Of the 50 seats in Congress that are considered most competitive, ten have Democratic incumbents, and 40 have Republican incumbents. A National Public Radio poll conducted by Democrat Stan Greenberg and Republican Glenn Bolger found a major shift in attitudes in these critical districts.
"In 2004, the total vote in these 50 districts went republican by about 12 points. In our current survey, voters in these same districts say they would vote for the Democrat over the Republican by about six points," according to the NPR report. Importantly, these are voters who go to the polls, with 86% saying they were certain to vote and 16% saying they would probably vote in November. In addition, interest in the November elections is surprisingly high, with 78% voting 8-10 on a ten-point scale.
In the 2000 Presidential election, the voters in these districts supported Bush by 58% and Congressional candidates by 56%. But the pollsters found that Republican candidates, who were polled by name, were only supported by 43% of the respondents. "The results are breathtaking and suggest that in the real world where the campaigns are fighting it out for votes, Democrats are in a very strong position to hold virtually all their seats, while the Republicans could readily lose most of theirs. Clearly, the probability of a Democratic takeover in November is rising, and is more likely than not."
What is surprising are the issues that are driving these attitudes. "When we list values issues like stem-cell research, flag-burning, and gay marriage, these are the issues that Republicans took the initiative, used their control in Congress to get on the air to be voting on, to be talking about," Greenberg says. "What this says: By 13 points, voters say they are more likely to vote Democratic because of hearing about these issues. Which suggests that the strategy of using the Congress to get out the base is one that's driving away a lot of voters."
Even on issues such as Iraq and the economy, the Democrats have an advantage, but not as large. Only on illegal immigration does neither party have an advantage.
.jpg?t=20120527181101)
Article comments
1 - Dave Nalle
Your explanation of the poll and what it means is a bit muddled, because the poll itself doesn't really address who is going to win the elections or how the seats in the house will likely break down. It's more a poll of general attitudes from which the conclusion in your title is derived.
This is the same kind of analysis that all the newspapers and news networks are doing right now - almost completely useless. They're polling 1000 people nationwide and asking them whether they are going to vote Republican or Democrat, or how they feel about key issues and pretending that means something. They're paying no attention to how things break down state by state or how people feel about specific candidates.. Useless.
Apparently it's too much work to go through all the polls for all the elections in all the states and figure out which candidates are actually leading their districts. They have staff, you'd think they could do this.
Actually, I'm sure someone is doing it - but I'm not about to pay $300 for a Rasmussen subscription to find out.
Dave
2 - Mark Schannon
Dave, read the article again. They polled only in those 50 Congressional districts--not nationally. And they named names in the districts--it wasn't a generic "who do you like" poll.
In Jameson Veritas
3 - Dave Nalle
For the most part I was talking in more general terms based on other polls I've looked at which are even worse than the NPR poll.
The poll you linked to did poll the districts in question, but its sample was still meaningless because they only polled 1000 people. That's 20 people per contested district. That's such a small sample that it's utterly worthless. Plus the results aren't even reported on a district by district basis, they're presented as an aggregate percentage, not broken down by district. Knowing that 49% of voters in contested districts support the Democrat and 45% support the Republican is not terribly useful. It could mean that 10 districts have overwhelming Democrat support and the rest lean very slightly pro-GOP.
Sorry Mark, the methodology of this poll is just garbage, and I say that for completley non-partisan reasons. It could just as easily be underestimating Democrat gains. Aside from the issue questions I just don't think this poll tells us anything useful.
Dave
4 - JustOneMan
Polls schmolls....what counts is what people do behind the curtain in the election booth...so far Dems have one platform...Busg Bash...guess what? That strategy may energize the looney left but it will not win elections!
5 - zingzing
i masturbated in the booth.
6 - JP
Damn, JOM, too bad we can't go back to 2004 and then we wouldn't have Bush around to bash!
7 - Jet in Columbus
Wrong JP, the republican congress would've gotten even less than they have with Bush, because they'd be as obsessed with getting Kerry out of office as they were with Clinton.
Zing! I thought that was you...
8 - Lumpy
Zingzing I think that's the ultimate expression of voter satisfaction.
9 - Art T.
I saw a poll that was of 1.4 million homes, you got me I don't remember it. But it stated that hands down immigration is #1 issue.
I am appalled that the pro-criminal supporters control polls to get a desired result. I read the one where 70% of Americans want comprehensive reform, and I knew that wasn't true. Then tonight I find out it's only California. Gee I wonder who they really asked.
I also wonder at this survey tampering if like in 2004 they throw out the votes they don't like.
I see what's going on in and around my community and country. I don't need a poll to tell me different.
If you want to see what comprehensive reform looks like, look at La Nueva Orleans:youtube.com
Lucky for us we don't have to wait until we get screwed to see what it looks like right now.
10 - ss
I read yesterday that in 8 out of 10 major American cities, the communications between the various emergency response teams still has not been standardized, meaning emergency response teams are still unable to communicate with each other during an emegency. I could be wrong, but I believe the Dems still hold the mayors ofice in most large cities. Putting aside, for a second, that fixing this situation is:
A) the right thing to do, and
B) Their job
Just think of the political oppurtunity if they had just taken care of this situation without DC, and they'd put those stories on the local news, two or three nights a week, and they'd played up the fact that they HAD to do it without DC.
I disagree with conservatives to deeply on too much not to vote for the Dems, but I have to admit, I'm not expecting any big swing. Not because the Reps actually represent America, but because the Dems have spent the last 6 yrs whining 'Why don't the Republicans DO something?' instead of working on the level where they had power and getting something done themselves.
11 - Jet in Columbus
I still maintain that with all the republican gerrymandering it'll be touch to undo 10 years of district rigging.
Tantum meus sententia
Jet
12 - Nancy
I have little hope the Republicans will be dislodged; they'll find some way of fixing the elections in future again, which I am convinced they did in the last two, and/or of subverting the USSC to throw them the election again as well. As far as I'm concerned, that is the worst sin committed by Bush, is involving the SC in the election; by allowing themselves to be drawn in, they completely lost their credibility as being neutral & judicial. That rep won't be recovered for years, if ever. Frankly I think in future elections, if the Dems have any sense, they'll insist on elections monitors from outside the US to keep US elections honest, because I don't think they are, anymore. BushCo & Rove have seen to that.