Emerson really polled D. C. residents, in contrast to the previous breakdowns I had done based on party identification in Manhattan and Washington, DC. And the outcomes are very predictable in a city that is not only heavily partisan but likewise very politically charged and where the majority of the informed populace participates in politics. Additionally, they prevent a good trial from happening. Residents of Washington, D.C., were asked to vote to convict former President Donald Trump in the case involving his attempts to sway the 2020 election results as part of a recent Emerson College polling survey conducted there. Residents would vote to find Trump guilty with a majority of 64 %, while 8 % would find him innocent with 28 % unsure.
According to Spencer Kimball, executive director of Emerson College Polling,” Perception of Trump’s guilt varies by gender: 75 % of women would vote to find Trump guilty, compared to 54 % of men.” It’s unclear if this is because of sex or political orientation, but men are more likely to find the former president innocent at 12 % compared to 4 % of women. Men tend to be more liberal than women. Democratic voters, 69 % to 5 %, find Trump guilty. Similar beliefs are held by independents: 53 % believe Trump is guilty and 14 % believe he is innocent. Republicans are more divided: 36 % believe Trump is guilty, 35 % believe he is innocent, and 30 % are unsure. The city’s pronounced Democratic leaning is accurately reflected by the 69 %. In general, juries can be relied upon to carry out their duties, with the exception of situations where there is intense social pressure. That is what occurred in the George Floyd case, and it has occurred a great deal with juries in Washington, D.C., to the point where it is plausible to claim that the city’s jurors are more inherently tainted than those in most other cities. To take advantage of that political bias is the clear justification for bringing cases in Washington, D.C. Because of this, a D. C. grand jury was immediately called in the case involving classified documents rather than in Florida. The jury in Washington, D.C., is politically contaminated, to put it simply. There is no longer any verdict in a social case that can be regarded as reasonable.
The results are predictable in a city that is not only partisan but also very political and where a significant percentage of the informed populace is active in politics. The results are predictable in a city with a large partisan lean, but also one that is very political and where a large percentage of the informed population is involved in politics. They also make it impossible to have a fair trial. A new Emerson College Polling study in the nation’s capitol asked D.C. Residents if they would vote for former President Donald Trump to be found guilty in the trial regarding Trump’s attempts to subvert the results of the 2020 elections. A majority of residents, 64%, would vote to find Trump guilt, while 8% found him innocent, with 28% unsure.
Spencer Kimball, Executive director of Emerson College Polling said that “perception of Trump’s guilty varies by gender. 75% of women vote to find Trump guilt compared to 54% men. Men are more likely than women to find the former President innocent, at 12%. Men are more likely to be more conservative.Democratic voters find Trump guilty 69% to 5%. Independents have a similar view: 53% believe Trump is guilty, and 14% are innocent. The Republicans are more divided: 36% believe Trump is guilty, while 35% are innocent, and 30% are unsure. The 69% really reflects a Democrat-leaning city. Generally, juries will do their job unless they’re under extreme political pressure. It’s been happening a lot in D.C. with juries, and the George Floyd case is no exception. You could argue that D.C. jurors have a more fundamentally biased than those in other places. It is for this reason that the classified documents case was first brought before a D.C. Grand Jury rather than one in Florida. The bottom line is D.C.’s jury pool has been tainted by politics. There is no longer any way to consider a verdict in a case involving politics as legitimate.
