New Polls: Democrats Heading for Disaster?

Dark skies ahead for Dems?

Hello Conflucians! It’s Tuesday after a long weekend, so we’re getting a slow start.

Three new polls were released today, along with a forecast from a group of political scientists. The results don’t look good for Democratic chances in the November elections. MSNBC’s First Read asks whether “a GOP tidal wave [is] building.”

With the official start of the campaign season now underway, the latest NBC/WSJ poll shows Republicans leading on the generic ballot by nine points among likely voters (49%-40%) and 18 points among those expressing a high interest in the midterms (53%-35%). Among registered voters, however, the score is even (43%-43%), suggesting that Democrats can limit their losses if they turn out their voters. The current political environment, in some respects, is worse than it was in 1994 or 2006. For example: 61% currently believe the country is on the wrong track. But at this point in time in ’06, 54% said this, and in ’94, it was 57%. Yesterday, President Obama accused Republicans of being of the party of “No, no, no, no.” But, according to this poll, “No, no, no, no” seems to be working for the GOP. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/06/AR2010090602161.html?hpid=topnews

At the Wall Street Journal, we’re told to “Get ready for an anti-incumbent wave.”

Mounting economic gloom and a controversial agenda are exacting a heavy toll on their prospects for keeping control of Congress in the Nov. 2 elections, according to a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll.

The poll, taken to coincide with the traditional Labor Day kickoff of the campaign’s home stretch, shows the Democrats’ biggest problem is a wide passion gap: Voters angry at Democrats are fired up to vote, while many who like them are yawning over the coming election.

When voters overall are asked whether they prefer that November’s vote produce a Congress controlled by Democrats or by Republicans, they split evenly, 43% favoring Democrats and 43% Republicans.

But among those who appear most likely to vote, based on their level of interest in the campaign and their history of voting, the Republicans own a dramatic 49% to 40% advantage. If that kind of lead holds, Republicans would almost certainly take back control of the House.

Here’s a link to the poll results (PDF)

The Washington Post-ABC poll came out today too, and the results are similar.

Republicans are heading into the final weeks of the midterm campaign with the political climate highly in their favor, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. Americans are increasingly frustrated by a lack of economic progress, deeply dissatisfied with the federal government and critical of President Obama’s leadership.

For the first time in more than four years, Republicans run about evenly with Democrats on the basic question of which party they trust to handle the nation’s biggest problems. Among registered voters, 40 percent say they have more confidence in Democrats and 38 percent say they have more trust in Republicans. Three months ago, Democrats had a 12-point advantage.

On the economy, 43 percent of voters side with Republicans when it comes to dealing with financial problems, while 39 percent favor Democrats. (Fifteen percent say they trust neither party more.) Although not a significant lead for Republicans, this marks the first time they have had any numerical edge on the economy dating to 2002. In recent years, Democrats have typically held double-digit advantages on the issue.

CNN’s latest poll is also out today

A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Tuesday indicates that 46 percent of Americans say that Republicans in Congress would do a better job dealing with the economy, with 43 percent saying that Congressional Democrats would do a better job on the top issue on the minds of Americans. The GOP’s three point advantage is within the poll’s sampling error.

The Republicans’ 3-point edge is a big shift from last year, when the Democrats held a 52 to 39 percent advantage. The GOP leads 51 percent to 32 percent on the economy among Independents, and they have a 9-point advantage on the issue among voters 65 and older.

The poll shows Dems with only slightly better numbers than Repubs on Social Security. It’s a shame President Obama had to turn over the reins of the cat food commission a conservative Dem and a complete nut like Alan Simpson, because now they really aren’t in a position to play the SS card anymore.

Finally, at Huffpo, Joseph Bafumi, Robert S. Erikson and Christopher Wlezien report the results of their “preliminary 2010 forecast” which “will appear (with other forecasts by political scientists) in the October issue of PS: Political Science.”

How many House seats will the Republicans gain in 2010? To answer this question, we have run 1,000 simulations of the 2010 House elections. The simulations are based on information from past elections going back to 1946. Our methodology replicates that for our ultimately successful forecast of the 2006 midterm. Two weeks before Election Day in 2006, we posted a prediction that the Democrats would gain 32 seats and recapture the House majority. The Democrats gained 30 seats in 2006. Our current forecast for 2010 shows that the Republicans are likely to regain the House majority….

By our reckoning, the most likely scenario is a Republican majority in the neighborhood of 229 seats versus 206 for the Democrats for a 50-seat loss for the Democrats. Taking into account the uncertainty in our model, the Republicans have a 79% chance of winning the House.

So what are you hearing? Please consider this a news post, and feel free to use the comments to post links to stories on any topic. And have a terrific Tuesday!!!!

131 Responses

  1. I voted yesterday in my state’s early voting primary. The only Dem incumbent I voted for was our governor, who really has done a good job (our state is one of the few with a strong budget and actual, if small, job creation) and is facing a truly insane and evil Republican opponent–and we know he’s insane and evil because we already tried him once and booted him after one term! (I guess he’s thinking the anti-incumbent wave will carry him up and away.)

    Nobody else. Voted for non-incumbents in every other category, including our sainted Senator-for-life. Sadly, I couldn’t vote against our county councilmembers, who are all running unopposed, so I just left the slate blank for them. In the general I’ll vote for whoever is opposing them even if it’s Beelzebub J. O’Whackadoodle.

    I’m planning on that being my only Dem vote this election. I don’t care who the Democratic Party runs, assuming they decide to primary Obama. I wash my hands of them.

  2. Thanks, bb!

    After reading an NPR article “Voters To The Parties: It’s A Date, Not A Marriage”, I decided that it’s fine to say these “guys” are rotten lets vote them out. But it seems like an endless cycle of rotten. When do we get to vote some decent representatives in.

    At this point I’m for term limits. Just voting against doesn’t cheer me. Let the system rout them out.

    http://www.npr.org/blogs/watchingwashington/2010/09/07/129696539/voters-to-the-parties-it-s-a-date-not-a-marriage?ft=1&f=1001

    • I know what you mean, but term limits are already in place. The house has 2 years, the senate 6, and the president 4. I don’t like the California term limits. It has done nothing to change the dynamics of how bad the incompetence of politicians in the state. Money from lobbyists is the problem.

  3. dancingopposum, I saw a Dem today say that she viewed the R’s rather like chemotherapy for 2010. Everyone knows chemo is poison. But if you do nothing about the cancer you’re dead anyway. Of course, you can’t let chemo go too far, or you’re still dead.

    That’s the precipice our nation is on. I predict a huge chunk of the “moderate middle” in America, as well as hyper-partisans on both sides, doing a lot of swing voting in the next few elections, trying to give various forms of medicine to the body politic. That’s not a statement of whether I think that is good or bad (it’s both) – it’s merely a statement of what is going to happen IMO.

  4. Ok, this is pretty much a done deal. We knew months ago they had lost the Independents.

    But here’s a question for discussion: After the midterm wipeout, which administration official will Obama ask to “spend more time with his/her family” to recoup?

    I vote Larry Summers. But I’d love to hear other people’s speculation.

    • Larry has a Y chromosome. He’s probably safe.

    • I think Geithner is going to walk the plank.

      • I’m not sure. Obama hasn’t tossed him yet despite many calling for his head and I don’t get the impression Obama much cares what us peasants think.

        • Yes, and they go way back. Iirc, they were childhood friends and their families were tight.

          • What?? who was a childhood friend of Summers (or Geitner for that matter)? families tight? please explain

          • I think Erica is talking about Barack Obama and Tim Geithner. Obama’s mother worked on microcredit with Geithner’s father. So there’s a connection there. Not sure how close it was.

    • “But you [Rahm] and your boss better do something fucking quick to put people back to work.”

      That’s a closer reference to Obama than “White House” and “this administration” anyway!

    • I find Michael Moore irritating as hell sometimes. But this is a great rant. Love this:

      “How ’bout making it a crime to take an American job and move it out of the country? In other words, treat it as if it were a fucking national treasure like you would if someone stole the Declaration of Independence out of the National Archives or some poacher stole eggs out of the nest of an American bald eagle.”

      If only we had leadership and that leadership were truly Democratic. Great stuff!

  5. May I add that the resurgence of conservatism in the GOP is a direct result of the poobahs being all too aware that the conservatives sat on their hands in 2008. They were not happy with the “moderate” McCain, and flexed their muscle.

    Do ya think that liberals might learn a LESSON from that? WHY is it that the GOP jumps when their far right base says jump, but the Dems feel free to spit on the left?

    I’ll tell you why. Because the left does not have the balls to do what the right does with regularity: Prove to their party that they can and WILL withhold their votes.

    So long as the Democratic party believes “Yeah, they’ll bitch, but they’ll vote for us anyway”, that is never going to change.

    • You are right. Good point. We hear from the Ds that the left has no place to go.

      Well, suck on this! — Thomas Friedman (5/30/2003 with Charlie Rose)

      • Since the D’s aren’t behaving like D’s wtf is the difference? They even sold us out on birth control and abortion.

        fuck’em all!

    • This is why I say that only Hillary can stop me from voting for Palin in 2012. Hillary is the last Dem I voted for, she’ll be the first Dem I ever vote for again. So the Dems better make damn sure she runs in 2012 if they want my vote.

      Otherwise it’s Indies, 3rd party, or even GOP. The Dems are dead to me.

    • See I think this reactionary voting is because we do not have liberals in office and that was what was sold last election cycle to the American public after 8 years of W; liberalism was what was expected of the current crowd in Washington. “Vote ‘em out because they are not doing what we expected them to do” sorta thing. I’m not saying it is logical to vote for Republican or Conservative Democrat to try and get back to a more liberal agenda, just that this is a “throw the bums out” movement.

      And if the economy it is not better in 2012, look for the “bums” to be tossed again, this time the Republicans.

      Americans seem fed up and frightened now that “hope and change” haven’t worked out.

      I’m probably not voting this round. I’m in NY and so the cities vote dem the suburbs vote repub like clockwork. The only person I wanted to see re-elected was Paterson, and the Obama administration took care of that.

    • Ding. Ding. Ding. Ding.

      That’s exactly what I heard when I sucked up all my pride and campaigned for McCain to the Republican base who would not vote for him … “we can wait.”

      I hang my head in shame at how truly stupid my Obot friends are. They lost all semblance of power to influence anything political in 2008.

    • I used to believe that, but I don’t anymore. The Democrats only ever learn one lesson, and that’s move to the right. Nader voters were the difference in 2000, but that meant nothing. There was no attempt to accomodate those leftish votes. Fundamentally, I don’t think the Dems believe there are enough leftish votes out there to ever be worthwhile, and maybe they’re right. Maybe if it was demonstrated otherwise in a direct way, with huge margins for Green candidates year after year, they might get it eventually. But believing as they do that liberal policies have limited appeal, watching Repubs cruise to victory with revved up voters, they’re taking the opposite message.

  6. Here’s what bothers me about all of the “anti-incumbent”, the Dem’s are going to lose the House and Senate stuff. Please keep in mind, I’m not an apologist for the Dems and I’m not a Dem anymore, but are we supposed to reward the Republicans for their attitude that they are going to block any progressive legislation? The Republicans have been nothing but obstructionists all along. I’m not happy that the Dems let themselves get out maneurvered, but I really, really, really don’t want the Republicans in power again.

    I’d love it if the voters sent a message to the Republicans and didn’t vote for them in the midterms just because they’ve been such obstructionist a-holes. It’s just a shame that it would be interpreted as a vote of approval for the Democrats.

    Also, I don’t trust the polls. I think they are designed, not to reflect voter sentiment, but rather to influence it.

    • I’m not rewarding the Rs, but punishing the Ds. It’s not the same thing. I’ve survived Nixon, Ford, RR, and two Bushes. I’m not afraid of the Rs. That’s all the Ds offer, be afraid, be afraid of the Rs.

      • Agree.

        Besides, all that “obstructionist R’s” bullsh*t is just that: bullsh*t.

        The Dems coulda passed anything they wanted before Scott Brown. They CHOSE to pass corporate health insurance reform, to keep the original stimulus low, to give the big banksters a pass.

        An old quote from Paul Krugman, Nov. 14, 2008: “My own back-of-the-envelope calculations say that the package (Stimulus) should be huge, on the order of $600 billion.”

        The “R’s are obstructionist” meme is a total copout. It’s bullsh*t.

      • Well, I’m afraid of the R’s, the ones now are mostly nuts. But the D’s have turned into R’s so what do you do. I have been thinking about this since May 31st, 2008. I understand why the Clinton’s stay with the party, they can only move forward within the party but I just can not keep voting for 2% less evil. I thought about not voting but I just can’t. My grandmother would come back and kill me. She was there in Tennessee for the vote August 18th 1920. Until there is a real third party it’s never going to change. I think a this moment, I will vote green ( after I’ve looked at their record) or a D when a R is more insane, (that last sentence I wrote made me laugh). I really believe until the people of the United States are dying in the streets, nothing will change. All we do is keep switching parties when neither does anything but feed the rich, corporate elite overlords. I’m really at the point of , there is nothing I can do until the mass of the country says ” I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore”.

        • Agreed. pdgrey. This election is beyond perplexing. I will not vote for an Obamacrat but I will not vote for a Far Right Republican or Tea Party candidate spouting Bible verses and “Long-Live the Republic.”

          I’ll go 3rd party or do the inconceivable: not vote at all.

    • The way the last two cycles have gone in 2006 and 2008 has been anti whomever is in power at that second. The same thing is happening in 2010. People are not voting FOR Republicans but rather against Democrats. Whichever party pulls their heads out of corporatist butt will win two elections in a row. If neither does we will see regional parties start up. Most people truly dislike both parties. Whether either party has enough sense to wise up is doubtful but when old bulls get defeated it signals that serving in the House is a two year gig only which is not enough to get experience or contacts to lobby or do anything else. And cutting off funding to sitting Congresspersons because they want to save all of their money for Obama 2012 is the kiss of death to the current leadership of Democrats.

    • If they can rely on your vote, why on earth would they ever listen to you?

      A protest vote is a powerful thing. And sadly, at least in the Democratic party, we don’t have democracy in the primaries, so that’s the only option we have.

    • I believe that we shouldn’t vote for ANY incombants – dem of rep – throw them all out – and if they screw us again – throw them all out the next time too until they get the message that they work for us! :mad:

  7. I don’t see all Repubs as a-holes—or Dems for that matter. I think things work best when we have a political split in the power chain. That keeps both parties more in check. But I really think we need to examine the belief that government is the answer. Neither government or business or private organizations are going to be THE answer but the huge focus on national politics is somehow wildly off track and just plain not working.

    As for the polls—-is it ok to say, “I told you so, damn it.”

    • I wonder if Nancy Pelosi finally realizes it wasn’t just “astroturfing.”

      (snort)

    • Government that works for citizens is most definitely a big chunk of the answer. I’m not in favor of privatizing one more thing. In fact, we need to get some of our contracts back.
      I don’t buy that “government is not the answer” crap. It’s totally a Reagan thing that needs to be stomped out.

      • Honk, honk. Wall Street will never put the interest of the people first. We are the government. We choose (okay, sort of) those in office, pay with taxes for everything the government does, and sacrifice our family when called to war to protect it. We have to make government work. If the current government is not answer, then we need to change it, but we cannot throw our hands up and walk away.

      • “I don’t buy that “government is not the answer” crap. It’s totally a Reagan thing that needs to be stomped out.”

        honk, honk!

      • Govt that works is a big part, I agree. However, the choices that the public perceive as being before them are these:

        1) Give a blank check to a wasteful, power-grabbing, tone-deaf, crony-rewarding, arrogant and ever-more-bloated-bureaucracy in bed with the corporate boyz.

        2) Take yer chances with the corporate boyz alone, with no govt partner to tilt the scales for them.

        Efficient, effective, transparent government that fairly does what it needs to do, no less and no more, is not even on the menu. And until it is, voters are going to pick option number 2, every fucking time.

      • “government is not the answer” crap
        The government is or at least should be the people. So when people say that, they’re effectively saying “the citizens running things is not the answer”. And of course the only alternative we have is mega corporations. IOW, honk, honk. :-)

      • Riverdaughter, boy do I agree with the anit-privatizing thing.

      • OMG, “honk, honk” seems to be taking on a life of its own.

  8. I posted over at Corrente (first time) and I invite you all to read it; it’s just my short pov on how the same people that own the GOP and the Dems use hate (and fear) to get our votes.

    Strategic Hate Management.
    http://www.correntewire.com/strategic_hate_management

  9. I am old enough to remember when, no matter who was in the White House, people always thought Democrats were better on economy – which is why R’s typically used national security to trump this.
    I remember Krugman at the time of the half assed stimulus

    I see the following scenario: a weak stimulus plan, perhaps even weaker than what we’re talking about now, is crafted to win those extra GOP votes. The plan limits the rise in unemployment, but things are still pretty bad, with the rate peaking at something like 9 percent and coming down only slowly. And then Mitch McConnell says “See, government spending doesn’t work.”

    http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/06/stimulus-arithmetic-wonkish-but-important/

  10. Not sure what’s going on here. Maybe the Democrats WANT to lose. There’s a definite strategy there. Let the Republicans have their way- completely. Let them live out their conservative wet dream. Let them completely rip open what is left of the social safety net and let all middle class Americans tumble down until they reach their natural level, so to speak. Bring on the Great Depression as it it was only on hiatus for 70 years. That’s what people want, right? The Democrats only hear the noisy Tea Party people and they think that Tea Party people represent everyone else. So, let the Tea Party have its way. Let’s all become rugged individualists, let Natural Law reign supreme, force everyone to go to church or become social outcasts, learn to live with malnourishment and urgent medical problems blissfully unattended and working poor struggling to pay the gas to get to each of their three less than minimum wage jobs. Maybe noblesse oblige is the only way to make the rich feel important. Or they can simply pass judgement on the undeserving poor and trample them beneath the wheels of their carriages as they hasten forth to their weekend retreats.
    The Democrats can rely on Obama to bravely stand up to the Republicans and veto all of their crazy ass shit.
    Or not.
    Obama is a softie. He’ll cave. He’s got to polish his mashie niblicks and brush the dirt off his shoulders or they won’t ask him to the post presidential soirees.
    He’s going to be all swave and deboner.
    FDR he’s not.
    So, once the Republicans have done their worst as the Democrats gingerly step out of the way, Americans will have learned their lesson, by golly. They won’t ever do THAT again. They’ll welcome Democrats back with open arms and all will be copacetic and life will return to its stagnant normal.
    If that’s NOT the plan, then the Democrats really need to get their shit together. They all need a class in personal power and how to use it. On a scale of 0-9, you want to be in the 6-7 range to be effective. Right now, Democrats are working in the passive zone, right about level 2-3.
    If your opponent goes up to 8, you have to go to 8 until they back down. It doesn’t work if you shut up and sit down. Republicans take advanced degrees in this subject. The short summary is, if they go up in aggression, you go up in aggression.
    Or as Sean Connery says in the Untouchables:

    Malone: And *then* what are you prepared to do? If you open the can on these worms you must be prepared to go all the way. Because they’re not gonna give up the fight, until one of you is dead.

    Ness: I want to get Capone! I don’t know how to do it.

    Malone: You wanna know how to get Capone? They pull a knife, you pull a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue.

    Forget about the Chicago Way. This is the way all power is played. You can never back down if you want to win. And to back down when you still have a majority is inexcusable. That’s why Democrats are losing in the polls. The public is tired of excuses.

    • I think the Ds are not only owned, though they are owned, they’re doing what they believe in.

      That’s why the Ds need to go the way of the Whigs as soon as possible.

      • Don’t know about that. If it’s true, then we’d all be better off in the end. But from now until that endpoint, it’s going to be extremely painful.
        Like surgery without anesthesia. I hope the patient doesn’t die of shock while we cut out the gangrene.
        Still, it’s that or a sure death.

        • Optimist! :-)

          But if you take the view that the only way to get a donkey’s attention is to hit it over the head with a 2×4, the position I’m taking certainly will do that, if broadly adopted.

    • If your opponent goes up to 8, you have to go to 8 until they back down. It doesn’t work if you shut up and sit down. Republicans take advanced degrees in this subject. The short summary is, if they go up in aggression, you go up in aggression.

      It seemed that the Dems tried in some muddled way to “up the aggression”, but unfortunately they are either too stupid or too corrupt to aim it at the actual opponent.

      So with whom did they get aggressive? The People. The voters. Both right and left. Bill Clinton knew that if there is one enduring truth in the shifting sands of politics, it is this: You NEVER insult and deride the voters. Not even the ones who are bonkers. Aim at the politicians, NEVER at the people.

      Because when you do, you set up a dynamic where Joe Average Centrist voter starts identifying with his conservative neighbor who is being called horrible names, NOT with you.

      • >>You NEVER insult and deride the voters. Not even the ones who are bonkers. Aim at the politicians, NEVER at the people.

        Amen, sister/brother. Now, if Democrats REALLY want to win, they will have a little sit down chat with Digby, Kos, Huffpo and Jeralyn and tell them to lay off Sarah Palin’s ass. It is not helping.
        Oh, and kiss up to the martyrs of 2008. You know, all of the Clintonistas, and working class women who knew what was coming and were completely ignored.

        • But…..but…..we have to help Obama! That’s why we must mention Sarah Palin at every possible turn, even though she will never be the nominee!

          The fact that she wears Spanx after having 5 children is newsworthy, doncha know!

          • heck, *I* wear spanx and I’ve only had two.
            But to be honest, I need to cut back on the wasabi almonds and run more. That would be more efficient.

      • Honk honk honk, WMCB.

        One doesn’t recruit voters by SNEERING at them constantly, berating others as raycists or bitter, clingy ignoramouses.

        Duh.

      • Yes, and that is why I don’t get D’s always kicking down, never up. If I hear “trailer trash” one more time. I’ll *******!!!!

    • Riverdaughter, I wish I wrote that.

  11. i forgot to mention that elevating the aggression level will get David Broder’s knickers in a twist. He will tut-tut you for behaving in a partisan manner.
    And if you want to lose, you just keep on listening to him because he’s been SOOO on your side for all these long years.
    You could be bad ass Democrats taking names or you could be completely ineffective student council types. In the end, what’s the media going to do that you haven’t already done to yourselves with your pointless passivity?
    Might as well go out in a blaze of glory and hope for the best and maybe get Broder to faint from the vapors.
    Just sayin’.

    • I just don’t think the Dems are that smart to cook up some elaborate strategy. I think they took us for granted – and still do. Barbara Boxer still thinks I’m going to vote for her. Ha! I can’t do Fiorina, but I despise Boxer now.

      The Dems have no idea what’s coming down the pike. They’ re still in lesser-of-two evils gear. And they’re all stuck anyway with their leser, Mr. Know-Nothing Wishy-Washy.

      • oops, leader I mean, not leser

      • I suspect they are starting to get a clue that November is going to be worse than expected. But if all they are listening to is Fox News, they are going to get mislead and think they have to go right when they really need to go at least as left as the New Deal.
        Well, they’ll learn. It will be a painful lesson. That is, if they even want to win. That’s a big if. Because from what I’m seeing, they look like they are trying really hard to lose.

    • It would knock the crease right out of his pants. He does so admire creases.

  12. For what this is worth, my voting strategy for 2010 at the state and Federal levels:

    1. Do not vote for any D or R, no matter what. Voting for the individual “good apple” tactically simply reinforces the legacy party system, which is our strategic adversary.

    2. Vote for any sane third party candidate (Green, Independent, DFL, whatever).

    3. If there is no third party, vote NOTA (None Of The Above) in the manner demanded by your jurisdiction — write-in, spoiled ballot, or whatever (this takes research). The idea is not to enable the “voter apathy” narrative, but to affirmatively vote against the legacy party system. Only counted votes make the news! Staying at home does not make the news. Wouldn’t it be great to see a crawl reading “!0% vote for None of the above” on election night?

    * * *

    This is my personal view, and others may differ, of course, on how to vote. Some may believe that the Ds can be reformed, but I think, with the D garden as badly mildewed as it is, the only thing to do is uproot the whole thing and then set it on fire. Sorry!

    • Yep, that’s my strategy as well. I think this is what Ian Welsh was suggesting too. If you let the Democrats blackmail you with fear, you will get absolutely nothing from them. They have to be shown up front that you’re not going to put up with the nonsense.
      People MUST vote but those votes have to go to a different party. It needs to be significant enough to make a point. This is quite different from Nader in 2000, which just managed to turn Democrats further to the right. The point of this protest vote is to make sure they realize how much of their base they have lost.

      • The left in this country totally misunderstands their role, IMO. Look, this country is basically centrist. I know some will argue with me on that, but it just is, like it or not. Once you accept that truth, then you see your role a lot more clearly.

        In this country, the people are never going to stand for a rightist’s wet dreams, but neither are they going to stand for a leftist’s wet dreams.

        The far right understands their role quite well: to be the anchor that keeps their party from EVER veering too far left. They KNOW they are not a majority – that’s not their function. And they do their function very effectively (see: McCain, 2008, and the current primaries)

        The left needs to fill that role on our side, but they just refuse to, or fear to. So we end up with a centrist country that gets pull from the right, but none from the left. Oh, the left makes noise, but always chickens out in the end. We’re great at opposing an R administration, but suck at holding our own accountable.

        • Ah, “this country is basically centrist” talking point.

          Can you explain to me how that proposition is to be tested?

          • Well, most polls show approx 40% of the country self-describes as moderate, about 40% self-describes as conservative, and about 20% self-describes as liberal.

            You can argue that there is a bit of muddiness regarding opinion on specific issues, but yeah, the country is basically centrist. And no, I don’t buy the idea that most of the country is stupid and ill-informed and has no idea how to properly label their own political views. Your mileage may vary.

          • IOW, I test it by giving the people the courtesy of taking their own word for it. Works for me.

    • Write-in-voters are not counted, and it’s the same as not voting.

  13. This time was not supposed to be like 1994 when the Dems got wiped out under the much reviled Bill Clinton.

    This time was supposed to be different: The Republicans would be in love with the much more bipartisan Obama and the Dems would have learned their lessons and not self sabotage.

    Plus ca change: Welcome to 1994.

    • We must have the most stupid Democratic politicians on the planet. It has to be stupidity and not greed because you can’t keep your powerful committee seniority if you don’t win the election. And you can’t win the election without voters. And people won’t vote for you if you make their lives harder and don’t fix what is broken.
      The whole point of being a politician is to be a public servant. If the politicians don’t realize this, the voters will remind them. Panifully. That is what these polls are saying.

      • you can’t win the election without voters

        Not only that: You can’t win election with someone elese’s voters. That’s why I was screaming on top of my lungs each someone told me “Obama would be better able to appeal to Republicans” I was fuming and saying “I want him to appeal to DEMOCRATS!!!”

        • It was an amazing shift that happened around 2006 through 2008, more and more people sided with the Democratic party and registered as Democrats. So with that new movement and those new numbers, what did the DNC do, they and their Bush lookalike put their efforts into appealing to the minority, to the few remaining Republicans. WTF?

          • I’ve never understood that disconnect. I think playing up Republican (rejected) policies make them look “serious”.

            Don’t we all want to be appreciated by David Broder?

          • I’m not sure it was a disconnect. I think Obama was a corporate installation. The dems have proven to me that they are just as owned as the repubs.

            Hillary and McCain both are more independent and principled, less apt to be controlled by corporations, Wall Street, or the giant unions, thus, they were both unacceptable candidates to their parties. And that’s why I voted for McCain when I could not vote for Hillary.

  14. Well, all I can say is that I am so looking forward to TC’s day-after-the-election WE TOLD YA SO edition.

    • Yup. Someone make the popcorn and I’ll bring out my bottle of 2008 Schadenfreude.

      It will be a well-deserved defeat by the Dems. Never saw a party work so hard to go down in flames. Truly historic.

    • Got to find a video of one of those carnival laughing women in the booth. And add some appropriate caption message to Pelosi, Reid, Obama, and the DNC.

  15. I am planning to vote for one Democrat in November–Bill White for governor. Rick Perry can’t be allowed to slide into office again on third party votes. He’s worse even than W, who had a couple Democrats in key spots doing the actual heavy lifting.

    • I wish I could still vote for our Dem gov, Ed Rendell, but he’s past his term limit. So instead PA voters will have to pick between GOp & GOP-lite. Ugh.

  16. In December 2008, Time magazine named Barack Obama as its Person of the Year for his historic candidacy and election, …

    Wipeout:

    Two months before the 2010 midterm elections, likely voters now favor the Republican over the Democratic candidate in their congressional district by 53-40 percent, the widest GOP margin on record in ABC News/Washington Post polls since 1981.

  17. If L-ists want to have any hope of salvaging this country from rising fascism, they better come up with better plans than I’ve read above.

    I know my idea gets trashed up and down, but it is a real electoral strategy that does not require years [think decades] of building or “asking” the elite to enact policies they won’t..

    Again, I’m still pretty sure if Colin Powell challenges Barak Obama in 2012 as an independent, he’d kick his ass.

    From earlier:

    “Powell was pressured, lied to…every dirty trick in the book, totally betrayed and left out to dry. Both Bush and the DCL “DINO’s” did a real job on him. He fought the war from the inside and put up a lot more oppositio…n than many “liberal voices” in the press and congress. If you will recall, the entire DC power structure was for this war of aggression. He fed back channel stories that were spiked by editors and producers…the amount of blame Powell receives is far in excess of his role in the invasion. He definitely did try to stop it, yes, he should have resigned, but trust me, had he done so, he would have been vilified by the corporate hacksters we call press.

    I have seen far worse rehabilitated…Biden come to mind. Truth be told, if Powell would get off his sorry ass, get a savvy manager, run the pattern as an independent in 2012…he’d come down with the ball and we could bring an end to 12 years of Bush’s right wing policies. I’m not naive on this, I think some of the ideologies Powell clings to are messed up, but that’s balanced by the fact that the guy regularly sets aside his preconceived notions in favor of what works. He would make a great President, he does understand the office is a duty, he is a leader and he has shown far more courage than the DC lizards who are highly critical of him. Powell should run 2012.”

    • Yea, Powell could do all that, but what would we have then. A guy who when along instead of getting the answers or knowing the right thing to do.

    • Exactly what does “From earlier:” mean.

      Link?

    • Powell will never run against Obama. imho.

    • Where’s the indication that Powell would ever consider running in 2012? There was a lot of noise about Powell [pretty favorable as I remember] running in 2000. But he backed off, said his wife was against it. He had a book come out and people were lined up around the block. He could have easily become the country’s first black POTUS.

      But if Powell didn’t want it then, why would he want it now? BTW, I agree he was used and abused by the Republican Party then fell on his sword in that disastrous UN presentation. Frankly, I was miserably disappointed by that. But I’ve always liked and admired Powell, even though he backed the wrong candidate in 2008.

  18. Pdgrey, I agree Powell is flawed, I think I was clear on this point.

    However Powell is far to the left of Obama in practice and Hillary fans should recall that she made overtures to Powell in 2007, which he stupidly rebuffed in favor of Obama’s bullshit…anyway his ignorance of Obama’s idiocy is somewhat understandable at that point in time.

    Purpfinn, I posted on another blog and on a bloggers/DJ’s facebook…so it acknowledges that i am repeating myself

  19. I think it was Wilkerson who reportedly stated that Powell in remarking about the UN presentation [the WMD spiel] that it was “the worst day of his life.” I read Powell said recently that he didn’t make it up, that he was reporting on the actual intelligience provided. I have no reason to doubt that.

    But I listened and watched Powell deliver that presentation and you could tell the man didn’t believe what he was saying. It was written all over his face. “That” was disappointing. Still, it was a far cry from what Bush and Cheney did, over and over again.

  20. I’ve heard it again and again from the usual suspects, but the experience of watching the reaction of ordinary people over the past 2 years has beaten me down and made me a believer.

    The US ,..IS a center-Right country.. and is NOT center Left.

    To try to claim otherwise in the face of the empirical evidence is engaging in self destructive fantasy.

    The Democratic Party is going to be sent to the woodshed and until it purges the extremist wacko left wing fringe that has turned the majority of voters against the party …OUT of the party..it will never see power again,.

    • The US is more center-left than the CW allows for when it comes to policy specifics, particularly on a lot of domestic issues (this is why people love their social security and their medicare…and why a medicare expansion/medicare for all had been popular in polling even as Obamacare was not), but when there is bad governance by an ostensibly “Democratic” president that was embraced lovingly (and unthinkingly) by the movement progressives at the outset, that brings out the anti-government/anti-anything-left-of-center backlash and brings out the conservative tendencies in people. Good governance, as under the Clinton co-presidents (that’s what they were and it was the best presidency of my lifetime), brings out the liberal in people.

      • People’s politics can change. Everything is constrained by the rightward tilt of the media and the boundaries being pushed by far-right politicians. The role of a political party should be to create space on the left side, to demonstrate in concrete ways that people’s lives can improve and it doesn’t have to be this zero sum race to the bottom. Instead, they try to outflank the Repubs on the right, and pander to the stereotypical voter who they apparently think is the most bigoted right wing wacko imaginable. Not only is that not the way to effect a political realignment in this country, they can never, ever be successful that way, because they’ll always be outflanked right
        back. They have no capability to successfully
        compete for right wing votes, because it will
        never be enough.

        And if only there were actually an extremist wacko left-wing fringe anywhere in the party or indeed the country. :)

Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 256 other followers