Both the Tea Party movement and to a much greater extent, the Occupy Wall Street movement, have vocalized some frustrations that are shared by a broad mass of the American people — suspicion of Wall Street and crony capitalism. Indeed, members of both the Tea Party and OWS movement share a broad-based frustration that our democratic system is not working the way voters would like and the belief that neither Wall Street nor the government can be trusted to do what is best for the economy and the country.
But the two movements diverge both in terms of their potential effect and whether they are representative of a broader constituency.
In order to try to answer with specificity and precision questions that have been raised about the relative influence of the OWS and Tea Party movements, my polling firm Douglas E. Schoen LLC. conducted a survey with a national sample of 400 likely voters. The fieldwork was done from Nov. 4-7, 2011.
What we found is that the Tea Party movement — despite having lost support since last year — has more influence, more credibility, and more effect.
Indeed, an in-depth look at the data suggests that on balance, the Tea Party is more representative of a broader constituency of the American electorate.
Overall, 31 percent of likely voters say the Tea Party movement comes closer to their views, while only 19 percent are more in line with the position of the OWS movement.
Voters are favorable to the Tea Party movement by a narrow plurality (42-39 percent) while they have an unfavorable impression of the Occupy Wall Street movement (43-35 percent).
And while one-third (32 percent) of likely voters are supporters of the Tea Party movement, they oppose OWS by a narrow (33 percent) plurality.
In terms of effect, the Tea Party movement is more likely to have a greater lasting effect on the political system.
One-quarter of voters (25 percent) believe the Tea Party will have more influence over who wins next year’s presidential election. Only 12 percent say the OWS movement will have more influence.
By a margin of 44-36 percent, voters say the Tea Party movement has had a real effect on the political process. Meanwhile, half (50 percent) say that OWS has not had a real effect on the political process, while only 21 percent disagree.
In 2010, Tea Party-inspired candidates ran for a substantial majority of the House and Senate seats up for election — such as Sharron Angle in Nevada and Christine O’Donnell in Delaware.
And, while those two candidates may have ultimately lost, the Tea Party itself demonstrated an unprecedented level of influence over primary and general election outcomes.
And, as evidenced during the fight over the debt ceiling last summer — the base they built moved the Republican Party further to the right has become a force that cannot be ignored whenever important legislation is in need of votes. The results of my own research suggest clearly and unambiguously that Occupy Wall Street is not going to do this.
Unlike the Tea Party movement, the OWS movement has been marked by violence, clashes with the police, and numerous arrests — beginning with the movement’s inception on Sept. 17 and culminating this Tuesday when 200 protesters were arrested in or around Zuccotti Park.
However, whenever the Tea Party was alleged to have done something — be it spitting at a congressman, or using racist rhetoric — these allegations received prominent coverage in the media, notwithstanding the level of proof, or lack thereof.
With only 9 percent of all voters saying that the OWS protests are helping President Obama’s chances of re-election — while 30 percent say they are hurting his chances — Obama and the Democratic leadership are making a critical error in embracing the OWS movement.
And this error may cost them the 2012 election.
Only 11 percent of likely voters consider themselves to be part of the OWS movement.
This is because the OWS movement reflects values that are out of touch with the broad mass of the American people–and particularly with swing voters who are largely independent and have been trending away from the president since the debate over health care reform.
Large majorities of OWS supporters call for increased regulation of the private sector (88 percent) more tariffs and protectionist policies to keep American jobs from being outsourced (86 percent) and raising taxes on the wealthy (84 percent).
To be sure, the Tea Party movement is broader based than OWS, but it, too, is perceived as polarizing and inflexible.
And, as the results from our survey suggest, a plurality of voters overall (40 percent) would like to see the Republican Party distance itself from the Tea Party.
What then do the American people want?
The American people want bipartisan cooperation, conciliation and a pro-growth agenda that addresses our most pressing economic concerns: reigniting the economy and creating jobs while simultaneously slashing the deficit and exhibiting fiscal discipline.
Moreover, they are looking for lawmakers who are independent of the Washington establishment and the special interests, and committed to putting the people first and foremost.
The larger point is that while the Tea Party movement may be more representative than OWS, what the American people are looking for is something more inclusive and overarching — that takes concern about the way the federal government operates and provides an optimistic, inclusive approach to emphasize growth, conciliation, and fairness in the application of government and allocation of resources.
Pollster and Democratic political strategist Doug Schoen was a political adviser to President Clinton and more recently co-authored with Scott Rasmussen “Mad as Hell: How the Tea Party movement is fundamentally remaking our two-party system.”
