Tag: democracy corps

Democracy Corps (D): Obama 41/55.

What today’s Democracy Corps poll DOESN’T say.

The Greenberg/Carville-sponsored poll certainly does have a good deal to say about the current state of House races, albeit from as positive-towards-the-Democrats position (Hotline called it ‘sugary spin‘) as possible. For example, for all of the talk about how ‘cool’ the electorate was towards Republican incumbents the truth is that they’re averaging a 40/32 approval/disapproval rating, and that the generic Congressional vote went from 48/42 Republican/Democrat in 2010 to 50/41 R/D today (which is up from 46/44 R/D in March). And while the poll will happily tell you that Greenberg & Carville’s recommended message will shift that advantage down to an even-steven 45/45 R/D generic Congressional number, what they don’t mention is that the last time they polled this survey they were able to ‘turn’ a 46/44 R/D into 44/47 R/D. In other words: things have gotten subtly worse for the Democrats since March.

As Hotline said: sugary spin.

But the big numbers here are President Obama’s: he went from a 48/47 approval/disapproval rating in the surveyed districts to a 41/55 today. That… is a disaster; but not as much as one as the fact that both Perry and Romney beat Obama 49/45 and 49/43, respectively. Couple that with the aforementioned incumbent approval ratings, and… well. It is an article of faith among the Democrats that their problems with the electorate are solely due to their poor messaging; if nothing else, this election cycle should test that theory to destruction. Continue reading Democracy Corps (D): Obama 41/55.

June Democracy Corps poll results: DOOM.

Jim, Stan?  You had me at ‘Grim.’

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 RedState.