Let's not get the cart before the horse, so in the meantime today we'll take a good substantive look at impeachment and extremism through the lenses of the Threat Index and some demographics. (Previous posts on findings can be found at these locations: Release 1 Findings, Terrorism Threat Index, Back in the Saddle Again and Impeachment Approach).

Here's the data on the lead-in question, whether Congress should investigate possible illegal actions (NSA surveillance of citizens, Iraqi WMD lies) by Dubya:

                                                  Should               Should Not
                                                   Investigate         Investigate

U.S.                                             49%                   43%

TTI Low                                      25                      69
TTI Medium                                56                      36
TTI High                                     76                      19

Fund.-Evangelical                      25                       68
Mainstream                                44                       49
Liberal                                        70                       25

Democrat                                   74                        21
Republican                                 22                       73
Indep.-Other                               51                       37

Northeast                                    54                        35
South                                          41                        54
Midwest                                     49                         43
Rockies                                      53                         44
West Coast                                 59                         35

As noted by Chris, we've got a split among voters on the issue. What a shocker. Further, the demographics show a split within voter groups, but with Republicans and their strongest supporters, fundamentalists/evangelicals, mainstream religious, those in the South, (not shown but in crosstabs on MyDD:) rural voters, Anglos and men most likely to say no to investigation while liberal religious voters, Democrats, those in the Northeast, Rockies and West Coast, (not shown) urban voters and minorities are most likely to say yes to investigation. Knock me over with a feather.

We've seen the demographic pattern before, in other questions in the survey, which I've discussed previously (see Release 1 link above). No new news there.

As I see it, the key finding here relates to the interplay between the Threat Index,  religious orientation and party registration. They're all three measures of psychological states: perceptions of terrorism threats, religiosity and political orientation. (Residence, in my view, is a geographical characteristic of people, having little, if any, meaning in a psychological sense.)

The characteristics (including others in crosstabs) don't provide us much direction in a strategic sense. We know that. But the psychological measures do provide some basic `map coordinates', so to speak, of strategy. Example: party registration shows the middle (Independents/Other) leaning toward investigation. Religious orientation shows the middle leaning against investigation. The TTI shows the middle significantly more likely to come down for investigation.

So what does that mean? It means framing investigation within the context of threats (in this case terrorism, but I'd also argue threats in a general sense: Dubya's unitary executive crap, NSA, Iraq, Katrina, lies, incompetence, corruption, yada, yada) is likely to push middle groups (Independents, mainstreamers) over to investigation in majority numbers. The conceptual anchor, the `hot button', that we see in these data is `threats', which moves in the same direction, only more clearly so, as other psychologically-oriented measures. In short, "Congress should investigate because such allegations and concerns are a clear and present threat to us, the voters."  

Thus, the call for investigation because of the threats these allegations and others represent, relentlessly made over the next eight months, is the real finding here. I'm confident this issue can be a tipping point, if handled right. There's already a significant constituency who buy in and there's also strong reason to conclude framing this issue properly and consistently getting it out there in communications will begin tipping middle groups over the fence. Once they perceive these Republicans and this Administration as a threat, watch out, baby.

Arianna over at HuffPo, whom I just adore, recently posted on the impeachment issue, concluding Dems should take Congress first in 2006 and then "we can talk about impeachment" on November 8th. Fine, I agree, but focusing on that (impeachment) misreads the strategic opportunity that the call for investigation represents, in my view.

That's the real opening and, further, as I noted in my last post (link above), potential investigation is where we actually are in the impeachment process. There's no evidence for impeachment right now, thus this recommendation tracks with the current reality. Hello? Are we listening, national blues?

There needs to be an investigation by Congress to determine if there is evidence. Put the heat on Republicans to do it (which emphasizes it's their responsibility as those in control of Congress), and don't let up, ding, danged, dammit. Of course Republicans won't convene a House Select Committee in an election year and that makes it all the more strategically attractive to do it now, in front of mid-term elections. In short, framing investigation as a threat response to Republicans can: 1) shore up the base, 2) begin swinging the middle and 3) erode some level of support for this Administration. And the dam starts to break. D'oh, as the original Sun Tzu might say.

Next, I'm going to blow through the actual impeachment/removal question because it's primary value as I see it at this point in time is establishing the baseline numbers for tracking. As noted above by Arianna and by me, it just doesn't make sense right now from a strategic communications perspective to pursue it as a key communications opportunity in this election cycle. But if things heat up down the road, we're set to map out the dynamics as they unfold. Here's the data on support/opposition to Dubya's impeachment and removal if it's determined he broke the law...

                                                    Total                   Total                   Not
                                                     Support               Oppose               Sure

U.S.                                               50%                    38%                   12%

TTI Low                                        31                       56                       13
TTI Medium                                  53                       35                       12
TTI High                                       72                       21                        7

Fund.-Evangelical                         33                       58                       9
Mainstream                                   42                       45                       13
Liberal                                           68                       26                       6

Democrat                                      71                       21                       8
Republican                                    26                      65                       9
Indep.-Other                                  51                      33                       16

Northeast                                       51                      35                       14
South                                             44                      47                        9
Midwest                                        50                      37                        13
Rockies                                         49                      39                        12
West Coast                                    61                      30                        9

Okay, it's good a majority, even a bare one, supports impeachment at such an early point. But opposition is significant and it's significant among sizable numbers of most groups. Further, a chunk are just not sure and that's no surprise whatsoever. So, currently, it's a divisive issue with no clear path to make it a successful wedge for us.

However what catches my eye is, again, the psychological middles. Particularly, the Threat middles. They're leaning support, they want to come over, but they're just not there yet. Getting them to move into support in large numbers would be a substantial undertaking with no guarantee it would amount to much, given the fact impeachment/removal is still fermenting, so to speak, as an issue. But, down the road...well, you know the gig on that.

Now let's look at the extremism measure. This one's really, really important, especially as you'll see in the extended analysis, as opposed to the basic demographic analysis. Overall, it captures the country's `zeitgeist' in a pointed way: are religious and political activists pushing public policy too far to the right or are they protecting society? Here's the data...

                                                         Pushing              Protecting           Not sure/
                                                          Too far               Society                Both/Neither

U.S.                                                   41%                    33%                     26%

TTI Low                                            24                       48                        28
TTI Medium                                      46                       30                        24
TTI High                                           62                       16                        22

Fund.-Evangelical                             24                       59                        17
Mainstream                                       39                       34                        27
Liberal                                               57                       23                        20

Democrat                                           55                       20                        25
Republican                                        27                       49                         24
Indep.-Other                                      41                       30                         29

Northeast                                           40                       27                         23
South                                                 36                       37                         27
Midwest                                            42                       34                         24
Rockies                                             47                       41                         12
West Coast                                        51                       25                         24

As John Lennon says: "Well, well, well. Well, well." A split electorate again, but this time on a question, in my view, getting at the base, fundamental change since the 2000 election: the constant political onslaught from the extremist right-wing.

It is amazing to me, with the abdication of the MSM/Fourth Estate's traditional public watchdog responsibility, the cabal of right-wing Faux media, corporations and churches and also the behavior of this Republican Party these past five years, that Americans are split at all, let alone three ways (pushing too far, protecting society, not sure). I believe this question shows a great resiliency among American voters, given such a consistent environment. Two-thirds do not buy into the `protecting society' position. Two-thirds, after all they've done and the hegemony they've pursued. Amazing.

We see in the detail familiar patterns among groups. This is an indicator we've gone as far as we can go in learning from the base crosstabs. So left-leaning groups say extremists are pushing too far and right-leaning groups say they're protecting society. Yup, been there, done that.

There're two things I see, though, that jump out. One, pluralities (the largest percentage) in 10 out of 14 voter groups come down on the `pushing too far' side. Only four land on `protecting society'. An obvious indicator of potential in strategic communications. Thus, not enough voters are `sold' on the pushing too far position but a bunch more could be.

Further on this observation, the expanse of turf covered by these ten groups is important. And impressive. Four of five regions of the country, two of three in religious orientation, two of three `parties', two of three in the Threat Index. That's a big, big chunk of the landscape the pushing too far position leads on, especially given the cabal of the right-wing, the dearth of formal opposition and the failure of the MSM in their watchdog role. Very impressive, I say again.

Second, that's a sizable chunk of unsure, etc. in virtually all voter groups: a fifth or more in 12 of 14 groups. There's a lot of potential for movement on this issue and the pluralities pointing toward `pushing too far' in most groups indicate they're inclined to move that way. If somebody helps them get there. If. Somebody. Helps them. Get there. Hello?

Which is The Point, as Harry Nilsson says. `Somebody' hasn't helped them. `Somebody' hasn't done squat. Somebody, that is, besides the progressive bloggers and netroots. Somebody besides us. Somebody besides you. Think about that. We are the only real opposition in this country. Period. And these wonderful, extraordinary American people are still hanging in there with us, five years plus down the road of right-wing hegemony.

It's a beautiful thing, folks. Truly humbling and inspiring, I say. My recommendation for today is to go grab some beers (plural), a bottle or two of wine or the liquor/libation of your choice. Whatever you want. Drink it, but be safe. Because...

we're done with the basic analysis. I'll do an intro post on the extended analysis and then, as Todd Rundgren says, `the shit hits the fan'.

We're going to lock and load the M-16s, button up the hatches of our M1-A1 Abrams, ring the engine rooms for flank speed and light the afterburners of our FA-18s. I'm going to do it because I am a Warrior. And as Jesse says, I Am...Somebody. I believe you are, too. We, you and I, are Somebody for the American people. It's that simple. So, until next time...hooyah!