« Rail with Trail to North Carolina | Main | Anacostia Riverwalk Trail keeps chugging along »


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

That 30% must be the group that comments on WP and ArlNow articles. The vocal minority that makes people think they're all that way.

Now if more Republican leaders would look at these numbers.

But perhaps they think that the vocal 30% are the ones that show up at primaries and are more reliable and consistent voters on Election Day. If so, then that 30% will continue to have an outsized effect on some Republican leaders.

Exactly--the question of whether more people support something is immaterial; the only thing that matters is the opinions of the primary voters in gerrymandered districts.

The survey notes that it was targeted toward "1,000 likely voters." How they determined who a likely voter is is unstated, and a lot could hinge on that.

While many politicians would still be likely to play to their more extreme base, getting the word out about general public support is useful. What we see publicly is often the extremes.

GGW reblogged this today.

I wasn't the least bit surprised by the outcome. I know plenty of R-leaning cyclists.

As for the use of such data? Well, like any advocacy, you have to be strategic. Sometimes legislators want to support something, but are worried about the primary as mentioned above and in that case, this gives them a plausible defense. In other cases, they're truly undecided and it's a feather in that cap. At a minimum for those opposed, you use it as a "you're not with us here, but many of your voters are so show us where you will help us."

The bigger problem I see is you can't say do you support rails-to-trails. It's, do you support it, and if so, how important is it to you? If I asked everyone here do you support volunteerism, I bet the answer is near 100%. Now, do you support funding for it? Sure, call it 98%. Now, do you support funding from it if that funding comes from rails-to-trails.... and suddenly, i bet it plummets.

For me, the main use of this data is to combat the impression, still held by many, that the haters are a majority.

Further, this supports the narrative that the 70 percent of people are potential transportation cyclists, but that 6 out of 7 of them are frightened or otherwise discouraged from riding in the streets. Given that few studies show bicycles to be clearly more dangerous than cars, this suggests the following. The cycling community has little to fear but fear itself.

I am a congenital Democrat, but I don't support much of the nonsense promulgated by the party's monosynaptic-reflexive wing. I still harbor the belief that a majority of Americans agrees, at least in the abstract, on what constitutes a social good and deserves collective support.

Courtland calls bike paths a "target rich environment."

I agree with Jonathon that this data combats the widespread narrative that a majority of people are haters.

The problem is that the haters are a loud and hateful minority.

The problem is that Republican elected officials usually don't reflect this particular sentiment of Republican voters.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Banner design by creativecouchdesigns.com

City Paper's Best Local Bike Blog 2009


 Subscribe in a reader