In the blog cited above, the section titled “Where are we now?” posed this question: “Has Primadonald’s pronouncement caused a change of mind among the birthers vis a vis their view of Obama?” As it turns out, we now have some preliminary data that can be applied to that query, Specifically, the Huffington Post (1) polled self-described Republicans on this matter back in January of this year and then again after the GOP candidate recanted his five-year-long lie about the president’s eligibility. The results follow along with your blogger’s analysis.
The poll asked “Do you believe that Barack Obama is eligible to serve as president of the United States?” Respondents were given choices of “Yes, No, (or) Unsure”. In January, 22% answered “Yes”, 58% said “No”, and 26% were “Unsure” (2). But, after Primadonald’s capitulation, the numbers changed to 34% “Yes”, 33% “No”, and 33% “Unsure”.
The numbers just cited suggest that the candidate’s disavowal of his previous birther stance had an impact: The “No” percentage dropped from 58 to 33. That’s a big and welcomed change. None the less, it is striking that in spite of Primadonald’s statement, 33% of the Republicans polled still could not let go of their previously held belief in Obama’s ineligibility. They continue to cling to this now thoroughly debunked notion even though their own nominee has told them otherwise; the man who they steadfastly believe will “Make America great again”…who will build a wall and “…Make Mexico pay for it” and “…bomb the shit out of ISIS” to cite just three of his more popular tropes.
Is it that they have some level of distrust of Primadonald or is something else at play? The view held here is that the 33% represent the hardest of hard-core birthers, a sub-set of that group whose hatred of Obama is all-consuming and has no bottom. No evidence, no long-form birth certificate, no categorical statement from their own leader has made a difference. In all likelihood, these people will go their graves with the same mindset.
- The Huffington Post is an on-line newspaper that covers many of the same topics one would find in a print daily (e.g. sports, finances). Its “Politics” section is definitely left-leaning.
- The percentages cited do not add up to 100. The excess may be the result of rounding error, or a miscalculation.