Bush Lingers in the Low 40s, Dems Maintain Ballot Edge

by Jonathan Singer, Fri Jan 27, 2006 at 06:33:48 PM EST

We in the MyDD community aren't the only ones with a poll in the news today. In fact, quite a few others have numbers available on the President (though none of them asked the tough questions in our poll, of course).

Presidential Approval

Congressional Appoval

  • Fox News: 34 percent approve, 51 percent disapprove
  • LAT/Bloomberg: 35 percent approve, 55 percent disapprove
  • NYT/CBS News: 29 percent approve, 61 percent disapprove
Generic Ballot

  • LAT/Bloomberg (If the elections for Congress were being held today, which party would you like to see win in your congressional district: the Democratic Party or the Republican Party?): 35 percent Republican, 47 percent Democrat
  • NYT/CBS News (If the 2006 election for U.S. House of Representatives were being held today, would you vote for the Republican candidate or the Democratic candidate in your district?): 33 percent Republican, 43 percent Democrat
While the Democrats have consistently fared better than the Republicans in this question for the last several months, the Democrats can, by no means, become complacent, believing that they have November's elections already locked up.

Looking at the Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll, which breaks down the generic congressional ballot by party affiliation, the numbers come out as follows: Democrats would vote for the Democratic candidate by a 87 to 5 margin and Republicans would vote for the GOP candidate by a similar 83 to 9 margin. Independents, who have continuously been moving towards the Democrats on key policy positions over the past year or so, favor the Democrats by a mere 32 to 27 margin. There are still a lot of unaffiliated voters floating around out there to be picked up by either party, and unless the Democrats do a fairly good job of wooing these voters in the next ten months, they might see this generic advantage disappear.

In many ways, this mirrors the key problem faced by John Kerry throughout 2004. From the time he locked up the Democratic nomination in March through the first Tuesday in November, John Kerry hovered in the high 40s, never dipping too much, but never really surging either. Essentially, the 48 percent of voters who opposed President Bush in March 2004 remained opposed to him throughout the campaign season, their numbers neither enlarging or deteriorating significantly, and on election day, only 48 percent of voters marked their ballot for the Democrat.

One of my fears is that this situation will repeat itself this year, with the Democrats seeming to maintain a generic lead throughout the campaign only to see Republicans coalesce in November. Tempering this concern, at least to an extent, are three facts:

  1. Jack Abramoff, as well as the many other indicted and investigated Republicans across the country;
  2. That 2006 hosts a series of more than 500 elections for the Senate, the House and the Governorships, rather than one overarching campaign for the White House; and
  3. The lack of a Democratic bogeyman (Kerry scares conservatives a lot less as one of one hundred Senators than he does as a possible President).
Still, as the Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll shows, the Democrats still need to work hard to convince independent voters to hand them the keys of government on November 7. Luckily, there's little reason why the Democrats shouldn't suceed in this effort.




Tags: Pulse, 2006 (all tags)

Display:
Permalink :: 15 Comments :: Post a Comment


Re: Bush Lingers in the Low 40s, Dems Maintain Bal (none / 0)

Never underestimate the ability of Democrats to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory!

Midterms are all about turning out your base, they always have significantly less turnout then presidential years, so while I think moving independents to the Dem column, it is ESSENTIAL that Democrats fine up the base and that Republicans stay home. That was the GOP Revolution's formula, Dems simply didn't show up.


by MiCHAEL104 on Fri Jan 27, 2006 at 06:54:42 PM EST

Re: Bush Lingers in the Low 40s, Dems Maintain Bal (none / 0)

Damn, that post is ridden with errors! yikes! But you get the point...


by MiCHAEL104 on Fri Jan 27, 2006 at 06:55:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Michael's Right--Mid-Terms Are About Turnout (none / 0)

While many different things happened during 1994, the Dems still would have maintained control of the House--albeit with a much smaller margin--if they had simply managed to get their base out.  There was an analysis showing this published in The Nation shortly after the election.  And, of course, the Dem's failure to deliver much of anything during Clinton's first two years was fairly discouraging.

Well, we all know that Reps don't discourage as easily. And we also know that Reps vote more intensely against things. So they will be all about getting the base all worked up about immigration, and Dems doing deals with bin Laden. (I hear they're going to appoint him Ambassador to Disneyland. Tim Russert says so!)

This is what I expect the election to be about in the last 60 days, if the GOP is successful.  Which means that the Dems have to win the election before then.  They have to hammer home everything the GOP has done wrong. All the scandal, all the lies, all the deadly mismanagement, the cronyism, etc., etc., etc.  That way, when the Rovian demonization machine shifts into high gear, it will be seen for the pathetic manipulation it is, and will turn people off in droves.

It also won't hurt if Karl Rove is indicted the week after Labor Day.  And Hastert the week before Election Day.


by Paul Rosenberg on Fri Jan 27, 2006 at 07:49:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Michael's Right--Mid-Terms Are About Turnout (none / 0)

And your analysis is where I think we are failing- do we have a long term strategy that goes beyond a vote by vote calculus of trying to appear fair or even handed? Where have we symbolically shown that we are up for taking over leadership? What do Americans think about us at the gut level - the non issue, but most important level of how they view our character?


by bruh21 on Fri Jan 27, 2006 at 08:02:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

WE Aren't In Charge Yet (none / 0)

I think that there are lots of ideas from the netroots that the Democratic Party consultocracy will absolutely not pursue.  I was writing about what we can expect, given this state of affairs.

But of course we can do much better than this. An important part of doing better is recognizing the new improved forms of bullshit being shovelled our way, in order to avoid it.  My current diary, "More On Values/Data Bamboozlement And More," is specifically a warning against a possible blind alley that is very attractive to the consultocracy.  The underlying data is--as I note--not necessary BS, though it has some problems. But the uncritical attraction to it is.  However, I then go on to make some positive suggestions of my own.  

Bottom line: It's not just a matter of having something to offer people.  It's also a matter of communicating hope, possibility and strength.  And doing so in a form--a compelling narrative--that gets through to them.


by Paul Rosenberg on Fri Jan 27, 2006 at 09:37:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Tim Russert says so (none / 0)

This has really been bothering me -- the way the press seems to lean to the Right in so many ways, from parroting and/or internalizing GOP talking points, to having imbalanced panels stacked with conservatives, to throwing softball questions at conservatives while grilling liberals.

I think the progressive netroots needs to make accountability and objectivity in the media a prime focus during this year's campaign, starting now. We can do it, we just need to make an organized and concerted effort.

As the Howell and Matthews incidents show, pressure from the netroots and activists can crack these guys, at least partially. Particularly if we can get help from Democratic politicians, I think we can have an impact.

This has to be a priority -- as long as the media is conservatively biased, we face an uphill battle on every issue and in virtually every race.

Plus, I think this will be a great way for the netroots to develop our organizational skills for when action needs to be taken.


TAKE BACK OUR PARTY: Democracy Bonds
by LiberalFromPA on Fri Jan 27, 2006 at 09:09:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Will There Be Pies??? (none / 0)

I think the behavior of the M$M just cries out for a liberal serving of pie-in-the-face.  

Clearly, engaging in reality-based rational discourse with these jokers is like speaking Swahili to Trent Lott.  We should use a language they understand: unmitigated mockery, with attitude!


by Paul Rosenberg on Fri Jan 27, 2006 at 09:41:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You're forgetting one (none / 0)

I believe they're going to do a gay marriage redux.  Look for ballot initiatives across the country.

Might be good to do everything we can to fight those initiatives getting on the ballots in the first place, or add ones of our own to motivate our base (e.g. right to privacy issues).

This isn't 2002, just after 9/11.  Still, they WILL use their tried-and-true formula for hyper-motivating the religious right base to go to the polls through the churches and ballot initiatives, and they will go door-to-door making their pitches to "Republican leaners".

We need to more than counter these things.


by jonweasel on Sat Jan 28, 2006 at 12:31:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bush Lingers (none / 0)

I want to k now what the polls say in invidual races and how the voters view us viscerally. I listened to people in Ney of OH's district, and despite the culture of corruption and other things- they still seem to be holding steady for him. He's not represenative- I know- but still, this whole- they are down, we are up in a general match up isn't as fruitful as more indepth state by state analysis- do they even do state by state analysis or more specically the toss up races?


by bruh21 on Fri Jan 27, 2006 at 08:00:08 PM EST

Not Quite (none / 0)

As I indicated in my other comment, I think that mid-terms are different--as does virtually everyone else in the political universe.

But, for what it's worth, this is factually inaccurate:

In many ways, this mirrors the key problem faced by John Kerry throughout 2004. From the time he locked up the Democratic nomination in March through the first Tuesday in November, John Kerry hovered in the high 40s, never dipping too much, but never really surging either. Essentially, the 48 percent of voters who opposed President Bush in March 2004 remained opposed to him throughout the campaign season, their numbers neither enlarging or deteriorating significantly, and on election day, only 48 percent of voters marked their ballot for the Democrat.
There was a great deal of movement during the campaign, with Kerry peaking in late June, early July, before he got really locked into the highly professionally fine-tuned part of the campaign, which is when they stopped paying attention to anything except their own navels.  Bush was in a prolonged slump, which he didn't break out of until after the GOP convention.

Dr. Pollkatz Bush Approval tracking shows that Bush stood at 49.0 on 2/28/2004, for a net +0.6. For the next 12 2-week periods, Bush was in net negative territory, through 8/31/2004.  He was then net postive for 3 of the next 5 2-week periods, including the one covering election week.  The biggest negative was -9.1, through 6/30/2004.

Or you can look at the appropriate part of this chart:

Full size here.


by Paul Rosenberg on Fri Jan 27, 2006 at 08:20:13 PM EST

Democrats Must Have A Better Local Organization (none / 0)

Dean has been doing a good job rehabilitating the state parties, but local county parties, who are in charge of getting out the vote and mounting the grassroots offenseive needed to win, aren't anywhere near ready.

Most local county parties are completely ineffective, don't do much of anything, raise little money, and thus provide practically no productive support to local, state, and national candidates.

This has to change if we are to win in 2006. I'm really tired of hearing Democrats complain about our situation, but don't lift a finger in terms of helping out the local party or a candidate. Not to be a hypocrite, I plan to help out my county DEC in precinct organizing, fundraising, and candidate support over the summer, when I'm not in school.

Talk is cheap, action is what will win the day.


"The collapse of confidence in the Republican leadership is not enough to elect Democratic leadership." -Dean
by gatordemocrat on Fri Jan 27, 2006 at 09:34:10 PM EST

I agree with this (none / 0)

We need to have our act together regarding targeting of potential voters.  We need to be organized with our GOTV efforts, as well as distribution of campaign material and talking points.

I think it would also be worthwhile to investigate several tactics designed specifically to counter GOP dirty tricks.  Among these tactics would be to send people to churches with tape recorders, the aim being to get material to publicize/forward to the FEC and IRS.  It's really past time to put a stop to the GOP's politicization of churches.

I would also like to see real efforts put into organized micro-targeting of various voter demographics.


by jonweasel on Sat Jan 28, 2006 at 12:35:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I agree with this (none / 0)

Add to the above: use our own ballot initiatives; put time and effort into stopping GOP ballot initiatives, where possible; and be prepared for the standard deck of GOP tricks like last-minute robo-calls misinforming people of polling places, robo-calls, push-polls and direct mail with lies, email campaigns of lies, the use of blogs to spread anonymous smears, phone-jamming, other forms of election fraud...you get the picture.

They're clever little cheaters, but the thing is, what they do isn't really anything new.


by jonweasel on Sat Jan 28, 2006 at 12:39:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I agree with this (none / 0)

In Montana, Gov. Schweitzer is doing just that by putting an "anti-corruption" iniative on the ballot as Jack Abramoff's best friend, Sen. Conrad Burns, faces a tough re-election challanges.


by AC4508 on Sat Jan 28, 2006 at 06:28:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Stand For Something (none / 0)

These polls are encouraging but we keep thinking we can run as not being George Bush.  It is not enough.  We must have a theme and tell the electorate what we will do if we are given the keys to govt.  Below are some successful themes:

1992 - Putting People First - Clinton
1994 - Contract with America - Gingrich
1996 - Bridge to the 21st Century - Clinton
2000 - Compassionate Conservatism - Bush

BS.  Yes but important branding.  J-HOS won't work.  What is the D theme for 2006?  We need one around which we can package our policies.


by John Mills on Sat Jan 28, 2006 at 12:06:17 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.

Login
Username:

Password: