« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

June Democracy Corps poll results: DOOM.

Jim, Stan? You had me at 'Grim.'

By: Moe Lane (Diary)  |  July 9th, 2010 at 11:00 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

This is the sexiest title of a political poll survey that you’re going to read all year: “Democracy Corps June Survey: Grim Stability Will Require Race-by-Race Fight” …and the bad news continues for page after page. Six point gap on generic Congressional ballot, dissatisfaction with the way the country’s going now at 2006 levels and rising, Democrats now on the wrong side (or right side, from my point of view) of the ‘Who’s looking out for you?’ question… and that last one should probably worry Democrats the most, as it’s directly attacking the Left’s own self-image in a way that I couldn’t hope to duplicate. Carville and Greenberg’s conclusion is particularly… there may not be a word in English that conveys the sense of weary nihilism, coupled with an obligatory advocating of a cynical policy that you know isn’t going to work – but it’s either amputate the hand now or amputate the arm later:

Democratic candidates should run as outsiders and independents that battle to change Washington.

Jennifer Rubin had the same reaction to me to that nonsense (or perhaps, I had the same reaction as her):

What are they supposed to say to fellow Democrats – “Many of you are going to lose but life after public office isn’t so bad” ? That would at least have the advantage of candor.

Candor is an advantage for the Democratic party? Is this a new thing?

Moe Lane

(Via Instapundit)

Crossposted to Moe Lane.

Tags: ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • haumea

    “Democratic candidates should run as outsiders and independents that battle to change Washington.”

    Just say it: I did not have political relations with that woman, Nancy Pelosi…

  • Tbone

    from trashing the joint on the way out the door.

  • m_quick

    According to Clinton it works pretty well and you’ll be forgiven after you win. As long as you’re a Democrat.

  • Dan McLaughlin

    here:

    Deep in the poll, they ask, ?Now, I am going to read you a list of words and phrases which people use to describe political figures. For each word or phrase, please tell me whether it describes Barack Obama very well, well, not too well, or not well at all.?

    …When asked about ?a socialist,? 33 percent of likely voters say it describes Obama ?very well,? 22 percent say ?well,? 15 percent say ?not too well,? and 25 percent say ?not well at all.?

    In other words, 55 percent of likely voters think ?socialist? is a reasonably accurate way of describing Obama.

    DOOM.

  • ralatredstate

    This presentation is based primarily on a national survey conducted by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research for Democracy Corps. The survey was of 1,001 2008 voters and conducted June 19-22, 2010. Margin of error: 3.1 percentage points.

    All data shown reflects results from 867 likely 2010 voters (866 unweighted;
    margin of error of 3.1 percentage points) unless otherwise noted.

    Do I understand this? They selected at random 1001 people who claimed to have voted in 2008 and then reduced the sample to 867 (or 866) who claimed to be likely voters in 2010? Is that standard polling methology?

    If not, I’d guess the results honestly measured are even worse (or better – point of view).

  • warrior06

    As the Confederate Cavalry general Nathan Bedford Forrest was wont to say: ‘keep up the skeer”. Now is not the time to lay back and rack in the winning votes in November. We all need to keep up the pressure, and never let our Democratic foes rest. By keeping up the pressure we force them into making mistakes that we can capitalize on, forcing them into more mistakes. We have an opportunity for Nov 2d to be of HISTORICAL proportions. We can rest on 3 Nov but until then “keep up the skeer”
    .

  • throwback59

    asked if they thought the word “socialist’ described Obama, 55% agreed.
    I assume the other 45% chose “Marxist.”

  • rdelbov

    in my opinion then 48R-42D for the following reasons:

    1. In house races the democrats tend to be concentrated in inner city/urban/minority seats. So +60 democratic districts had a 70% Obama majority in 2008 while a mere dozen or so GOP seats had a 70% McCain vote. The playing field for the GOP (not predicting that number of seats) is therefore in the 265 to 280 range for the house. Boehner said a 100 seats in play and at +6 that’s about right.

    2. This +6 gap is largely driven by conservative/GOP voters feeling passionate about changing DC. strong conservative republicans like Paul-Angle-Rubio have the best chance to excite. Its alway better have the passion and people on your side.

    3. Yes there are discouraged democrats so some blue dogs will suffer as liberals stay home but on the flip side being lukewarm in your views does not win you conservative votes–so think Shular-Ellsworth and others who are faux conservatives–they lose both ways.

  • clintonformccain

    Darn you Moe Lane. I’m laughin’ so hard, I just pulled a Mama Cass and now I’m choking on a ham sandwich:

    “Democratic candidates should run as outsiders and independents that battle to change Washington.”

    How, on earth, do you run as an outsider when your party has supermajorities in the House and Senate and contols the White House? That’s about as insider as it gets.

  • clintonformccain

    OK, Ya’ll gotta click the link to the poll results PDF in Moe’s blog post and check out Page 23. It’s priceless.

    A “word cloud” presentation of the reasons why poll responsdents disapprove of Barack Obama’s job performance.

    I’d like to frame it and hang it on the wall. Classic.

  • eastbaylarry

    I wonder if Obama even cares though.

  • Menlo

    That was quite a shock to me. And such a critique was once put on par with those of the “birthers.”