad light, the camping was starting to drown out the message in the media almost from the start. It's sad because the message does resonate with the majority of the population when broken down issue by issue. I warned about this happening in a leaderless and young movement almost from the start. http://greenmind0428.wordpress.com/2011/10/21/occupying-the-disconnect-with-the-mainstream/


HinterlandG - What is your evidence that the guy pulling down his pants near a cop car was an OWS protester?


I totally agree with celestus. The Oakland Occupation, in a city and region that is 99% supportive, lost much support as we saw the same movie being replayed: The cops vs. the protesters. It did not make sense to us that Oakland was the enemy.


Raising taxes on the wealthy will not make anyone else better off, it will just make the wealthy poorer and the political class richer and more powerful.

Bob Fishell

It was much the same with the protests against the Vietnam war in the 1960s. Public opinion was overwhelmingly against the protesters, but it did not stop the protests from growing. Ultimately, public opinion turned against the war, but it was a long, slow process helped along by Walter Cronkite and Life Magazine. The OWS kids haven't gotten much love in the "liberal" MSM. I don't think that's helped their movement.


OWS forgets that protest must lead to action. The tea party got political and did what you have to do to effectuate change-they got candidates and elected some of them. What is the point of the protest if it doesn't lead to a change in the people running the show? Politicians listen to their constituents that vote. They pay little or no attention to people camping out in a park somewhere making a mess.


What is impressive about these results is that the media generally has given broad and instant support to Occupy, doing all it can to cast them as noble and a force for good, while at the same time done everything it could to paint the Tea Party in the most negative light possible... branding them as racists and domestic terrorists.

If one allows for correction of this systemic and active bias, then Occupy would poll much worse than it is, and the Tea Party would poll much higher.

The evidence for this is clear.

People, when asked about their objections to the Tea Party are very unclear about them... "They have ties to groups that make me uncomfortable". What ties? What groups? What makes you uncomfortable? They don't know. These are the same people that think Sara Palin said she could see Russia from her house. They are suggested a talking point by comedians, and they adopt it instantly.

On the other hand, people that don't like Occupy are *very* specific about what they don't like.

Noise. Public disruption of traffic/commerce. Dropping a deuce in public. Ignorant of purpose... no demands to be met that would cause them to leave... they are squatters. The rapes, the drugs... even the killings. Vandalism.


That represents an 11 point shift in the wrong direction for the movement's support...

Why "wrong"? I'd say it's in the right direction, and clearly a plurality agrees.


Goodness, the media better step up its campaign to convince the public that the OWSers are the second coming of the civil rights movement, the media has obviously slipped up on this one, too much negative information is getting through. It would help if the OWSers would stop pooping on the sidewalk, assaulting people and running small businesses out of business, but hey, the media has had tougher jobs than this before, they should be able to handle it.

Neil Rowland

What a difference a basis of comparison makes.

By the way, just what IS the message of the Occupy movement?

I'd like to see Warren Buffett pay the millions in back taxes he owes through Berkshire Hathaway before he grandstands anymore about how generous he is.

Mikey P.

With every headline of misbehavior, shootings, arrests, public defecation and so on and so fourth, I hate that bunch of dirty losers a little more. I was ok at first.

George Orwell

What does this Poll tell you about the Independant voters? They do change their mind very quickly. Right now they like the tea Party because of its stance on fiscal matters. The Republicans and the Tea Party need to understand that if they branch off into other directions, they can very easily lose them and any political gains the last two years have brought.

Daniel Clair

The polling methods used here involved using land-lines.

Land-line polling...who the HELL uses land-line polling anymore? If you can't see how that might skew a poll's numbers in favor of people who don't like occupy wall street, then I urge you to carefully think about that for a moment - it should be obvious.

There's also other awful things about their polling methods that are outdated and terrible. Bad article. Bad poll. Bad narrative.

Michael Collins

In the pdf, you say "This poll was not paid for or authorized by any campaign or political organization."

That's who didn't pay or the poll.

Who did pay or it?

Dustin Ingalls

We pay for all of our publicly released polls with our own profits.


IMO, the OWS movement has been effective. The general electorate are now more aware of the moneyed interests' control of the political process and the resulting economic inequalities. They brought the what and the who caused the economic meltdown into the forefront. The republicans in Congress are now amenable to raising taxes to generate more revenue. The OWS have exposed WS's titans as mere mortals when they cannot work both sides of the transaction. This is evident by the below average to average returns they have generated of late. Whatever The OWS movement does from this point on will be icing on the cake. And this will translate into votes in 2012, just like in the last election. Last week's election proved that they can spend millions of dollars, but they're no match to voters' awareness and involvement either caused or strengthened by the OWS movement.


Gee, no kidding. You mean to tell me people don't like a bunch of spoiled, trust-fund junkies destroying their cities while clamoring for more govt. freebies? I'm stunned.


This looks like a massive outlier to me. I've not seen the Tea Party poll anywhere NEAR this high all year.


Their polling data clearly shows that people overwhelming agree with OWS on economic issues. This is a clear case of the media doing its job to "manufacture consent" or in this case, lack thereof.

I've witnessed it first hand. At the Oakland General Strike there were 10,000+ peaceful marchers to the port including myself. It was barely mentioned on the news, and by the next day they were covering a group of about 5 people who stayed behind trying to block streets without showing a single recap of the huge march from the prior day.

That kind of continued lopsided reporting is bound to influence people's opinion, which is why they do it. Obviously windows were indeed broken and a few streets soiled, but an underclass uprising (as opposed to the upper class Tea Party) that is comprised of all walks of life is bound to have its share of friction.

But it's funny how anyone could spin this as anything but, well, media spin. As I and PPP pointed out, the numbers are there, on an individual issues basis people support the same goals as OWS. They just don't support seeing the same window smashed on loop from different angles and in slow motion every 5 minutes on their local news. Well, who would.


It says in the release that This poll was not paid for or authorized by any campaign or political organization.

I'm curious who paid for it?
Were the results given to paid clients prior to the release of the results publicly? Can we know who those clients are?

Obama 2012

Very sad. Right wing propaganda works again. They attack the messenger and idiot America ignores the message.


Good points, Mark.

Example from MMfA.


Dustin Ingalls

As with all our publicly released polls, this poll was written, paid for, conducted, and analyzed only by us and not shared with any client.

Michael Collins

The current PPP poll offers no real reason to think that support for the Occupy Wall Street movement is fading. In fact, it looks like an outlier.


The PPP poll looks like an outlier. Here's why.

PPP: Do you support or oppose the goals of the Occupy Wall Street movement? Support 33%, Oppose 45%. Not sure 22%

The "support" figure was lower than a late October CBS poll, 1,650 respondents, two weeks before the 800 respondent PPP poll.

The Oct 25 CBS poll the question posed was "Agree with Occupy Wall Street Movement?" Yes 43%, No 27%, Don't Know 30%


PPP's Tea party rating is through the roof. On Aug 11, Gallup found: Support 26%, Oppose 29%, No opinion 46%

PPP showed 42% Approve,, 45% Oppose, 13% Not sure

So, in the course of just 15 days or so, approval gathered 62% over Gallup, disapprove was up 55%, and don't know/not sure dropped by a factor of three.

This about sums it up for the Tea party. The New York Times, Aug 17, reported on an extensive analysis of polling data that found that: "the tea party is "less popular than much maligned groups like 'atheists' and 'Muslims.'" I seriously doubt that 'atheists' have a greater than 43% approval rating.

This poll is difficult to accept as being even close to actual public sentiment.


Liberals should probably be happy that the OWS protesters are "drowning out" their own message. Their incoherent anti-American left wing agenda is probably only about 99% as popular as public defecation.


Mark - "Upper Class" Tea party? You're kidding, right? The march on Washington DC by the Tea Party last year got almost no coverage because it was made up of working class families from all walks of life, and mostly these people were from "flyover" country. YOu may wish to pay a little closer attention to the news, and what construes as bias. At least OWS was covered.

But as an aside, they are still protesting the wrong people. It is not "Captitalists", nor "the wealthiest 1%" of private citizens that are the majority of the problem. The majority of the problem is in Washinton DC (Congress) itself. When they can vote themselves in a law that allows them to practice insider trading, therebye making millions of dollars, while the rest of the "unwashed masses" would be jailed for the same act, then I would say you need to start focusing on the elite who makes the lopsided, unilateral laws in this country that benefits only them.

Daniel Brockman

I recall the critics of the protests that eventually led to the end of the Vietnam War, and the objections to OWS bear a resemblance. "No goals", "no plan", "unorganized", "dirty", "rude", "troublemakers", "socialist", "unnecessary", "un-American". I think the critics are wrong this time, too.

Jack You

Lies, and more lies.

If the Empire is marauding for other peoples' money, resources, and cheap labor in North America, or abroad, what else is there left to say?

Lies, and more lies!!!!!!!!!!

Michael Carmichael

The situation with OWS is changing. Now, I am reminded of the Birmingham Campaign in the summer of 1963, when Dr. King was arrested for the 13th time and Bull Connor cracked down on the marchers with firehouses and police dogs. America was shocked. JFK saw pictures of police officers siccing huge German Shepherds onto protesters. JFK said, the image in the New York Times, "made me sick." Shortly thereafter, JFK ordered the National Guard to stand down and permit the non-violent protests. The mood of the nation changed, and the massive majority moved behind King and the Civil Rights Movement. The heavy-handed police crackdowns from Zucotti Park, to Chapel Hill, to UC-Davis signaled Egypt and Syria to follow suit with heavy-handed crackdowns of their own. It is time for a new round of polling to take into consideration the public perception of the police versus the protesters - especially since the pepper-spray incident in California. To date, Obama has been supportive of OWS, along with many other leading Democrats. Now is the time for America's leaders to call for restraint from the police who are using far too much force to control what are by and large peaceful, non-violent protests - the hallmark of democracy and the open society we all strive to serve.


Actually the Occupiers have a very clear and concise set of demands. The media moguls (of course) refuse to report this document: "The new common sense" https://docs.google.com/document/d/1D9E6vrKGGnTsZM1Y3Nm75UxctNkEZ-NtHweOpVo6Iws/edit?hl=en_US&pli=1

Joe Motor

Thanks jkollert, You are bring up a good point, the media is ignoring a lot of things. I've been to several Occupy sites and if you spend a little time and talk to people, you do get a feel for what they and many Americans are upset about. Thanks for pointing out the "The New Common Sense" This document is getting too big to fail and soon mainstream media will no longer be able to ignore it. Everyone please read ans SHARE ; http://pastebin.com/gm2UV08D

Marxist Hypocrisy 101

"In my opinion, the movement original message has changed because of all the "bad apples" who are among the protesters"

Except for the fact that these "bad apples" and their message of state totalitarianism achieved through violence and terror have remained consistent since it's astroturfed inception.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

PPP POLLS BY YEAR: 2006-2017

We came to PPP after a public poll in the San Jose Mayoral race showed our opponent ahead by 8 points. They found our candidate (Sam Liccardo) ahead by 3 points and that allowed us to be able to push back with the press against the perception that our opponent was now a strong favorite in the race. Sam ended up winning by 2 points and is now the next Mayor of San Jose. PPP worked very fast and had a very accurate read on the electorate when we needed them
–Eric Jaye, Storefront Political Media.

For more information on hiring PPP for your polling needs click here

Among the Best Pollsters, Year after Year.

2014 :
Rated Most Accurate Pollster in Governor’s Races Nationally

2012 :
Correctly predicted the winner of every state in the Presidential race, and the winner of every major Senate race

2010 :
First pollster to predict Scott Brown’s upset win over Martha Coakley in the Massachusetts Senate race, only pollster to predict Christine O’Donnell’s upset victory over Mike Castle in the Delaware Republican Senate primary.

2008 :
Ranked by the Wall Street Journal as the 2nd most accurate swing state pollster in the Presidential election.

WSJ Graphic


Public Policy Polling
2912 Highwoods Blvd., Suite 201
Raleigh, NC 27604
Phone: 888.621.6988

Questions or Comments?
Email Us




Dean Debnam Dean Debnam
Public Policy Polling CEO

PPP is best known for putting out highly accurate polling on key political races across the country, but we also do affordable private research for candidates and organizations.  Why pay tens of thousands of dollars for a survey when one of the most reliable companies in the nation can do it for less?"

Learn more about working
with PPP for your next project >


Facebook Facebook
Twitter Twitter
RSS Feed RSS Reader