How Did Liberals React to 9/11?

Legacy blog posts Polls in the News

By now most of MP’s readers have presumably heard the flap over White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove’s speech on Wednesday that attacked the alleged reaction by “liberals” to the September 11 attacks.  For those who have been avoiding all media for the last 48 hours, here is the “money quote:”

Perhaps the most important difference between conservatives and liberals can be found in the area of national security. Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 in the attacks and prepared for war. Liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers. In the wake of 9/11, conservatives believed it was time to unleash the might and power of the United States military against the Taliban.

The debate over Rove’s remarks has focused mostly on the 9/11 reaction from liberal political leaders and pundits.  Democrats remind us that the Senate authorized military action against Afghanistan by a vote of 98 to 0 and the House approved 420 to 1.   White House Communications Director Dan Bartlett Republicans argued this morning that when Rove said “liberals” he “cited” only the liberal group, MoveOn.org. But MP is intrigued by a different issue.  How did ordinary, rank-and-file liberals react to the 9/11 attacks? That — as a pollster I once worked for liked to say — is an empirical question.

Virtually all of the public pollsters went into the field immediately after the attacks and asked Americans whether the US should take military action or go to war.  While I can find no tabulations by ideology, two polls did provide results at the time by party identification.   Here is a sampling: 

CBS/New York Times, 9/13-14/2001, n=959 adults (source: National Journal’s Hotline).

Should the U.S. take military action against those responsible?  Yes: 93% of Republicans, 86% of Democrats, 76% of independents

Should the U.S. take military action against those responsible for attacks, even if it means innocent people are killed? Yes: 74% of Republicans, 64% of Democrats, 67% of independents

What if that meant going to war with a nation harboring those responsible for the attacks, then should the U.S. take military action against those responsible for the attacks?  Yes: 74% of Republicans, 61% of Democrats, 65% of independents

What if that meant thousands of innocent civilians may be killed, then should the U.S. take military action against whoever is responsible for the attacks? Yes vs. No: Republicans 66% to 16%, Democrats 55% to 28%, independents 60% to 19%.

Los Angeles Times9/13-14/2001, n=1,561 adults:

In your opinion, is the United States now in a state of war?  Yes: 74% of Republicans, 70% of Democrats, 66% of independents (Q11)

If it is also determined that the Taliban ruling party in Afghanistan is harboring Osama bin Laden, would you support the United States and its allies retaliating with military action against Afghanistan, even if it could result in civilian casualties, or would you oppose that?   Support: 91% of Republicans, 80% of Democrats, 78% of independents (Q37)

What about Osama bin Laden’s organization itself? Do you think the United States should retaliate against Bin Laden’s group through military action, or should the United States pursue justice by bringing him to trial in the United States?  Retaliate vs. bring to trial: Republicans 80% to 17%, Democrats 66% to 28%, independents 64% to 27% (Q38)

Thus, in the days after 9/11 overwhelming majorities of both Democrats and Republicans believed America was “at war” and favored some sort of “military action.”  Americans of all persuasions were less enthusiastic about military action if it meant all out war or killings “thousands of innocent civilians,” but even with these stipulations rank and file Democrats still favored war by a two-to-one margin.  Yes, Democrats were a bit less supportive of waging war than Republicans, but compared to the partisan polarization we see today, the unity on these issues in the aftermath of 9/11 was far more striking than the differences.   

Yes, “some” Democrats expressed reluctance to wage all-out war, but so did “some” Republicans (though not as many).  The bigger point:  The  majority of both Democrats and Republicans believed, as Karl Rove might put it, “it was time to unleash the might and power of the United States military against the Taliban.”

Of course, Rove spoke of “liberals” and “conservatives” not Democrats and Republicans, and the results above involve partisanship rather than self-reported ideology.  Not all Democrats are liberals, not all liberals are Democrats.  So it is at least theoretically possible that we might reach different conclusions from tabulation by ideology.  This leads to a suggestion from…

MP’s Assignment Desk: The major news media pollsters all have data in their archives from 2001 that they could easily tabulate by self-reported ideology.  Do the results for ideology look like the results above for party?  MP assumes others might like to know.  Sunday morning news show producers (if you’re reading), this means you!


UPDATE:  MP Gets (Survey) Results!

The pollsters at CBS News were kind enough to pass along cross-tabulations of their post-9/11 questions by self-reported ideology.  Because of limited time, they did not ask an ideology question on the survey conducted on 9/13-14/2001, but did field a longer survey a week later that included ideology and repeated the questions above. 

I’ve summarized the findings below, and posted a PDF with the complete results, but they are consistent with the results for party.  The bottom line:  Two weeks after the attacks, 84% of self-described liberals supported “military action” against the terrorists and 75% supported “going to war with a nation that is harboring those responsible.”

CBS/New York Times, 9/20-23/2001, n=1216 adults.   Note that the question text below is verbatim from CBS; the wording above came from a Hotline summary. 

Do you think the U.S. SHOULD take military action against whoever is responsible for the attacks?  Yes: 84% of liberals, 93% of moderates, 95% of conservatives.

Do you think the U.S. SHOULD take military action against whoever is responsible for the attacks, even if it means that innocent people are killed? Yes vs. No: liberals 60% to 19%, moderates 64% to 21%, conservatives 76% to 14%.

What if that meant going to war with a nation that is harboring those responsible for the attacks, then do you think the United States should take military action against whoever is responsible for the attacks?  Yes vs. No: liberals 75% to 6%, moderates 83% to 6%, conservatives 89% to 3%

What if that meant that many thousands of innocent civilians may be killed, then do you think the United States should take military action against whoever is responsible for the attacks? Yes vs. No: liberals 62% to 17%, moderates 69% to 18%, conservatives 73% to 15%.

Mark Blumenthal

Mark Blumenthal is political pollster with deep and varied experience across survey research, campaigns, and media. The original "Mystery Pollster" and co-creator of Pollster.com, he explains complex concepts to a multitude of audiences and how data informs politics and decision-making. A researcher and consultant who crafts effective questions and identifies innovative solutions to deliver results. An award winning political journalist who brings insights and crafts compelling narratives from chaotic data.