Poll numbers show Democrats at disadvantage

[Savannahmann]

A few days ago I highlighted a problem that we were studiously ignoring. Both parties are ignoring this issue, and doing so with a determination that boggles the imagination. The problem was the 55 Million people who are out of work, and not counted because they were not actively seeking employment. They had given up, surrendered to the despair of the current economic circumstances.

Today, the Washington Post and ABC News released their most recent join poll results. They are abysmal for Democrats. The Republicans stand an excellent chance to keep the House. That's bad enough, but it is looking increasingly likely that the Republicans could pick up the six seats they need to sieze control of the Senate.

I'm going to exerpt a bit of the story.

A majority (56 percent) say that, based on personal experience, the economy has begun to recover. But only 18 percent say it is a strong recovery. Four in 10 call the recovery weak, and the rest say it has not begun.

Barely half the people think we are in a recovery. Fully 40% say it is a weak recovery. That is because we as a people are ignoring the 55 million people who are not employed, and aren't counted. Think about that my friends. We're talling 55 million people that they and their familes don't count.

Now people think we are better on some of the key issues, but we're not doing anything on those issues. President Obama is not talking about those 55 Million people who have given into despair. No one is talking about them. We are ignoring the issues that matter, and while people think we would vote on fixes, if we ever got around to a vote, we aren't pounding the table and the people notice.

People look at Washington. All the Democratic Politicians say is that it is the Republicans fault. All the Republicans say is that it is the Democrats fault. Nobody is talking about issues. We are asking people to get to the polls and vote against Republicans. They did that in 2006, 2008, and 2012. They're aren't going to turn out and vote against a party forever. It's past time that we stood for something other than the Republicans are bad.

Neither party is showing any leadership. And that is what the people desperately want. They don't want endless speeches on bandaid fixes to the huge problems. They want leadership, bold ideals. In eight months we go to the polls and cast our ballots. If we continue on the same path, we are going to find ourselves in the minority in both houses of Congress. Then my friends, the problems really begin. Because then the view of who is obstructionist will change dramatically. Congress will pass legislation, and President Obama will veto it. Democrats will be seen as obstructionist.

So any bets on if we tackle the tough problems? Anyone want to guess if Democrats put forward plans on the issues that matter to the people? Personally, I don't think so. I think Democrats are going to continue bleeting about the band aids like that's all the nation, it's all the economy needs. I think we're going to ignore the problems until it is too late. I think we're going to keep sounding the trumpets as the unemployment numbers keep going down from people giving up and no longer being counted. I think we're going to ignore privacy and resist reigning in the Government Perverts grabbing screen shots of teenaged girls dressing in their rooms from hotwired webcams. I think we're going to ignore out of control police and let more people be victimized by the authorities. Because if we notice the problem, and start talking about it, we might have to admit that things are not as awesome as we pretend they are, and that would me we have to work. It's just easier to say it's all the Republicans fault.

[Lurks Often]

1. Historical patterns strongly suggest we will NOT regain the House and MAY

lose control of the Senate.

Of course I am sure some will be along shortly to dispute both of us and probably toss in some insults for good measure.

[BlueCaliDem]

5. Historical voting patterns strongly suggested that we'd NEVER elect a BLACK president.

Historical voting patterns strongly suggested that we'd NEVER re-elect a president with a weak economy and high unemployment.

And guess what?

So let's not set our hair on fire just yet. The elections are still six months away, and in politics, six months is a lifetime.

And IF historical voting patterns prove correct, that Democrats will lose the Senate as well, well, then historical patterns prove, beyond any doubt, that the majority of Americans ARE as dumb and ignorant as the back-end of a mule - and they will prove the oligarchs correct, that the people really are a bunch of herd animals to be led off to the slaughter at their whim.

[Lurks Often]

8. I'm not setting my hair on fire, but historical patterns can give indications of the future

and tend to be more objective.

[BlueCaliDem]

12. Until they're not. As last election showed us.

The demographics have changed. The last election should give people an idea just how much. The fact of the matter is, the minority demographic in this country is growing fast and furious, and with Republican anti-minority bills continuing to pass instead of dealing with the problems people are facing, at least minorities will come out, en masse, to prevent a Republican takeover of the Senate. There's nothing we can do about the House, though, if 1.5 million more votes in last election couldn't flip the House to the true majority Party (Democrats).

But like I stated in my previous post, it's too early. We're six months out. But I really don't see the Senate going to the Republicans. I really don't.

[Lurks Often]

16. I'm certainly not going to try and predict the Senate

MAYBE a month out, but certainly not now.

[BlueCaliDem]

17. Then I'm confused.

Didn't your original post predict, based on historical voting patterns that strongly suggest that Republicans MAY win the Senate? And that some will be along shortly to dispute your doomsday scenario? Seems like you'd already made up your mind right there.

I'm not that pessimistic. On the other hand, I have zero faith in the ability of Americans to do the correct thing for this country so you can say I'm cautiously optimistic. They just might get an epiphany in the last month or so before election day.

[Lurks Often]

18. I said MAY win the Senate, not will

I do expect them to pick up at least a couple of seats and Montana will almost certainly elect a Republican this year.

[rurallib]

2. maybe I am an idiot, but to me Democrats have shown leadership

at least some have. But they are obstructed at every turn either by the House or by the stupid Senate rules.
In some cases Obama has shown some real leadership, others not so much.

The problem is the perception - the media goes a long way toward setting perceptions. With the media about 99% corporate controlled those they perceive as their enemies are beaten about the head daily. Thus I am actually surprised Democrats are doing as well as they are. That may be due to the fact that the one media corporations do not fully control yet is the internet.

The Republicans understand that most people feel that the President can act on his own to make changes and thus deserves all the blame which he shares with his party. Thus in an attempt to get even a small step forward Democrats are forced to use what band-aids they can get.

[stillwaiting]

7. The problem is too many elected Democrats don't put the blame where it belongs.

They need to forcefully, clearly, and repeatedly state to the people (WHENEVER they are on television), that they are frustrated they haven't been able to do X, Y, and Z… because of the historical obstructionism by the Republicans.

They are more interested in peddling the bi-partisan narrative, and all that does is give the Republicans a gigantic, enormous, gargantuan pass on all of their B.S. behavior. The average person just does NOT get that the Republicans have been so obstructionist, and why would the Democrats want to be so super-bi-partisan-y with the Republicans if they were truly that bad (to an average American's mind).

Elected Democrats have every reason to not want to work with the Republicans. In fact, if they truly want to enact policies for ideas they supposedly support then they need to be CLEARLY telling the American people that although they want to enact X,Y, and Z, these policies will never be enacted if Republicans are in Congress. This is a message that they rarely, if ever, speak, and it truly makes many wonder if they really want to enact the policies they supposedly stand for. They will NEVER be implemented with Republicans. They can't work with Republican to enact them, so they need to repeatedly state that fact. Repeatedly. And again. One more time.

[Savannahmann]

9. Really?

What Democrat has spoken about the 55 million people who are not considered unemployed because they have given into despair over the paucity of employment opportunities?

What Democrat has come out and said the unemployment numbers are misleading?

No, the Democrats come out and complain that the Republicans won't vote on a minimum wage bill that will help at a maximum 3 million people, and according to the GAO will lose half a million jobs. They do this while celebrating the greatest economic recovery in the history of history. At best the minimum wage hike would be a band aid on the patient who is bleeding out from a torn femoral artery.

So we turn our back on 1/6th of the population, and hope that somehow a majority of the people will vote for us because they wouldn't be dumb enough to vote against their own interests. But are we fighting for their interests? What have we given them to vote for?

Whenever we do see a discussion about jobs, it's something asinine like people given the freedom from employment. That spin followed the equally well received Funemployment stories.

It's bullshit spin and has nothing to do with reality, and it is driving away those supporters we need to vote for us.

The Republicans are complaining that President Obama is via Executive Orders changing the laws at a whim. They even use the term Imperial Presidency. Before we take a position based upon what we think the Republicans are saying, we should figure out what they are saying.

[earthside]

3. Democrats may be blowing it again.

Democrats must nationalize this election to make it a referendum on Tea Party-Repuglican extremism.

There is a Tea Party-Repuglican outrage almost everyday -- enough material is not the problem.

For instance, there is a report out today about a Mississippi Tea Party-Repuglican saying that the biggest mistake the country made was ever allowing women to vote --- stories like this ought to be turned into TV ads and run nationally from now until election day.

Where is the DNC, the House and Senate campaign committees working to nationalize the 2014 elections as a rejection of Tea Party-Repuglican extremism?

Of course, if Pres. Obama approves the Keystone XL pipeline, one of the most dependable parts of the Democratic base will be discouraged from participating (like dropping the public option did to the base in 2010).

Democrats have the majority of people in this country with them ... but it looks like they are getting bogged down in being defensive about Obamacare and in lacking inspiration and boldness to counter the clearly energized Repuglicans.

Democrats ought to win in a landslide in November, but risk-aversion and the notion that they have to appeal to 'conservative' voters may cause them to blow this election like they did in 2010.

[Savannahmann]

10. Tea party extremism?

Again, that is the problem. We're calling on people to vote against the opponent, instead of offering something to vote for. What we are saying doing that is that we have nothing to offer except that the other side really sucks. It is an admission that we suck, they just suck more.

[BlueCaliDem]

13. Well, it's worked for the Republitarian Party, hasn't it?

Why do you doubt it can work for Democrats?

We've tried it your way. IT DOESN'T WORK. It only resulted in getting MORE Republicans elected.

Demonizing the Republican candidate IS the way to go. People need a reason not to vote Republican because Koch money will go on the attack of any Democrat, be that attack truthful or not, while not promising the voters anything.

In a time of instant gratification and 100 mbps Internet speed, I believe you overestimated the intelligence of the average American voter. They don't give a good goddamn what the Democrats promise, because Democrats are incapable of outright over-promising simply because corporate media won't give them the same deference as they do the Republitarian Party. The American people have become the same as the spectators of the Gladiator fights of Ancient Rome: show me some blood.

That's how Democrats will win. Period.

[Savannahmann]

20. Revisionist History. Awesome.

Because to my recollection, we win biggest when we are running on a platform of being for things, instead of against the other party.

In 2002 we ran on the platform that the Rethugs were rushing to war, we lost. We weren't actually in favor of not going to war, we just wanted to go slower.

In 2004, our platform was ABB. Anybody But Bush. We lost.

In 2006 it was a platform of ethical government, we won.

In 2008 the platform was Hope and Change. We won.

In 2010 it became it's not our fault, and we lost. Between 2008 and 2010 we started using asinine talking points like we have to pass it to find out what's in it. I may never forgive Speaker Pelosi for that one. We went from the Ethical Congress to the don't worry about it we're doing fine Congress.

In 2012 it was the accomplishments of President Obama, and how much more we needed to do. We won the Presidential, picked up a few seats in the House, but not enough. Because our House Candidates were asking people to vote against the Republicans. A vast majority of the voters voted FOR President Obama, not Against Romney.

So let's go further back in history shall we? In 1992 it was the new way Democrats, and they won. In 1994, the Rethugs won by being in favor of the Contract with America.

History seems to indicate that when you run in favor of something, you win. When your platform is that the other guy sucks, you lose.

But we can go ahead and pretend that your way works. I have no idea how we're going to get away with hitting the voters in the head with a shovel so they'll believe it, but that's a problem for tomorrow I suppose.

[BlueCaliDem]

28. Yeah. Yours. AWESOME theorizing - in a LaLa World.

That's your interpretation of how "we" won the elections. And maybe your theories carry some weight, but they were not the deciding factors.

In 2002, we were marching TOWARD an inevitable war, and Americans don't like to change presidents in the middle of it. Republicans did an excellent job milking the 9/11 fears predicated on the American electorate by warmongering corporate media, and Democrats did nothing to counter it. 'member?

In 2004, we were right in the middle of war, and as any political strategist will tell you, the American people don't like to change presidents in the middle of war. Besides, people were pissed off that the DLC successfully sabotaged Howard Dean's campaign with the "Dean scream" that was clearly manufactured and manipulated. Democrats, especially young Democrats - the ones who came out, en masse, for Obama - did not like Kerry, and stayed home. Then Bush's buddy, Blackwell, in Ohio, manipulated the election there and voila! Bush got a second term.

In 2006, we got tired of Republican over-spending and drumbeats for another war (Iran), and so did the CATO Institute. They, and their moneyed ilk, held back from attacking Democrats because they damn well knew that it was high time to put the adults back in charge of the purse strings - but not give them more power than that.

2008 had NADA to do with "Hope & Change" other than the historical election of America's FIRST black president and wanting to be on the side of said first black president. Young people liked him because he was Denzel-like: a cool cat with a Harvard degree.

A vast majority of the voters voted FOR President Obama, not Against Romney.

Yeah. If that's what you want to tell yourself. The reality is, the 47% vid sank Romney's chances to win the White House. So they voted against Romney, not necessarily for President Obama.

You really give the American people waaaaaaaay too much credit for doing the right thing when necessary. I'm more realistic. Americans will always, always do the right thing - after every other alternative is exhausted. And not before.

Maybe you revere the good and positive messages that Democrats can campaign on, which is admirable, but I'm far more skeptical. I've learned that the majority of Americans want to see BLOOD. And the one who draws the most, wins.

When a Republitarian comes out and campaigns on, "I'll work hard for your Jobs! Jobs! Jobs!", the Democrat has to come out and say, "That's what he says now, but while in office he's voted against every single bill that would help you and your family get those jobs. When he talks about jobs, jobs, jobs, he's talking about HIS."

[earthside]

14. Yup. That is it.

In congressional year elections the negative is a more powerful motivator than the positive.
It is just the truth.

Then if, for instance, Pres. Obama approves the Keystone XL pipeline, there isn't even a positive to vote for for base environmental voters -- and that could cost you Sen. Udall in Colorado.

I don't think Democrats have figured out how to win these non-presidential year elections -- the Repuglicans have by highly motivating their most passionate supporters. That's what Democrats need to do, too.

[Savannahmann]

21. Yeah.

Like the Contract with America, and the Ethical Congress. Negatives like that. Oh wait, those were postive platforms that actually worked.

[AgingAmerican]

11. Come election time

The Dems tend to be scared of their own shadow. They do not do the right thing because they convince themselves that doing so will cost them votes, which repeatedly costs them elections.

[ProSense]

4. I think

Today, the Washington Post and ABC News released their most recent join poll results. They are abysmal for Democrats. The Republicans stand an excellent chance to keep the House. That's bad enough, but it is looking increasingly likely that the Republicans could pick up the six seats they need to sieze control of the Senate.

...the OP analysis is off.

WaPo title:

Poll: Democrats’ advantage on key issues is not translating to a midterm-election edge

The Post-ABC survey affirms those projections, showing Republicans in a stronger position than Democrats in the states with Senate races this fall and more than holding their own in the battle for control of the House. In the 34 states with Senate races, 50 percent of voters say they favor Republicans and 42 percent favor Democrats.

That is the case despite the Republican Party’s poor image nationally and its deficit on some important issues. About two in three Americans say the GOP is out of touch “with the concerns of most people in the United States today.”

Republican aren't going to win 34 Senate seats, despite that polling.

The actual reason Republicans have an edge is that several Senate seats currently held by Democrats are in states won by Romney in 2012.

Alaska
Arkansas
Louisiana
Montana
North Carolina
South Dakota
West Virginia

I'm going to exerpt a bit of the story.

A majority (56 percent) say that, based on personal experience, the economy has begun to recover. But only 18 percent say it is a strong recovery. Four in 10 call the recovery weak, and the rest say it has not begun.

Barely half the people think we are in a recovery. Fully 40% say it is a weak recovery. That is because we as a people are ignoring the 55 million people who are not employed, and aren't counted. Think about that my friends. We're talling 55 million people that they and their familes don't count.

There is simply no way to spin the fact that 56 percent say "the economy has begun to recover" as a negative.

[BlueCaliDem]

6. Well...

There is simply no way to spin the fact that 56 percent say "the economy has begun to recover" as a negative.

... there is if you're paid by the opposition to post on Democratic Party supporting sites to sow anxiety and discord to the benefit of a do-nothing Republitarian Party.

[Dawson Leery]

27. +1

[One_Life_To_Give]

15. 6 million full time jobs short of 2007

It has been a deep recession and people gave the government the benefit of the doubt. But I sense that willingness to wait is waning. Even people with full time jobs have been impacted by the poor economy. Raises and benefits have suffered during the downturn. Employers know their in the drivers seat and take advantage of it.

This is building an anti-incumbent attitude. Just as no repug could win in 2008 we see peoples patience wearing thin with Dem leadership as well.

[kenny blankenship]

19. The 3% Strategy (being 3% less sucky than Repukes) isn't working anymore.

[woo me with science]

35. +100

[Tikki]

22. We have a giver-upper in our home. He did get medical coverage under the ACA and..

we are hoping this will lift his spirits.

Thing is we can use him around here with our renovation, meanwhile we are subsidizing him here and
we are hoping he will go back to school.

He is 38 years old and has no outlook for the future and even schooling may not make the difference.

We have advertised him as helping with research on our historical preservation renovation. He is doing
an outstanding job with the research and maybe that will make the difference.


The Tikkis

[Savannahmann]

25. It's hard to blame those who have given into despair

Knowing that they struggled for weeks, months to get back to work. Being turned down for jobs that paid half of what they once made, and then being turned down for jobs that paid a fraction of what they made. It has to affect your psyche, and again, I don't know that in the same circumstances that I would be more resilliant.

I hope that you are successful, and I hope things work out. It is a rough world right now, and so many seem to be ignoring it.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

23. So what are you doing about it?

[Savannahmann]

24. Damn it I forgot

You're not allowed to report anything but cheerleading without a detailed plan to turn it around. I keep forgetting those are the rules of DU these days.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

26. Well, it would prove more useful.

Complaining is a reward unto itself sometimes, but it would be nice if DU could get back to its activist problem solving ways of 2005 and earlier.

[Common Sense Party]

29. Don't underestimate the talent the Republicans have for screwing things up.

They still have plenty of time to nominate whackjobs and to make gaffe-tastic insulting remarks.

[Savannahmann]

30. That's not much of a plan

Many in our party are either agnostic, or atheist. Praying to some deity that our opponent self destructs isn't much of a plan IMO.

[Common Sense Party]

33. No need to pray--some of the Repukes are going to crash and burn without any

divine intervention.

No one said "don't have a plan." You certainly did NOT hear me say any such thing.

Plan. Prepare. Canvass. Support decent candidates. Get out the vote. Vote.

All I'm saying is that it probably won't be the disastrous bloodbath the media wants us to think it will be.

[woo me with science]

31. People resent being lied to and manipulated.

When someone looks you in the face and claims to care deeply about inequality, but repeatedly offers up SS cuts, cuts food stamps, and tries to fast-track a "trade" agreement that will force Americans to compete with workers in impoverished countries and slash wages across the board...

...the response won't be mere indifference. It is legitimate anger.

[ProSense]

32. You're

People resent being lied to and manipulated.

When someone looks you in the face and claims to care deeply about inequality, but repeatedly offers up SS cuts, cuts food stamps, and tries to fast-track a "trade" agreement that will force Americans to compete with workers in impoverished countries and slash wages across the board...

...the response won't be mere indifference. It is legitimate anger.

...offering an anti-Obama narrative to justify a poll showing Republican ahead in terms of voting? Did you notice that Democrats are ahead on the issues?

If people "resent being lied to and manipulated," why would they side with Republicans?

5 Reasons Paul Ryan Is In A Budget Jam
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024601975

Krugman: Flimflam, The Next Generation
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024602285

[Demo_Chris]

34. good thread, but as pointless as trying go convince the GOP that 'skewed polls' are a myth...

Some here, perhaps many, believe that winning elections is the end game. For them that's success. But outside these electronic walls people expect their leaders to DO something. Failing that, they at least expect them to try. Failing THAT, at a bare minimum they expect some kind of concrete plan -- something relevant to the problem and that sounds like it might at least possibly work.

We haven't done any of that. We don't even have a plan other that do something slightly less than the GOP is calling for. So basically we look like Republicans, only perhaps a bit nicer and a whole lot less competent. The only thing we have going for us is that batshit crazy social conservative Christian wing of the GOP. No one, including the GOP, wants those nutcases in power, but if the American people are given the choice between having a job and protecting Gay rights, those jobs will come first every time.

The GOP is out there every day saying "This is why you don't have a job." Their reasons might be bullshit, but at least they are talking about it. And in the meantime we aren't fighting for jobs, we're fighting for new job destroying trade deals, more austerity, more domestic spying, Chained CPI, and all the rest.

Come 2014 and 2016 it is gonna bite us in the ass with a vengeance.