Public Policy Polling released some more polling data on interracial marriage.

[randomness]

They polled the question in Georgia, North Carolina, and Mississippi.

---

Here's the data by state and political affiliation to the question, "Do you think interracial marriage should be legal or illegal?":

Georgia (790 voters):
Legal: 62%
Illegal: 22%
Not sure: 15%

Georgia Democrat:
Legal: 67%
Illegal: 20%
Not sure: 13%

Georgia Republican:
Legal: 52%
Illegal: 29%
Not sure: 19%

Georgia Independent/Other:
Legal: 74%
Illegal: 13%
Not sure: 13%

---

North Carolina (507 voters):
Legal: 68%
Illegal: 20%
Not sure: 12%

North Carolina Democrat
Legal: 74%
Illegal: 15%
Not sure: 11%

North Carolina Republican:
Legal: 55%
Illegal: 30%
Not sure: 14%

North Carolina Independent/Other:
Legal: 80%
Illegal: 11%
Not sure: 9%

---

Mississippi (817 voters):
Legal: 54%
Illegal: 28%
Not sure: 18%

Mississippi Democrat:
Legal: 68%
Illegal: 18%
Not sure: 14%

Mississippi Republican:
Legal: 39%
Illegal: 41%
Not sure: 19%

Mississippi Independent/Other:
Legal: 56%
Illegal: 21%
Not sure: 22%

---

Another noteworthy result is that when broken down by age (18-29, 30-45, 46-65, over 65), more people in the 18 to 29 group thought interracial marriage should be illegal than any other group except those over 65. This was true in each state. (GA: 28%, NC: 26%, MS: 36%). In each state, more 18-29s believed that interracial marriage should be illegal than the sample of all ages.

PPP has asked for suggestions for national poll questions; I suggested they ask this question nationwide.

PPP's press release, with all the questions and crosstabs.

Comments

[cerebralpaladin.livejournal.com]

I dunno--60:29 doesn't seem the same to me as 43:31, and I think it's more relevant to look at both the "should be legal" and the "should be illegal" numbers than either alone. But there definitely are some odd results in the "very liberal" categories, possibly because the total number of people in that category is low. With 11% of 790 respondents answering "very liberal," that means that the total number of people in that category is about 87. Out of 87 people, 29% represents about 24 people total. So a couple of loony people, or people with idiosyncratic definitions of very liberal, or whatever, ends up making a big difference.

I have to say, I find this data really scary and appalling. Thanks for sharing it, r_ness.

[r-ness.livejournal.com]

Thanks for sharing it, r_ness.

You're welcome. For obvious reasons, I very much wanted to post.

[st-rev.livejournal.com]

Consider how many of those younger people are just trolling, though.

[karakara98.livejournal.com]

"But definitely there are some odd results in the 'very liberal' categories"

Those results don't strike me as odd. I think we need to more explicitly define "liberal" and "conservative" along both social and fiscal/governance lines. It does not strike me as odd at all that there are people who are "liberal" on government intervention on things like welfare and healthcare, but who are socially "conservative" or even racist.

I think I'm more sensitive to it for a couple of reasons. One being more conservative than some of my friends on fiscal/governance issues while being not so happy with the socially conservative aspects of the Republican party makes me wish for 3rd and 4th parties. Second, my grandfather was a classic "yellow dog" Southern democrat and would probably have answered with "should be illegal." It doesn't surprise me that that persists two decades later.

[karakara98.livejournal.com]

P.S. This is not to say that I'm happy with the Republican party along any axis. I guess I've become a moderate in my middle age, but I'm still willing to bet I'm more conservative than many friends on what the role of government should be. :)

[cerebralpaladin.livejournal.com]

Oh, I entirely agree with this as well. I thought about mentioning the possibility that some of the "very liberal" respondents might be populist-style economic liberals who are also socially conservative. I just think it's important to note that for that category in particular, n is quite low.