Democrats jump into six point lead on Generic Ballot

[RecycleMichael]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/141440/Democrats-Jump-Six-Point-Lead-Generic-Ballot.aspx?version=print

July 19, 2010
Democrats Jump Into Six-Point Lead on Generic Ballot
At the same time, Republican enthusiasm for voting in November surges

by Lydia SaadPRINCETON, NJ -- In the same week the U.S. Senate passed a major financial reform bill touted as reining in Wall Street, Democrats pulled ahead of Republicans, 49% to 43%, in voters' generic ballot preferences for the 2010 congressional elections.

The Democrats' six-point advantage in Gallup Daily interviewing from July 12-18 represents the first statistically significant lead for that party's candidates since Gallup began weekly tracking of this measure in March.

"The 51% of Republicans saying they are "very enthusiastic" about voting this fall is up from 40% the week prior, and is the highest since early April -- shortly after passage of healthcare reform."Whether the Democrats' edge is sustainable remains to be seen. Republicans held a four-point or better lead over Democrats in three Gallup weekly averages thus far this year, but in each case, the gap narrowed or collapsed to a tie the following week.

Movement Seen Among Independents

With Republicans' and Democrats' support for their own party's candidates holding steady in the low 90s this past week, independents are primarily responsible for Democrats' improved positioning. Thirty-nine percent of independents favor the Democratic candidate in their district, up from 34% -- although slightly more, 43%, still favor the Republican.

Republican Enthusiasm Spikes

Simultaneous with increased support for Democratic congressional candidates, Gallup polling last week found Republican voters expressing significantly more enthusiasm about voting in the 2010 midterms. The 51% of Republicans saying they are "very enthusiastic" about voting this fall is up from 40% the week prior, and is the highest since early April -- shortly after passage of healthcare reform. Democratic enthusiasm is unchanged, at 28%.

Bottom Line

It's possible the increased voter support for Democratic candidates this past week is linked with the Wall Street regulatory reform bill that passed in the U.S. Senate last Thursday, July 15. The financial reform bill is the second-biggest piece of legislation to get through Congress this year, after healthcare reform, and it enjoyed majority support. According to a USA Today/Gallup poll in June, 55% of Americans were in favor of legislation expanding government regulation of financial institutions -- including 72% of Democrats and 56% of independents. Only Republicans were generally opposed.

Last week also marks the second time that Republican enthusiasm for the fall elections has increased after congressional passage of a major Democrat-sponsored bill. Perhaps these events sharpen Republicans' focus on the opportunity to change Washington in November. Such animation could be crucial to turnout this fall, which could in turn determine the outcome of the midterms.

Since 1950, Gallup's final generic ballot measure, based on likely voters, has closely matched the total percentage of votes cast nationally for Democratic and Republican candidates in all 435 U.S. House races -- a statistic that bears a predictable relationship to the number of House seats won by each party. Gallup does not screen for likely voters until closer to Election Day, but historically, Republicans' turnout advantage in midterm elections changes the Republican-Democrat gap by five percentage points in the GOP's favor. Thus, if these numbers held through Election Day, the two parties would be nearly tied at the ballot box, with possibly a slight advantage for the Democrats.

[guido911]

But will President Carter, er, Obama campaign for them:

http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/checker.aspx?v=XdZuyt6UVr

[Ed W]

Conventional wisdom says that the mid-term election is often a referendum on the President's policies, and for some voters that's undoubtedly true.  But in this mid-term we may be seeing a true difference in each party's approach to governance.  On one hand, we have health care (insurance) reform and a halting approach toward increased regulation of the financial sector and energy production.  On the other hand, we have a party that says "NO!" and holds its breath until it turns blue....er....red.

In all seriousness, the Republicans must jettison the crazies in their ranks.  Otherwise, as those crazies drag the party ever more to the right, they'll lose the moderates they need to win elections.

[heironymouspasparagus]

There was a short run at getting rid of the crazies in 2008, with John McCain.  But then he caved in when it came time to pick a running mate, so we ended up with Obama as reaction.

As an aside;
Got an interesting note from the NRA this week, endorsing and encouraging the election of Drew Edmondson for his efforts to preserve constitutional rights in the form of right to bear arms in the state of Oklahoma.  (Yes, they are serious - the NRA has NO sense of humor and is very serious about this topic.  As am I.)

And the RWRE think that Democrats are all anti-gun!  Not the real ones.  Just like not all Republicans are anti-people.

[we vs us]

We hear a lot about how energized Republicans are, but I wonder how many conservatives like Bruce Bartlett are out there:

"The monumental hypocrisy of the Republican Party is something amazing to behold. And their dimwitted accomplices in the tea-party movement are not much better. They know that Republicans, far more than Democrats, are responsible for our fiscal mess, but they won't say so. And they adamantly refuse to put on the table any meaningful programme that would actually reduce spending. Judging by polls, most of them seem to think that all we have to do is cut foreign aid, which represents well less than 1% of the budget."

In so many places, where the GOP has chased the more conservative vote than the more centrist vote, I will be interested to see who doesn't show up, rather than who does.

[nathanm]

We hear a lot about how energized Republicans are, but I wonder how many conservatives like Bruce Bartlett are out there:

Um. Why is this guy saying many of the things I've been saying? Obviously he's under some sort of rabid left-wing mind control. 

[Conan71]

Who is Bruce Bartlett? Another staunch conservative like Andrew Sullivan? 

[we vs us]

Who is Bruce Bartlett? Another staunch conservative like Andrew Sullivan? 

He was a policy advisor to Reagan and in Bush I's Treasury Dept. Essentially a RINO.   

[heironymouspasparagus]

The Republicontin party and the Dummycrats both have been co-opted by extremists at each end.  Gerald Ford was the last decent Republican President we had and Kennedy was arguably the last Democrat (maybe Truman).  Each successive has been a bigger joke than the previous.  No exceptions now.

[we vs us]

The Republicontin party and the Dummycrats both have been co-opted by extremists at each end.  Gerald Ford was the last decent Republican President we had and Kennedy was arguably the last Democrat (maybe Truman).  Each successive has been a bigger joke than the previous.  No exceptions now.

You're showing your age, Hiero.  Kennedy?  Really?

It's the easy out to say that the D's and R's are equivalent in their looniness.  It's easy and wrong.  There are substantive and demonstrable differences between the two parties right now, and the level to which each has been co-opted.  I'm sorry to report that the Democratic Party is in thrall to centrists, conformists, and in general, weenies and has utterly and entirely ignored its far left.  You don't have to look any farther than the legislation that has been passed to date.  A lot of the initial trial balloons that would've kept the base and its left happy have been scrapped in order to make the right more comfortable.  The sad death of the public option is the quintessential case of the Administration jettisoning even mildly liberal reforms to chase down the approval of the right. 

So it's a false equivalence, comparing the two, and we do so at our detriment.  It further muddies the waters and introduces even more mistrust into the political system than maybe there needs to be.  I mean, there're plenty of reasons of legit reasons to mistrust the D leadership, but being too radical just isn't one of them.

[Conan71]

You're showing your age, Hiero.  Kennedy?  Really?

It's the easy out to say that the D's and R's are equivalent in their looniness.  It's easy and wrong.  There are substantive and demonstrable differences between the two parties right now, and the level to which each has been co-opted.  I'm sorry to report that the Democratic Party is in thrall to centrists, conformists, and in general, weenies and has utterly and entirely ignored its far left.  You don't have to look any farther than the legislation that has been passed to date.  A lot of the initial trial balloons that would've kept the base and its left happy have been scrapped in order to make the right more comfortable.  The sad death of the public option is the quintessential case of the Administration jettisoning even mildly liberal reforms to chase down the approval of the right.  

So it's a false equivalence, comparing the two, and we do so at our detriment.  It further muddies the waters and introduces even more mistrust into the political system than maybe there needs to be.  I mean, there're plenty of reasons of legit reasons to mistrust the D leadership, but being too radical just isn't one of them.

I don't hear a lot of people on the right who are too happy about even the watered down legislation which has passed.  They still view much of it as leftist socialism.  I realize a lot of what gets spouted by the talking heads is hyperbole, but listening amongst my conservative bretheren, it's hard to find anyone who considers the HC reform, Financial reform, stimulus, etc. as being centrist in nature.  Real or not, it's the perception which matters on election day.

[nathanm]

I don't hear a lot of people on the right who are too happy about even the watered down legislation which has passed.  They still view much of it as leftist socialism.

Just because the usual talk radio suspects say it and their parrots repeat it does not mean that it is leftist. As I've mentioned before, the HCR bill is essentially Romney's plan, which is essentially what Nixon's plan in 1972 was.

Then you've got the Congressional Republicans who are more interested in disagreeing with anything and everything coming out of this Congress in a cynical attempt to improve their election chances. These are by and large the same people who were happy to pass Medicare Part D and otherwise balloon the deficit but now complain about expense when a new program is paid for.

It's really sad when the Democrats are the responsible ones and the Republicans are the ones whining like little children.

[Conan71]

Just because the usual talk radio suspects say it and their parrots repeat it does not mean that it is leftist. As I've mentioned before, the HCR bill is essentially Romney's plan, which is essentially what Nixon's plan in 1972 was.

Then you've got the Congressional Republicans who are more interested in disagreeing with anything and everything coming out of this Congress in a cynical attempt to improve their election chances. These are by and large the same people who were happy to pass Medicare Part D and otherwise balloon the deficit but now complain about expense when a new program is paid for.

It's really sad when the Democrats are the responsible ones and the Republicans are the ones whining like little children.

Your opinion and your perception.  Also how far left or how far right a piece of legislation seems to you depends on where your seat is on the political fence.

One cannot get an honest answer about the good or bad of legislation from a legislator because everything is engineered to gain or retain power, not to give constituents what is truly best for them, nor truly following their will.

[nathanm]

Your opinion and your perception.

Why don't you compare the three plans, on a factual basis. Perhaps then you'll realize that there is more in this world than opinion and perception. There are in fact facts. One of them is that the health care law is not a "liberal" law. It ain't a libertarian law, either.

Unless you want to make the claim that Mitt Romney is some kind of bleeding heart liberal. Which I guess you could. At worst it would be pretty funny. Maybe the case is there to be made and you will open my eyes.

[we vs us]

Your opinion and your perception.  Also how far left or how far right a piece of legislation seems to you depends on where your seat is on the political fence.

One cannot get an honest answer about the good or bad of legislation from a legislator because everything is engineered to gain or retain power, not to give constituents what is truly best for them, nor truly following their will.

But the point that nathan (and I) was making still stands:  historically, and by objective standards (ie comparing past legislation), most of the stuff the D's are passing is centrist, and lots of it has Republican origins.  The R's perceive the stuff that's coming through as socialist and as a threat to America, but up till very recently it was considered good policy.

So the question is, why is the legislation suddenly suspect?  The substance hasn't changed, but the people opposing it very obviously have. 

EDIT:  and nathan beat me to it.