Skip to main content

On the Polling and Political Wrap, I'd argue that (and this is a conservative estimate) a quarter of the comments emanate from some criticism of a particular poll based on the demographics inherent in that poll.

This is a fairly common practice for political junkies like us, and it almost always accompanies data that, quite frankly, forecasts outcomes that the critics of the data really do not like.

Looking at a number of recent polls in the 2010 cycle, we can see an ample reservoir of eye-popping demographic assumptions that could fuel these kinds of criticisms from the Left.

Do these samples have demographic characteristics that are markedly different from previous cycles?

Yes.

Do those palpable differences seem to favor more positive outcomes for Republicans?

Yes.

Does this mean that the "books are cooked" to the detriment of the Democrats in this year's polls?

Actually, I'd doubt that a great deal. Clearly, pollsters are making very clear assumptions about who will comprise the 2010 electorate. Like any assumption, it could be wrong. But they could just as easily be right, and while comparing the demographics of 2010 polling to previous cycles might feel like solid evidence, it is worth remembering that the polls in 2008 and 2006 didn't look like their predecessors, either.

Curious Demographic #1: The Enthusiasm Gorge

Our friends and polling partners over at Public Policy Polling are often described in the press as "Democratic pollsters", because they do have a handful of partisan clients (including Alan Grayson). However, one of the most appealing things about the firm is that it is evident that they play it straight, which has actually led to some pretty hilarious allegations of right-wing bias.

PPP, as a matter of clarifying their samples, asks a question that few pollsters ask, but is incredibly useful: they ask respondents for their 2008 presidential preference.

As a result, we are able to note that one of the most consistent characteristics of the samples of PPP polls in this cycle is an electorate that was far less pro-Obama than 2008.

And, as Tom Jensen spelled out earlier this week:

If the folks planning to turn out this year matched the 2008 electorate:

*Alex Sink running for Governor in Florida and Alexi Giannoulias running for the Senate in Illinois would have double digit leads.

*Elaine Marshall running for Senate in North Carolina and Pat Quinn running for Governor in Illinois would have small leads instead of trailing.

*Ted Strickland running for Governor in Ohio, Lee Fisher running for Senate in Ohio, Joe Sestak running for Senate in Pennsylvania, and Robin Carnahan running for Senate in Missouri would all be within three points rather than trailing by 7-10 as they do now.

This year isn't getting away from the Democrats because voters are moving toward the Republicans en masse. But the enthusiasm gap is turning races that would otherwise be lean Democratic into toss ups, turning toss ups into leaning Republican, and turning leaning Republican into solid Republican.

Despite the best wishes of some Democratic faithful, however, there is absolutely no reason to believe that the 2010 electorate will look anything like the 2008 electorate. When you go from a presidential election to a midterm election, you are shedding about one-third of that leap year electorate. And, as it happens, a lot of that one-third has historically come from demographic groups that would tend to support Democrats. Therefore, assuming that PPP and other pollsters are being unduly pessimistic because they are not asking enough Democrats could be an errant assumption.

That is why comparing sample demographics in 2010 to the most recent election (2008) is probably not the wisest comparison point to make. History tells us that the demographics are going to be different for a much simpler reason than some grand conspiracy: the polling samples are different because the electorate will be different. However, the next curiousity from 2010 polling I noticed not only flies in the face of 2008 polling samples, but previous midterms, as well. Therefore, this next one is worth a much closer look.

Curious Demographic #2: The Older Vote

Anyone that has ever walked a precinct on Election Day knows that the electorate skews far older than the population at large. If your walk sheet has fifty names and addresses on it, it seems as if half of them are over 50 years of age.

That said, a number of polls in this cycle have shown an electorate that has a surprisingly high percentage of older voters, and a considerably reduced number of younger voters.

Nowhere is this distinction more pronounced than in the recent spate of polls in key House races conducted by GOP pollsters Ayers McHenry on behalf of the right-wing think tank American Action Forum. Those polls, which had Democrats flailing quite a bit in 31 key districts from coast-to-coast, have received a ton of media attention. They also have a demographic characteristic that is dramatically different from the exit poll data from prior midterms.

According to the exit polls conducted during the most recent midterm (2006), roughly 63% of the electorate was aged 45 or over. A look at a previous midterm exit poll (1998) suggests that roughly 12% of the electorate is between the ages of 45-49. Doing a little simple subtraction, then, we could make a fair estimate that, in 2006, somewhere between 50-55% of the electorate should be aged 50 or older.

The Ayers McHenry polls had demographics that were, it is safe to say, skewed a tad older than that. Indeed, of the 31 districts surveyed, twenty-six of them had samples in which two-thirds of the sample were in the 50-or-older cohort. In Arizona's 1st district, for example, only 16% of their sample was under the age of 50.

One thing that the 2006 exit polls made clear was that the older the voter, the more likely they were to support Republicans. Even in heavily Democratic 2006, the 65-and-older demographic was split down the middle between Democrats and Republicans. Therefore, Ayers McHenry's older electorate could easily explain at least part of the Democratic underperformance in those polls.

But, it doesn't mean that they are wrong, as a cursory look at the 1998 and 2006 exit polls would seem to attest (for those wondering why I am ignoring 2002, please note that VNS recalled their exit polls for that particular midterm).

The electorate may well be getting older. Ayers McHenry polled in eighteen different states. Eleven of those states had exit polls in both 1998 and 2006. Of those eleven, the proportion of voters over the age of 45 increased in nine of those states. While that wouldn't begin to explain the chasm between the Ayers McHenry polls and the 2006 exit polls, it might mute the impact of that discrepancy if the electorate simply got older in the interim, which it almost certainly seems to have done.

Does the size of that discrepancy between the Ayers McHenry numbers and the past electorate matter? Indeed, it matters a great deal. If they are off the mark by a handful of points, then even adjusting the age cohorts to appropriate levels would not change the overall trial heat numbers a whole hell of a lot. However, if they really are off by twenty points or more, than their trial heat numbers could be off by an order of magnitude that would really start to matter.

Of course, the obvious drawback is that we won't know if they are wrong until November.

* * * * * * * * * *

There are certainly other quirks to be found in polls throughout the cycle. Whether it is SurveyUSA suddenly finding that young voters loves them some Republican candidates (which flies in the face of recent convention), or a California poll which shows Hispanics embracing a GOP candidate who posed for ads in the primary in front of the border fence, there will always be some statistic for those who want to seek to invalidate the outcome.

Understand that this is nothing new, and in fact is a pastime for the party that appears to be on the short end of the polling stick. Consider some very recent history, courtesy of the Washington Post:

There appears to be an undercurrent of worry among some polling professionals and academics. One reason is the wide variation in Obama leads: Just yesterday, an array of polls showed the Democrat leading by as little as two points and as much as 15 points. The latest Washington Post-ABC News tracking poll showed the race holding steady, with Obama enjoying a lead of 52 percent to 45 percent among likely voters.

Some in the McCain camp also argue that the polls showing the largest leads for Obama mistakenly assume that turnout among young voters and African Americans will be disproportionately high.

And that's not even getting into the whole Bradley Effect debate from 2008, although I must confess that the highlight of 2008 for me may well have been Heidi Montag and Spencer Pratt on some absurd celebrity talk show explaining that their guy (McCain, of course) was gonna win on Tuesday, because people didn't want to tell pollsters that they wouldn't vote for the black guy. Because, y'know, they don't want the pollster to think that they are racist, and stuff.

Conservatives jumped all over polling in both 2006 and 2008, convinced that they had gone under the hood and found that the numbers were all wrong (here is one such example). Indeed, the one recent poll that was decent news for Democrats was immediately assailed from the Right (and noted by Pollster's excellent Mark Blumenthal, who proceeded to execute a devastating takedown of the critique in question).

Could the polls be wrong in 2010? Sure, they could. Pollsters, as always, make assumptions about who will show up at the polls. Those assumptions could be in error. But hanging hopes that the critical mass of polls are in error because of this demographic quirk or that deviation from 2006/2008 is probably a glorified method of "shooting the messenger." Certainly, there's a great temptation to shoot the messengers this cycle--certainly I am guilty of it, and I'd probably be convicted on multiple counts of doing so.

That said, it is infinitely more likely that the route to avoiding a Republican resurgence lies in being able to change the composition of the electorate (i.e. attract base voters to the polls) or by the ability of the Democrats to change a few hearts and minds between now and November. That's the ticket, because counting on the myriad of polling firms to uniformly be off of the mark is almost certainly a faith that will be proven to be misguided.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 02:00 PM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  The one and only poll that matters in the end (7+ / 0-)

    is the one where those that showed up at the polls and voted are considered and verified.

    Sorry Al.  That one did get away from us.

    Sarah Palin 2012!!! Prove the Mayans right...

    by funluvn1 on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 02:08:57 PM PDT

    •  Don't forget buyers' remorse (0+ / 0-)

      PPP, as a matter of clarifying their samples, asks a question that few pollsters ask, but is incredibly useful: they ask respondents for their 2008 presidential preference.

      As a result, we are able to note that one of the most consistent characteristics of the samples of PPP polls in this cycle is an electorate that was far less pro-Obama than 2008.

      Like it or not, the message from the polls is clear - a substantial number of Obama voters have changed their mind and will vote Republican this election.

      When that happens many people tell pollsters that they voted previously the way they feel now rather than the way they actually voted.

      For example, I am sure that if you had done a poll on Bush v. Kerry in 2008 you would have concluded that Bush really did steal the 2004 election because well under 50% of people would admit having voted for Bush.

      Same thing is almost certainly happening now in reverse.

      •  I would never vote R, but (0+ / 0-)

        The only thing the Dem's have proven over the past two years is that they want to please Repub's.  Nothing substantial has changed.

        Yes, I know we have some small change to medical insurance that won't happen for years...if ever.  We saved the American auto industry and yet haven't done anything to stem the retreating tide of industry leaving.  We've saved the really big financial institutions and have been repaid by keeping those same people responsible for this train wreck in place and fighting to return to what caused this all the while assuming their debt and giving them raises.  Nothing has been done for "main street" business, re-industrializing the nation, expelling corporate government from the peoples' business...etc.

        No, I'd never vote for a fascist Republican as they are now.  I expected change.  Steamroller change if need be and all that has happened is an attempt to please corporate interests and Republicans.  

        If that is the change I'm be forced to believe in then I'll sit on the sidelines and let the Republicans (and Dems that want to be Repubs) finish off this country.  Bring on the depression.  It seems to be what those in power want.  Count me out.

      •  actually they did such a poll.. (0+ / 0-)

        For example, I am sure that if you had done a poll on Bush v. Kerry in 2008 you would have concluded that Bush really did steal the 2004 election because well under 50% of people would admit having voted for Bush.

        From the ny times exit poll, I wrote about it in a diary after the election.

        Previous Vote  Obama/McCain
        37% Kerry                89/9
        46% Bush                 17/82
        11% First time voter 69/30

        I hypothesized that Kerry voters didn't show up due to long lines and such. I assumed Bush was toxic enough that people who voted FOR him might want to deny it. Comments on the diary thought it was likely the other way around as people tend to "remember" voting for a winner of an election and thus might report voting for Bush in higher numbers, thus the odd results.

        If this is the case here, perhaps the polls could be even more lopsided than we realize.

  •  If October polls have Democrats (6+ / 0-)

    getting their asses kicked, then they are getting their asses kicked. Polls may err a little here or there but they are accurate 90-95% of the time.

  •  How bizarre (21+ / 0-)

    One thing that the 2006 exit polls made clear was that the older the voter, the more likely they were to support Republicans.

    That's weird, because I'm 66 and the older I get, the more radically left I become.  I used to be a Democrat; now I'm a socialist (although of course I have to vote Democratic).

    I've always been in favor of gay marriage and lately I've become convinced that socialism makes far more people much happier than our winner-take-all economic system.

    Yes, I'm het, but I'm NOT a Mad Hetter!

    by Diana in NoVa on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 02:12:01 PM PDT

    •  New SUSA Poll in KY (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Matt Z

      Has ONLY 65 and older SUPPORTING Jack Conway over Rand Paul, EVERY OTHER age groups is HEAVILY Paul--it's sickening!

      Rand Paul up by 15 points!

      The ONLY ideological group(s) Conway can count on are 'Liberals' which there are VERY FEW (about 12%) AND 20% of those are for Rand Paul, the other group is MODERATES far more of them than 'libs" I say go for that group--it's a stable large group!

      Most who suppor Paul are white men, of course, in ALL educational catgeories--

      EVEN in Louiville Rand Paul is LEADING which means that the KY-03 TEA PARTY candidate there will most likely benefit and may be able to OUST our 'LIBERAL" Representative John Yarmuth-- That will be a HUGE pick up for them and right now Yarmuth is ONLY 2 points ahaed of the Tea Party candidate--

      Hello Speaker Boehner???

      Please vote Democratic in November. If the GOP wins we will all be forced backward another decade, who wants that?

      by Wary on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 02:58:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Socialism (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Odysseus, ddrich, Matt Z, jan4insight

      The hope of a better world founded on compassion and cooperative values. A political philosophy with a paramount concern for human needs, and even more, a way of life encompassing all relationships. Socialism means just about everything to me.

  •  One thing is for sure (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    buckhorn okie, Matt Z

    the "likely voter" models are going to have another good "test" this election cycle.

    Second thing that's for sure: Nate Silver will have a huge amount of new data to crunch post-election. I wonder if he'll get the drop on yet another polling outfit.

    We're all human, aren't we? Every human life is worth the same, and worth saving. - Kingsley Shacklebolt

    by chparadise on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 02:12:32 PM PDT

  •  I'm not surprised at older voters going GOP (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    buckhorn okie, Matt Z, skohayes

    ...but I'm surprised (and concerned) by SurveyUSA's trending among 35-49 year olds to favor the GOP candidate. Steve, do you think this is a sampling error or is it being reflected in other polling among this age group?

    As I recall, both SUSA's WA and CA recent Senate polls had the 35-49 year olds trending GOP in greater numbers than not only 50-64 year olds, but greater than 65+ voters as well. I don't recall seeing this demo do that in any other election.

    All I can think of is that this age group is the one facing the most hurt over home foreclosures and underwater values for their homes. That, or a sampling error.

    •  35-49 is not a good (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wsexson, Wary, Matt Z

      demographic for Democrats. Lots of Reagan Republicans/Indies in there.

      •  Yet 30-44 year olds voted for Obama... (5+ / 0-)

        ...by a 52-46 margin, according to the CNN exit polling. In California, the same age group gave Obama a 20 percent margin over McCain, and in Washington the spread was 15 percent.

        While the ages in the demo are slightly different (CNN's skews younger by 5 years), the swing of the Middles is pretty striking.

        •  Gotta remember that many voters went to (3+ / 0-)

          Obama just because they were sick of Bush and the Republicans in general.

          Also remember that he brought out a lot of new voters. California may not be the best measure to go by since it is a more liberal state than most.

          Progressives will win when the country becomes Progressive.

          by auapplemac on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 02:49:45 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  That could be a very interesting effect. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Alice in Florida

          If that group really did go heavily for Obama, yet is trending GOP now, you have to wonder about a "betrayal" effect -- ie, "I voted for them and they stabbed me in the back. Won't make that mistake again".

          More likely, though, is throw the bums out.

          LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

          by dinotrac on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 02:51:30 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  30-35 year olds are more democratic (2+ / 0-)

          It's that 35-45 demo that grew up under Reagan and daddy Bush that is the trouble.  I have alot of friends in that demo that are rock solid repubs and other than the fact that we all grew up under 12 years of repub rule there is no reason for them to be GOoPers.  

          This is your world These are your people You can live for yourself today Or help build tomorrow for everyone -8.75, -8.00

          by DisNoir36 on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 02:58:17 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  More indies than reagan reps (0+ / 0-)

        Only those over 45 were old enough to vote for Reagan.

        Though actually I think there are plenty of just plain republicans.  This is my age group and we are in the heart of our maximum earnings (assuming we haven't been downsized).  Many of my peers voted for Obama but are now convinced he is a socialist and is sending the country down the toilet. They blame him for the bailout, stimulus, and healthcare bill, all of which more oppose than support.  That's why Republicans do so well with this age group.

        I'm not sure there's much dems can do about this.  I actually think that Dems had one chance to win over this group - in early 2009 they needed to pass major Wall Street reform.  I'm not arguing that would have been better policy or that they even could have pulled it off with Nelson and Lieberman around. But IMO that is the only way they could have convinced more of my age group that they were serious.

        I think we'll lose both houses in 2010 because while Obama and the Dems have passed a lot of good stuff, they have failed to sufficiently address the stuff that is resonating with voters - the economy. And people my age will be a big reason why they lose.  I have no way of convincing them differently - "think how much worse it would have been" is useless, and pointing out things from say the healthcare bill gets them talking about the deficit - something else that people wouldn't be freaking about as much if Wall Street had really been reined in.  And yes I know healthcare technically reduced the deficit but they believe that costs will continue to skyrocket and the deficit will go up more than predicted.

        Want a progressive global warming novel, not a right wing rant? Go to www.edwardgtalbot.com for a free audio thriller.

        by eparrot on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:37:12 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  For years, voters have said... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          wsexson, eparrot

          ...that their no. 1 issue with healthcare is ever-increasing costs of health insurance and out-of-pocket costs. Yet employers are passing on increases to employees, individual policies continue to increase 15-35 percent per year, and Congress couldn't even pass an extension of the COBRA subsidies for those laid off.

          Although the healthcare legislation will help a huge chunk of near-poor Americans when the subsidies kick in (although we don't yet know what will be slashed from Medicare to fund the subsidies), in the meantime almost every voter is facing increases in healthcare costs at a time when they can least afford it.

          •  yep (0+ / 0-)

            healthcare is going to continue kicking the ass of whatever party is in power until someone actually deals with the cost issue.

            Want a progressive global warming novel, not a right wing rant? Go to www.edwardgtalbot.com for a free audio thriller.

            by eparrot on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 05:35:26 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Absolutely right (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Matt Z

        They grew up resentful of baby boomers and hippies who seemed to have had a more interesting youth.  They also believe they are getting hosed by taxes and that social security won't be there for them.  They really got injected also with America is good and the rest of the world is ungrateful or dangerous.

        Republicans and the right-wing have a simpler message: you are hard-working and good and the leeches want to take your money.  A lot of folks in this demographic believe it even if they don't really know much about hard work.

        If looks could kill it would have been us instead of him.

        by jhannon on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 09:44:57 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  That age bracket is the most Republican. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      auapplemac, Fury
      The older voters are made up of Reagan Democrats who were part of the Silent Generation.

      Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives. John Stuart Mill

      by Micheline on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 02:23:25 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  exit polls suck (10+ / 0-)

    I'm a fairly radical lefty. I'm so much of a lefty that my Democratic friends are sometimes rather horrified by me. One gave me a lecture yesterday about a recent op-ed I wrote for my local paper.

    In fact, I'm the kind of lefty that gets the blame from conservadems, blew dogs, and the Democratic Party. Robert Gibbs, too.

    I'm 55 years old. All of my old lady friends are rad as hell.

    member of the professional left

    by susanthe on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 02:19:07 PM PDT

  •  Got to share this (6+ / 0-)

    Just got an email a minute ago from a former staffer, who is going crazy like the rest of us over SUSA's ridiculous poll for Kentucky and especially Louisville. To quote:

    The ten year average turnout ratio by registration in Jefferson County is 1.8 Democrats for every Republican.  Since 2000, the turnout ratio has never varied from the average by more than 5.5% (1.7 to 1 in 2004 when the marriage amendment brought conservatives out in droves), yet SurveyUSA's numbers are off the average by 33% (a ratio of 1.2 to 1)-- a swing 6 times greater than the largest deviation. That seems wholly unjustified, incredibly unscientific, and more than a little misleading. In today's CJ, they justified the discrepancy by saying it reflected an "enthusiasm gap", but we've had enthusiasm gaps before.  This seems more like a reflection of a plague wiping out the Highlands, Downtown, and the West End.  And instead of reflecting the political landscape, they're shaping it.

    You can talk all you want about adjusting the demographics to reflect the supposed "enthusiasm gap" -- but these numbers for Yarmuth are just WRONG. A 6x swing is just crazy.

    As noted above, the only poll that counts is the one on Election Day. In the meantime, though, if a polling organization releases something so absurd as this, they need to be called on it.

    Bruce in Louisville
    Visit me at brucemaples.com

    Follow me on Twitter: @brucewriter

    by bmaples on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 02:19:11 PM PDT

    •  Yep (7+ / 0-)

      SUSA's numbers have suspect all cycle. And you and I aren't the only ones to notice. This cycle could hurt SUSA's standing.

      That said, the solution to our woes is simple; GOTV

      Doors, phone calls, and get those 08'ers to the polls.

      The GOP wins back the House? Meet the new Chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security: Rep. Louie "Terror Babies" Gohmert

      by Darnell From LA on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:06:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Sorry Bruce (0+ / 0-)

      But the recent Rand Paul Jack Conway poll salso points out that Paul is leading in Lousiville as well.

      Also don't forget that Louisville ELECTED and Re ELECTED Northup for over a Decade, Conway came clost to ousting her in 2002 but he couldn't do it.

      I don't like this one bit, BUT it is REALITY setting in!

      Look at the recent yarmuth polling internals by SUSA the ONLY Really stable group there is 'moderates"

      Let's take a look at how SUSA's estimation of the LV universe has shifted over the past three cycles:

      Nov-06 Oct-08 Aug-10
      Democrat 54% 57% 50%
      Republican 33% 35% 40%
      Independent 12% 8% 8%
      Liberal 18% 20% 12%
      Moderate 43% 44% 41%
      Conservative 39% 31% 40%

      I'm not saying that's right, but I am saying that's scary!

      Swing State Project

      So called 'liberals' have declined by 6% in 2006 and 8% in 2008 --Conservatives dropped in 2008 but have come back  up to 40% that's their 'enthusiasm'--Repubs identification ALSO up to 40% and Dems dropped to a low of 50% from rather large highs--it's REALLY happening, like it or not.

      Please vote Democratic in November. If the GOP wins we will all be forced backward another decade, who wants that?

      by Wary on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:12:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I still think Yarmuth by 2% over Lally is crazy (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kefauver, Matt Z

        That said -- perhaps you are right, and the middle has moved.

        I DO know this -- I and many of my friends are just now gearing up to work. KY politics may start with Fancy Farm; but for many of us, ground game starts after Labor Day.

        So, it's "to the phones" and "to the streets" for me over the next ten weeks. Got to keep Representative Awesome right there in DC!

        Bruce in Louisville
        Visit me at brucemaples.com

        Follow me on Twitter: @brucewriter

        by bmaples on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 05:06:13 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  That SUSA Poll Makes No Sense. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Matt Z, scotths

      Plus, over twice as many Democrats came out to vote in the Democratic Primary than Republicans in the Republican Primary in KY. Are you telling me a majority of the Mongiardo are going to sit out the general or vote for Paul?

      Quit belly-aching and get active.

      by kefauver on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 05:42:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  It's still GOTV and/or clearer messaging (6+ / 0-)

    That said, it is infinitely more likely that the route to avoiding a Republican resurgence lies in being able to change the composition of the electorate (i.e. attract base voters to the polls) or by the ability of the Democrats to change a few hearts and minds between now and November. That's the ticket, because counting on the myriad of polling firms to uniformly be off of the mark is almost certainly a faith that will be proven to be misguided.

    screw the quick and dirty (dick and querty) polling methodologies and the idiocy over mood, enthusiasm, or some other ambiguous trend indices.

    "...calling for a 5" deck gun is not parody. Not by a long shot." (gnaborretni)

    by annieli on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 02:20:09 PM PDT

  •  GOTV (8+ / 0-)

    Oregon has gone with vote by mail for years and we consistently have a high voter participation rate.  We average about 70% participation in off year gubenatorial elections, & 80% in Presidential elections.  

    If the nation had those kinds of numbers I'm convinced democrats would be in a substantially better position.  

    Failing that, it just makes sense to make election day on a non work day.  Either the weekend or make it a holiday...

    I am the neo-con nightmare, I am a liberal with the facts.

    by bhfrik on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 02:22:11 PM PDT

    •  Why the hell are dems so lazy? Why can't they (5+ / 0-)

      get to the polls in numbers?

      So they work hard and it's difficult to get to the polls. I bet if they had tickets to a concert or wanted to watch a game on TV, they'd make time.

      I'm really tired of Dems not voting when it's in their interest to make every effort to get to the polls every election!

      Why hand elections to the Rs just because it's a little inconvenient.

      I worked, road public transportation to and from the job and still voted in every election that mattered. So did my parents.

      How often are they asked to participate in choosing the government who make decisions that will effect their lives?

      Progressives will win when the country becomes Progressive.

      by auapplemac on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 02:58:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's a vicious circle (7+ / 0-)

        politicians ignore them, so they figure what's the point in voting, the politicians only listen to the money anyway. The politicians know they probably won't vote, so they do what the money wants....

        For Republicans it doesn't matter, because they are voting for fantasy--their dream of a "Christian Nation" lording it over godless libruls everywhere.

        "All governments lie, but disaster lies in wait for countries whose officials smoke the same hashish they give out." --I.F. Stone

        by Alice in Florida on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:19:15 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Getting them to vote in 2008 was like pulling (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kefauver
          teeth, so your comment doesn't explain what is going on.

          Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives. John Stuart Mill

          by Micheline on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 04:17:18 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  But why should it be "like pulling teeth?" nt (0+ / 0-)

            Progressives will win when the country becomes Progressive.

            by auapplemac on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 04:26:45 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I really believe is the lack of resources. I (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Matt Z
              remember when I went canvassing several said that they wanted to vote  but could not afford to take time off.  They didn't know anything about absentee or early voting until we told them. Many do not have cars, so you need to id them to take to the polls. Some are not even aware about the upcoming elections.  This has nothing to do with health care reform lacking a PO but because they are getting by with their lives.

              Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives. John Stuart Mill

              by Micheline on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 04:56:47 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Maybe we should follow Europe here (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Matt Z

                Most European nations have their elections on weekend, and turnout tends to be high.  It would probably be best if it was Sunday, as many Jewish voters are prohibited from voting on Shabbat and, I may be wrong, there's no such prohibition among Christians for voting on Sunday.  If that's too radical, make election day a legal holiday like Labor Day, or at the very least, require businesses to allow employees to take as much time off as they need to on election day. Employee 15 minutes late in the morning or from lunch on election day because he or she took the time to vote.  Tough Titty, Daddy Warbucks, you cannot fire him/her.

                "Valerie, why am I getting all these emails calling me a classless boor?"

                by TLS66 on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 05:46:04 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Remember that a lot of businesses are very (0+ / 0-)

                  small and have few employees. On or two out makes a big difference and all the lost business/productivity lies with the owner.

                  I've always like weekend voting. Why not 2 days. This should take care of most religions and those who work on one of those days.

                  Progressives will win when the country becomes Progressive.

                  by auapplemac on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 06:10:55 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  I believe in Europe voting is required (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Matt Z

                  not that anyone is likely to be prosecuted for not voting, but it's not considered optional as it is here. That being the case, they kind of have to make sure people have the opportunity...

                  "All governments lie, but disaster lies in wait for countries whose officials smoke the same hashish they give out." --I.F. Stone

                  by Alice in Florida on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 06:49:00 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Republicans don't want weekend voting! (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Matt Z

                  and will block it and Obama and the Dems would go along in the name of bipartisanship.

                  Repubs want to do anything possible to suppress turnout.

                  If looks could kill it would have been us instead of him.

                  by jhannon on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 09:49:00 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

  •  There is no substitute for making it happen. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Darnell From LA
    •  Here's a question nobody is asking... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Matt Z, scotths, nicethugbert

      "WHAT IF?" The plain old what if the GOP doesn't take power? Even if you believe it's unlikely: what the fuck if?

      How would the GOP react? How many times would teabaggers heads spin around? How radicalized would their movement become? Personally I want to see what happens for myself!

      The GOP wins back the House? Meet the new Chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security: Rep. Louie "Terror Babies" Gohmert

      by Darnell From LA on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:24:35 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •   I think it would help (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Matt Z

        close, if not bridge, the enthusiasm gap.  Just visualize it, Fat Rush is smoking a cigar, waiting to pop the champagne cork,  only to find out the GOP just barely missed retaking the house and senate.  Imagine his faced going purple with rage, the veins in his head throbbing. Boehner and Mitch screaming "It was OURS, OURS ... we have the right to rule!"  They really do believe that. Imagine them being foiled.  Think of the delicious schadenfruade we'd feel!

        "Valerie, why am I getting all these emails calling me a classless boor?"

        by TLS66 on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 05:52:10 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  And What Would Dems Do? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          wsexson

          Try even harder to be bipartisan and please the Repubs?  

          •  And you think that (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Matt Z

            just staying home and not voting would help them "learn a lesson"?  A few days ago, someone was suggesting that we let the Ds be out of power for two years and in 2012, we'd mobilize and get them back in power, showing how them the "base" was important and was the difference between victory and defeat?  Thing is, this thinking doesn't take into account that they might not be able to get back into power after two years.  I'm sure lots of D voters thought this way and stayed home in 1994, figuring they'd come back in 1996 and retake things.  Didn't happen.  When will you guys get real? So, go ahead and pursue the perfect. Don't come whining to me if even after your anger at the Ds has subsided and you've been trying to get them back in, they are still unable to.  Do you think Republicans act this way?  Sure they may sometimes grumble about their more liberal members, and as we've seen from Miller v. Murkowski, get rid of someone who doesn't meet their purity tests in a primary.  But after the primary is over, it is over for them.  They do not sit at home for the general election.  That's why they usually get what they want from their officeholders, because they are dependable voters, and gratitude works far, far, better at getting a congresscritter  to do what you want than fear.

            "Valerie, why am I getting all these emails calling me a classless boor?"

            by TLS66 on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 07:47:37 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  RE: Sarah Palin (0+ / 0-)

    Thanks for the info. She's a liar. It saves me from having to read the VF article. Any time I spend on that twat I can't get back.

    While the Democrats and Republicans take incoming from each other and corporations are pwning America, the Chinese are taking over the world. C'est le vie.

    by Village expects idiot home soon on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 02:34:35 PM PDT

  •  It's very sad that a contingent of Kossacks (7+ / 0-)

    shares the impulse to disparage polls on the basis of nothing more than their gut, with a recommended diary no less.  Let's remember that no matter how tempting truthiness is, every effort to win a seat in the real world requires using polls to identify likely voters, frame a campaign's message, and allocate resources.

    •  we see the unhappiness on here (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      auapplemac, think blue, Matt Z

      a pro-democratic blog, and we wonder why those folks in the middle might be really unhappy?

      The reality is the Republicans are sitting pretty right now and it's going to take a pretty big effort and maybe a little luck to keep the House from going to the Republicans, if it's even possible anymore.

      I still find it hard to believe the Senate will go too but it's possible, and that's just damn depressing to think that the American people are so short-sighted that after two years and everything isn't already fixed that they are going to go back to what got us here...

      But I guess you go with the electorate you have, not the one you want, to paraphrase someone.

      •  Stunning to think that Senate is in play, but... (4+ / 0-)

        it's too easy to blame Americans for being short-sighted when their leaders seem to have "other" priorities.

        Over the last two years about how Democrats were getting ready to focus like lasers on jobs.

        If they'd ever actually done it, things might be very different now.

        Part of the problem, certainly, is that so many people are unemployed and many of us seem to have no hope for employment any time soon.

        Most people understand, I think, that you can't fix a problem like that overnight, but here's the difficulty:

        Knowing that it takes time, you have to believe that your leaders are taking the problem seriously NOW and that they are doing things NOW that will fix it, even if the cure takes time.

        If you don't believe your leaders understand the problem and its seriousness, you don't believe they're doing what needs to be done.

        LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

        by dinotrac on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:00:40 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I fundamentally disagree (0+ / 0-)

          there is nothing that can be done short term that is going to do anything but stem the blood loss.

          I understand that and so do you, and that's what's happened so far.

          But because it isn't all better, then that means nothing to the electorate.

          They don't understand the problem other than, the economy is bad, so how would they recognize whether or not the government understands the problem?

          All they know is Obama said he'd fix it and it isn't fixed so he must suck too, they all suck, and thus it's back to option B...and then when the reps win and the economy doesn't instantly get better than either, it will be back to option A.

          Because we live in a very fickle, short-attention span society.

      •  That's because the Dems have a lousy message (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Alice in Florida, susanthe

        Wait, I should have said NO message.

        People have a short memory. Got remind them over and over again what Bush and more importantly the Rs left behind we trying to do the heavy lifting with one hand since the Rs won't help.

        Simple message repeated ad nauseum. Remind them who we're fighting for - THEM - THE PEOPLE - THE CHILDREN - YOU!

        Progressives will win when the country becomes Progressive.

        by auapplemac on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:04:01 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I really expected a Plan by now (0+ / 0-)

        and still there is no agenda that the Dems have put forward.  No scope of action that extends into the future.  Just do the minimal to paper over the problem of the week....as long as it is pleasing the Rethugs.  No vision, no action, no message.  So just let's go fascist all the way.  It seems to be what America wants.

    •  That (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      think blue

      That diary just made me roll my eyes.  I am an optimist by nature, but I can also see wave coming my way and knowing that just hoping it won't hit isn't going to work.

  •  I still hold that Boxer and Murray won't lose. (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mango, bluicebank, Matt Z, proud2Bliberal, Dbug

    I'll fall on that sword if I have to.

    First, Boxer is a great campaigner and I think once a number of the Dems see who Fiorina really is, their enthusiasm will return.

    Second, Rossi is just a terrible candidate, and has lost twice already.  I don't imagine independents who are already familiar with Rossi will suddenly say, "Hey, wait a minute, this whiny sore loser might actually be GOOD for Washington!"

    The electorate hasn't flipped THAT badly.  I could see Rand winning Kentucky before I could see Boxer losing an election.

    The Obama/Biden Inaugural -- the exact moment when the world went from gray to colorful.

    by alkatt on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 02:45:17 PM PDT

    •  WA has mail-in voting (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Odysseus, Matt Z

      A ballot is mailed to every voter.  The voter's don't have to make an effort to go to the polls.  I am not sure how that changes the age demographic of voting.  Young people who don't have cars will not have a transportation obtacle and neither will the elderly who aren't able to walk or drive on their own.  Also, busy parents won't skip voting because of a lack of time to get to the polls.

    •  Boxer the fighter... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      alkatt, Matt Z

      Solidarity Now. (We can continue the fighting later). See you in Washington 10-02-10.

      by reddbierd on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:16:19 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  First queston is (0+ / 0-)

      Why are Boxer and Murray even in trouble? Where are those 'progressives' to support them?

      Look at Sestak in PA he's down so much, where's his supporters?

      Please vote Democratic in November. If the GOP wins we will all be forced backward another decade, who wants that?

      by Wary on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:26:52 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I agree. Murray's gonna win. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kefauver, Matt Z

      There was a SUSA poll right after the Primary (available here) that said Rossi was ahead 52%-45%. But look at the age breakouts:


      Age: 18-3435-4950-6465+
      52% Rossi (R) 49%58%47%49%
      45% Murray (D) 50%37%49%49%
      3% Undecided1%4%4%3%

      First, I find it hard to believe that, in the middle of August, over two months before the election, only 3% are undecided. Second, Rossi and Murray seem to be tied in every age group except 35-49 (roughly, people born from 1960-1975, who grew up with Ronald Reagan). There's a 20-point gap? In the state of Washington? It's just bizarre.

      "Where it is a duty to worship the sun it is pretty sure to be a crime to examine the laws of heat." - John, Viscount Morley

      by Dbug on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:50:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  tied among 18-34 years olds?? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Dbug

        really??

        Also, that poll has the 2 candidates tied at 48% in Metro Seattle (with Rossi leading in Western Washington outside of that area). That can't possibly be correct! Murray should have substantial leads among both 18-29 and Metro-seattle.

        I think SUSA has a hard time polling young liberal voters in the Seattle area. I think we saw this same effect 2 years ago in which there appeared to be a substantial number of young voters in the Seattle area who were going to vote for Obama and Rossi for gov. Needless to say that while of course there were such voters (Obama won by a larger margin the Gregoire) there wasn't a large contingent of young, Seattle area voters in this category and the election wasn't particularly close.

        I suspect this may be the cell phone only problem or some other related problem which is skewing the sample to make the youth vote and the metro-seattle vote more conservative than it actually is.

        •  Yep. The urban numbers are all wrong, too. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          scotths

          If there's one rule about WA politics it's that the cities are blue and the rural areas are red.

          It could very well be a cell phone problem. Also, the Republicans were excited about the primary fight -- more likely to be paying attention and more likely to be counted as likely voters.

          "Where it is a duty to worship the sun it is pretty sure to be a crime to examine the laws of heat." - John, Viscount Morley

          by Dbug on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 09:15:53 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Polls and Democrats (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    billlaurelMD
    There is one glaring variable that is entirely left out of this post. The right wing corporate media and the far right wing sound machine have defined the reality. That reality is that Democrats are apathetic and alienated from both the party and the President(if I'm an example it is absolutely accurate) while the neo-fascists are wildly enthusiastic(sort of like the "brown shirts" were, just different enemies). Regardless, as is well known if that reality is what the Democratic electorate perceives, then they are more likely to stay home. Add that to the real anger and alienation of the base towards what I'd kindly refer to as these frauds, what you have is a recipe for a real Democratic disaster on the level of 1994. and the Obama Administration simply doesn't get it or they don't really give a dam. Given that at least, if not more, of the Democratic party are faux Democrats and vote as conservative Republicans then the shift will be massive and may even be large enough to override vetoes. You can thank the DLC and triangulation for the coming neo-fascist society that appears to look a lot like what went on in Italy and Argentina when they went fascist.
    •  This is kind of a Godwin's law (0+ / 0-)

      Response, conversation stopper.

      Please vote Democratic in November. If the GOP wins we will all be forced backward another decade, who wants that?

      by Wary on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:30:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  but isn't that really the choice (0+ / 0-)

        once we get this far gone?  Sometimes invoking Godwin's law is putting on blinders.  It can happen here.

        Struggling to find my relevance in a world gone amok

        by billlaurelMD on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:59:22 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Godlwin's law (0+ / 0-)

        is just bullshit. Yes it has become au courant to denigrate any reference to HItler. But note I didn't really refer to nazi Germany. I referred to Italy of the 30's and Peron's Argentina and should have also referred to Franco's Spain. Bottom line here is that the reality of the parallels are real and frightening. If Godwin's law is invoked so as not to see the reality of what is occurring then when they start requiring a certain kind of Christianity to be represented in all things public or when they start rounding up Muslims and/or Brown people and essentially eliminate freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, etc., will you still argue for Godwin's law?

  •  Older voters are unemployed (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dinotrac, susanthe, Willa Rogers

    Another trend - an increasing number of those 50 and 60 year olds are unemployed.  If the 99ers do not get an extension soon, many of these voters will become homeless between now and November.

    •  some of us (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wsexson, proud2Bliberal, Willa Rogers

      already are. I've been out of work for 2.5 years, and never was eligible to collect unemployment benefits in the first place.

      Yesterday, the Dem running for US Senate told a gathering that the way to create jobs is tax breaks for small business, loans for small business, punishing companies that send jobs overseas. At the rate that strategy will create jobs, I'll be 100 before it makes any goddam difference in the unemployment numbers.

      What is increasingly obvious is that either these people don't know how serious things really are, they don't care, or they're too afraid to speak up about it. If Obama had any guts at all, he'd resign himself to being a 1 term president (since he's going to be one, anyhow) and do something big and BOLD - like a 21st century WPA.

      Instead, there's far too much pandering to the right going on - and if the Democratic candidates don't come out strongly against the Catfood Commission, they can kiss their asses goodbye. If cuts are made to Social Security, the Democrats may as well just disband, because they'll be finished.

      member of the professional left

      by susanthe on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:08:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  you are completely correct (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        susanthe

        I hope you are calling your Senators and Reps with that message every few days, as I am.

        •  I told the candidate (0+ / 0-)

          that I was homeless -  that what he was looking at was the new face of the middle class: poverty and homelessness.  

          He did not know what to say to me.

          member of the professional left

          by susanthe on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:36:14 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  well, keep at him until he has (0+ / 0-)

            an acceptable answer for you.

            Struggling to find my relevance in a world gone amok

            by billlaurelMD on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:46:10 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  that's a good thought (0+ / 0-)

              but he doesn't have one. I haven't heard a Democrat who does. I'll vote for him, because he's better than the Republicans - but I won't volunteer for his campaign, or write about him. (I'm a lightly paid member of the professional left)

              member of the professional left

              by susanthe on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 04:07:20 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  I'm not a member of (0+ / 0-)

            the 'professional left'--

            I run scared of becoming homeless so I take any job I can get!

            Last summer sudden;y unemployed, it was applying to 'temporary jobs' which I did, I wiped out of factory work, BUT could 'clean toilets' and carry signs on street corners for businesses, whic I did at age 61, waiting for school to begin so I could substitute teach. which I did ALL LAST SCHOOL year.

            This summer I've been cblessed with the BEST summer job I've ever had, tomorrow is my last day,--I'm also substitute teaching just to retain my home.

            I will proudly say that with even a BA and MASTERS Degree if I have to I'll clean toilets, carry signs on street corners for businesses when I'm down and out with no job, no 'unemployment' insurance--amd I can bet you that my LIBERAL Representative will have NOTHING but praise for my efforts IF I ever tell him!

            Please vote Democratic in November. If the GOP wins we will all be forced backward another decade, who wants that?

            by Wary on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:47:15 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  tax credit for research (0+ / 0-)

        will only help people with a 3.5 GPA in science get a job, and those people can already get a job.  And most of that hiring is not for US workers.

        •  That's not true (0+ / 0-)

          we need research and development in this economy to further develop alternative energy products/delivery systems.  We need to develop new scientific products in medicine and manufacturing that will produce competitive products in a global marketplace.  Then we need to keep the jobs here through tax incentives and penalties.

          If looks could kill it would have been us instead of him.

          by jhannon on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 09:57:46 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Hey don't tell us Oldsters we're (0+ / 0-)

      UNEMPLOYED!!!!

      I'm working TWO JOBS tomorrow one job ends so I'll have time to campaign!

      My OLDSTER NEIGHBORS in 50's 60's AND 70's also EMPLOYED--perhaps not the best of employment but we're working!

      The one's I know who are in that 99er's are in their 40's

      I've NEVER had unemployment as an option even back in Bush's first recession, I just had to keep on working AT ANYTHING--

      Of course those people I know are SINGLE no other source of income, we keep working at something anything, always have.

      Please vote Democratic in November. If the GOP wins we will all be forced backward another decade, who wants that?

      by Wary on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:37:10 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Health-insurance costs... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      susanthe

      ...are killing those of us older folks who are self-employed and unemployed, with no relief in sight.

      •  Haven't had the blessing (0+ / 0-)

        Of health insurance for over 11 years now. My jobs don't provide it, I can't afford it, I get sick it's up to me to get well.

        And I do, it's been extremely difficult over this last decade but it's made me a much stronger person!

        AND it's made me a much healtheir person as well! I take care of myself because I'm all alone and if I don't work, I don't get paid--simple as that--I'm not complaining just explaining!

        I feel so blessed to be able to work on my life without, as I once did, being obsessed with 'health insurance.

        I miss only a few days in a whole year on my job which is IF I don't work I don't get paid.

        But then I learned all of this when I served as a Peace Corps volunteer in a 3rd world country.

        Please vote Democratic in November. If the GOP wins we will all be forced backward another decade, who wants that?

        by Wary on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:54:25 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Youngest voters don't remember Bill Clinton (0+ / 0-)

    18 year old voters were children when Bill Clinton was President.  They have no understanding of his achievements economically.  18 year old voters also do not remember the days before condominiums and McMansions dominated the landscape and never experienced the days when people had the same job throughout their adult lives.  Reagan was something they have no experience of.

  •  Old people vote (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sauron21

    Which is why they're running on fear almost exclusively this cycle.  Old folks are the easiest to scare and always vote.  

    Also the GOP's strategy since Obama was elected was to exploit the fact that they could grind the senate to a snails pace and the young and first time voters would become disillusioned.  

    •  Yeah, fear. When you're out of work, facing (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      proud2Bliberal

      homelessness, have kids, and nobody wants to hire old folks, there's damned good reason.

      LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

      by dinotrac on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:01:58 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Damn good reason to vote Republican? (0+ / 0-)

        Or to just not vote at all? I don't get it...

        •  Some Rs are considering Democrats (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          scotths

          Some conservatives are upset that the Republicans have done nothing about outsourcing.  They have reacted favorably to Trunka's AFL-CIO report and to the bill by McMerney, Peters and Bishop (Democrats) to limit outsourcing.  Republican high tech workers are angry at Whitman for supporting the H1-B program and outsourcing.  This election has subtexts that the major polls are not considering.  

          •  I haven't heard anything about that trend. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            scotths

            Is it a California thing?  California is a hi-tech haven and H1-B is an especially big issue in tech industries, as is outsourcing.

            On the other hand, tech industries aren't exactly bastions of union activity.

            LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

            by dinotrac on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 04:36:07 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Damned good reason to have fear, and damned good (0+ / 0-)

          reason to vote for somebody other than the people who have declared your plight unimportant.

          LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

          by dinotrac on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 04:34:05 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  old people (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      billlaurelMD, Willa Rogers

      are worried about Social Security, thanks to Obama's Deficit Commission.

      member of the professional left

      by susanthe on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:09:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Nothing but fearmongering... (0+ / 0-)

        Helped pushed by the friendly neighborhood progressive.  

        •  fearmongering? (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          wsexson, dinotrac, Willa Rogers

          I may be old, but I ain't stupid. I know what the Catfood Commission's intentions are.

          Funny how the Democrats howled when Cheney had secret energy committee meetings - but nary a peep about the secret Deficit Reduction Committee meetings that President Transparency is having.

          member of the professional left

          by susanthe on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:39:35 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Folks 50+ would have nothing to worry about... (0+ / 0-)

            Even if their commission changes SS and it passes the Senate, House and Obama signs it.  Even the hardest core Republican doesn't say they'd change it starting now, but would be grandfathered in.  

            And this isn't secret - it's releasing the eventual report and then will be voted on.  Cheney's meetings were behind closed doors as were the findings/decisions.

            •  Jonze can you guarantee that? (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              dinotrac

              Yeah, I didn't think so.

              member of the professional left

              by susanthe on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 04:12:35 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Guarantee what? (0+ / 0-)

                You folks are foaming at the mouth about a commission report that hasn't even been released yet and you want me to guarantee something?  Makes sense to me.

                If the commission report is going to be as bad as folks here are breathlessly believing it will be, and a Pelosi led 70 seat House majority and a 59-seat Senate majority both pass it's findings and Obama signs it well I guess they're all corporate sellouts and/or don't understand the problems of the day.   And if that's the case America is in much bigger problems than a commission report.  

                •  You folks! You folks! You damned old folks, (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  susanthe

                  why don't you just shut your stupid traps.

                  Better yet, why don't you just do the decent thing and die.

                  That, at least, is what it sounds like to me.

                  For the record, actual people are allowed to be skeptical, old or otherwise.  Not only that, but we can skeptical without "foaming at the mouth".

                  Perhaps you've got us confused with rabid dogs.

                  LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

                  by dinotrac on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 04:45:26 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  "You folks" are the people here of any age.... (0+ / 0-)

                    who are borrowing trouble that doesn't even exist up in arms about the deficit commission findings that don't even exist yet - they're not even due until December 1st.  

                    I don't know anybodies age here - trying to make it about agism is silly, but par for the course.  

                •  Oh I see (0+ / 0-)

                  you just want to bellow at me for being pissed off that Democrats are going to cut Social Security, so you make statements like, "Folks 50+ would have nothing to worry about" even though you have absolutely no proof of that. You just want to shut me up.

                  Secret meetings. The House has already agreed to pass it - sight unseen.

                  That's right out of the Bush playbook. And no, I have no intention of shutting up.

                  member of the professional left

                  by susanthe on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 05:17:53 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  We have plenty to worry about. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              susanthe

              Nobody wants to hire people 50+ and nobody in the administration seems to care about the fact.

              Bad enough that SS benefits are piss poor, but it would be nice to make some kind of living up until turning 65.

              LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

              by dinotrac on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 04:43:02 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  and voting republican won't help (0+ / 0-)

        with that.  I guess they don't understand.

        Struggling to find my relevance in a world gone amok

        by billlaurelMD on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:57:19 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  who said anything about voting Republican? (0+ / 0-)

          They'll just stay home. I'm tempted.

          member of the professional left

          by susanthe on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 04:13:20 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  It wouldn't be voting Republican. It wouldn be (0+ / 0-)

          voting "How dare you ignore the fact that we are suffering while you pursue your agenda."

          Votes are blunt instruments. We don't get to attach treatises to clarify their intent, or to only vote for 40% of one candidate and 60% of the other.

          We do the best we can.

          LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

          by dinotrac on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 04:47:11 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  The Upshot... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew, scotths

    That said, it is infinitely more likely that the route to avoiding a Republican resurgence lies in being able to change the composition of the electorate

    In other words, every first time and/or young voter from 2008 that Organizing For America can get back to the polls this November will counteract the vote of some old teabagger.

    I can get behind that. And I will!

    The GOP wins back the House? Meet the new Chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security: Rep. Louie "Terror Babies" Gohmert

    by Darnell From LA on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:00:02 PM PDT

  •  America will get the Government she deserves. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    au8285

    Anybody voting against their own self-interest 100% deserves everything the Republican congress will do to them.  

  •  Josh Mitteldorf's perspective: likely it's rigged (0+ / 0-)

    The Dutch kids' chorus Kinderen voor Kinderen wishes all the world's children freedom from hunger, ignorance, and war.

    by lotlizard on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:04:36 PM PDT

  •  full court press on the young (0+ / 0-)

    It's unclear how, without an obvious rock star Presidential candidate, the "youth" vote could be maximized. Celebrities? Facebook? There has to be some way of stressing the urgency especially in the key districts. Baring a mass disgust at the far right bringing out our under 35s in mass seems like the best hope. But ... I don't have ideas how to make that happen (but will certainly blog if I come up with some)

    If you didn't like the news today, go out and make some of your own.

    by jgnyc on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:05:54 PM PDT

    •  They need a sense of a future (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Willa Rogers

      The problem for young people is that they go to college and accumulate debt and then don't see any future ahead of them.  The recruiters don't hire on campus, they bring in workers from India. Then the young can't earn enough to have an apartment or get married unless they have a 3.5 average in science. Public policy has to give the young a future other than college debt and no way to pay it off.

    •  Here's an idea to attract young voters (0+ / 0-)

      Every university that gets Pell grants or research money from the government must cap all university executive salaries at $450K and obey certain rules about how much each level can be paid.  That will keep tuitions down and limit student debt somewhat. Look how many students' tuition monies paid Emmert's $900K salary at UW and he quit to take a "better" opportunity.

  •  DNC without Howard Dean (0+ / 0-)

    When Cristie won the NJ governorship, no one asked the hard questions about whether Kaine is an effective DNC chair.  He's a good man, I'm not attacking him as a person.  But Howard Dean was much more dynamic and had virtually every race in the 50 states in his mind, even down to city council races in some cases.  Howard Dean was right on Iraq and has been right on virtually every issue, and at the same time he is capable of dealing with large amounts of detailed information all at the same time.  I don;t know why the Democratic Party is laying down and letting itself get walked over rather than bringing in Howard Dean to accomplish as much as possible.  I know we would benefit from having him out West in CA and WA.  I think he could help in PA (Phila,) too.

  •  Stick this in your pipe... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    susanthe, annieli

    Most unemployed and long-term unemployed are over fifty. Do you honestly believe that this group will vote predominantly Repuke?

    Well, maybe, but I don't think so. Perhaps these Dem voters are not available for pollster calls because they are out looking for work - or are so pissed off like me that I gleefully curse at them and hang up the phone when they call.

    How about the young, the 18 to 29 year old unemployed and long-term unemployed, and maybe unemployable. Do you think they will vote Repuke as well? They're probably out shooting hoop. But to say they will vote R is a lie.

    I have this feeling that the Repukes are marginalized and completely shot...dead as a doornail!

    I think they have bigots and psychos on their side, but few else. And I think we're being sold a big big bill of goods by media which are running most of the polls, and paying big for push polls. Because it's BIG business to make it all look controversial.

    And if I were asked if I were enthusiastic about pulling the D levers or R levers this time, I'd say "not by a long shot, and f**k 'em both."

    ...'06, '08, and ...'10? 'It was a trifecta of the peoples' outrage against Republicanism!'

    by ezdidit on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:13:56 PM PDT

  •  Enthusiam gap? Every dang person ought to be (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Darnell From LA, jan4insight

    enthusiastic about voting.  Voting is what makes a democracy; it's what countless have shed their blood for, both in war, and in the fight for civil rights.

    So if young people don't feel enthused to vote; the deserve what they get if the Republicans take Congress and Social Security gets so reformed it will never be there for them.

    So what if Latinos are not enthused because there hasn't bee immigration form enacted; the kind they don't want will be enacted if the Republicans take control of Congress.

    So what if gays and lesbians are not enthused because DADT hasn't been repealed; it sure as heck won't be if Republicans take Congress, and look for legislation trying to take away recent gains in rights.

    So what if older folks are not enthused; if Republicans take Congress their Medicare benefits are on the chopping block.

    So what if the middle class is not enthused because so may are ought of work and the economic future isn't bright; if Republicans take Congress those unemployment benefits will dry up and tax cuts for the wealthy will fall on the working middle class.

    This country is at another crossroads, only 2 years after 2008 when the future of the Democratic Party looked so bright with demographic trends going its way.

    If people don't get out in vote, when the looming disaster is plainly obvious to anyone listening to what the republican candidates are actually saying, then we deserve the government we get.

    •  ahem (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Willa Rogers

      Social Security and Medicare already are on the chopping block, with some Dems singing along.

      Fuck that noise.

      member of the professional left

      by susanthe on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:41:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I truly fail to understand ... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        wsexson, susanthe

        what they were thinking.  Isn't politics about CONTRAST? They (Obama in particular) gave away the farm on that one.

        Struggling to find my relevance in a world gone amok

        by billlaurelMD on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:55:16 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  This is the central reality (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          billlaurelMD, wsexson
          "The thing about Britain is that their debate is closer to the real meat and potatoes of what this argument is all about.  Ours is frustratingly diverted into "Like or Dislike Obama" or "Is the Tea Party Racist" and other tangential questions.
          Britain makes it clear: it's really about social democracy vs. neoliberalism.

          It is important that [Open Left] understand this.  This is the debate that is barely allowed to be mentioned on our side of the pond but it's the crucial distinction.

          When Paul Krugman argues for Keynesianism he's taking the social democratic side of this argument.  But he's not allowed to say so, or at least not willing.

          The mistake of our side in the past period was in not understanding how strongly our opponents believed in the other side of this argument. It was indeed their central rationale.  It wasn't "just politics".

          http://www.openleft.com/...

          I like the comment so much that I am now going to posted it when questions like yours come up. The answer is that they believe in neo-liberalism.

          •  even when it is clear from objective analysis (0+ / 0-)

            that it has completely and utterly failed us.  

            Amazing.

            Struggling to find my relevance in a world gone amok

            by billlaurelMD on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 04:36:44 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Its a closed system of assertions. (0+ / 0-)
              Or, if you prefer- a fundamentalist sect. The GOP are the literal text believers with neo-liberalism (all regulations are bad) like some Christians are literal text believers (the world began 7000 years ago because that's the date one can count from the Bible).

              The Democrats are the conservatives (while not literal, they do believe that we aught to keep things as they are rather than change them that much- maybe around the edges you can change things, but the word of God is the word of God) who are not quite literal, but pretty close (the solution to health care reform is to base it on the private system rather than public because the private is more efficient despite the fact its not and can't ever be). The GOP says let's end social security. The Democratic response is to want to cut it to show they are serious believers
              It is a conclusion seeking to be proven correct rather than a theory seeking to be disproven or proven through evidence.  

              Scientific method and real social science requires one pose a theory, test that theory, and if the theory fails - to throw the theory out or rethink it. That's the cornerstone of the enlightenment and modern reason.

              Anything that doesn't do that is belief masquerading as reason.

  •  Cell Phones.. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Clara Listensprechen, scotths

    Although some pollsters have starting to include cell phones in their polls, it is very expensive to do. And I am very suspicious of the results.

    I mean, I don't know a soul who isn't "totally wireless." In addition, I don't know ANYONE who answers their cell for a blocked, 800, or otherwise strange phone number! i.e. pollster I wouldn't be surprised if this is causing the youngin's from 2008 to be excluded.

    The GOP wins back the House? Meet the new Chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security: Rep. Louie "Terror Babies" Gohmert

    by Darnell From LA on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:17:39 PM PDT

  •  SUSA consistently is more repub than repub polls (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew, jan4insight

    that and their screwy demographic breakdowns is good reason to be suspect of them, not just that the results aren't what we would like.

  •  One thing that will help is the march on (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Alice in Florida

    Washington 10-02-10.
       Of course, the Dems and Obama could do some stuff too. Immigration reform and a jobs bill (even if they get nowhere for now) would help a lot. This week may be their last chance.

    Solidarity Now. (We can continue the fighting later). See you in Washington 10-02-10.

    by reddbierd on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:21:55 PM PDT

  •  Older people vote more in mid-terms (0+ / 0-)

    Here's a table I copied from a previous diary I wrote (if you care, it's here).

    In 2008, the only age bracket where less than 50% voted was 18-24. In 2006, the less than 50% groups were everyone under 45.


    .2008Presidential.2006Midterm.
    AgeEligibleVotedTurnoutEligibleVotedTurnout
    18-24 years 25,791 12,515 48.5% 24,954 5,524 22.1 %
    25-34 years 34,218 19,501 57.0 33,215 11,137 33.5
    35-44 years 36,397 22,865 62.8 37,520 17,079 45.5
    45-54 years 41,085 27,673 67.4 40,322 21,708 53.8
    55-64 years 32,288 23,071 71.5 30,433 19,017 62.5
    65-74 years 19,571 14,176 72.4 18,208 11,700 64.3
    75+ 16,724 11,344 67.8 16,420 9,954 60.6
    Total Adults 206,072 131,144 63.6 201,073 96,119 47.8
    .
    Age 45+ 109,668 76,264 105,383 62,379
    Percentage53.2%58.2%52.4%64.9%

    (These numbers are from census.gov, which only counted citizens over 18 who were eligible (not necessarily registered) to vote; undocumented aliens and other non-citizens were ignored. Also, there may have been some people who didn’t vote, but claimed that they did.)

    In general, turnout is lower in mid-terms. And two groups that are motivated to vote are older people (who tend to favor Republicans) and the party that's out of power.

    That's why we need to Get Out The Vote in November.

    "Where it is a duty to worship the sun it is pretty sure to be a crime to examine the laws of heat." - John, Viscount Morley

    by Dbug on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:24:52 PM PDT

  •  the only poll i pay attention to (0+ / 0-)

    is the one on election day.

    I trust no poll, even ones done by so call reputable places.

    Down with Prop H8! Jerry Brown for CA_GOV 2010

    by GlowNZ on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:27:30 PM PDT

  •  Let's not pretend that "messengers" are unbiased (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jan4insight

    or that they are unaffected by conventional wisdom, or that polls do not have an effect of self-validating if not pushed back against or that things are set in stone by polls taken months out.

    The polls are a WARNING to Democrats that, as suspected, GOTV is going to be critical. But they are being used by many as a validation of their, usually confused, criticisms and as a prediction.

  •  GOTV is key in Ohio and PA. (0+ / 0-)

    We need to work as hard as we can to defend as much as we can.

    We talk about this kind of stuff on SSP all the time.

    Cold hearted orb/That rules the night/Removes the colours From our sight/Red is gray and/Yellow white/But we decide/Which is right/And/Which is an Illusion

    by KingofSpades on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:30:48 PM PDT

  •  Shooting (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Alice in Florida

    Yea, I have seen people shooting the messenger for months on this site and others.  Ras is the main target; despite the fact that PPP is now getting the same numbers as Ras - and those numbers are bad for Dems - people are STILL doing it.

  •  Can't we try to get young people to vote? n/t (0+ / 0-)

    "All politics is national."

    by Auriandra on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 03:33:54 PM PDT

  •  Why spin what the polls are suggesting? (0+ / 0-)

    Come November there is going to be one huge ass kicking thanks mostly to Pelosi and Obama, Pelosi is about as useless as tits on a Bull and Obama has sold out the base.

    •  Peloso, Obama nd the rest of the party in DC (0+ / 0-)
      They couldn't have done it without the rest of the party there.
    •  300+ House bills gone to the Senate to die (0+ / 0-)

      That, plus the lack of messaging on JOBS, are the main problems.

      Pelosi can be blamed for the latter, in conjunction with other Democrats.  Reid is to blame the former.  I hope he keeps his Senate seat, because we need every senator, but I also hope someone else becomes the Democratic Majority Leader.

  •  President Obama and Dems shd be in TV more often (0+ / 0-)

    The problem is Dems ceded the race to GOP instead of creating the narrative,  they have been letting GOP, FOX Limbaugh create the narrative.

    Protect Democracy. Keep lying GOP out of the People's House.

    by timber on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 04:00:41 PM PDT

  •  I wonder, can we all agree on one thing? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wsexson

    If the Democrats, from the White House down to the freshman incumbents in the House, talked about nothing but JOBS JOBS JOBS from here to the election, the numbers - whatever they may or may not be now - would increase?  That disaffected people would become more enthusiastic, that already enthusiastic people would become even more enthusiastic?  That GOTV would be easier to accomplish?

    So:  Obama, Reid, Pelosi - PUT OUT A BIG JOBS PLAN AND RUN ON IT!

    •  Nope--don't agree on that one thing. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      scotths

      When the candidates for government and government talks JOBS JOBS JOBS, critics will yell "government takeover of the private sector". When you hear the anti-government people yelling "JOBS JOBS JOBS" while blaming the government for private sector responsibility, you're hearing Br'er Rabbit yelling "don't throw me into the briar patch!"....or Bugs Bunny declaring that it's Rabbit Season.

      •  Critics would, sure (0+ / 0-)

        Most people actually want a job.

        Do you have any evidence that the number of critics would outweigh the number of people who are desperate to get jobs?  That the number of critics would be higher than the number of people who would become more enthusiastic about voting this fall for Democrats?

        What do you suggest for a message?

        •  fear (0+ / 0-)

          Scare 'em to the polls with the nightmare facing them if they have to look at Boehner,Ryan,McConnell and company for their future. It makes me ill to imagine what they might do.

          •  That doesn't work so well on independents... (0+ / 0-)

            my father, an independent, says that the mentality is, "If you didn't get it fixed, we'll let the other side try."  And mind you, he voted for Obama.  But he feels that HCR should never have been tackled until after the economy had been addressed, with the unemployment rate steadily decreasing.  Instead, it looks to him like Democrats spent most of Obama's presidency on HCR and not much at all on the economy.  And he says that if the economy had been fixed first, then there would've been much more credibility and political capital to use for HCR and so on.

            Plus indies know that Obama can veto anything that's too nutty.

        •  I'm not arguing numbers, I'm arguing principle (0+ / 0-)

          ...and that would be the principle of whining about how the government isn't creating jobs. That's not the government's job in the first place--it's the job of the people currently yelling about the government not producing jobs, who are the same people who whine about government takeover of business.

    •  it's a good thought (0+ / 0-)

      Black Knight - but the sad reality is that they don't have a plan to do anything about jobs.

      member of the professional left

      by susanthe on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 05:14:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  That's true now... (0+ / 0-)

        but, there's still time for the election.  They could put a plan together if they wanted to - a sort of economic Contract With America - to run on.  I'm sure some of the stupider Blue Dogs and Conservadems would refuse, which, fine - they'd be gone, and we'd retain all the solid Democrats and both houses, albeit with slimmer margins.  But we'd still hold Congress.

  •  Wait a second (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Clara Listensprechen, bluicebank

    Can you explain this logic of curiosity #2?

    According to the exit polls  conducted during the most recent midterm (2006), roughly 63% of the electorate was aged 45 or over. A look at a previous midterm exit poll (1998) suggests that  roughly 12% of the electorate is between the ages of 45-49. Doing a little simple subtraction, then, we could make a fair estimate that, in 2006, somewhere between 50-55% of the electorate should be aged 50 or older.

    In 1998 the first two years of boomers - the lowest numbers at the onset of the boomers - hit 50 years old. By 2006 the peak of the boomers - 1955, 1956 - hit 50 years old. As the rest of the boom rolls through - those in 1960 are hitting the big five oh - we should see much higher age skewing of the electorate.  I wouldn't expect to see a decline in the age 50 and above demographics.

  •  Polling is sooooooo 20th century (0+ / 0-)

    This is an age of disposable cell phones/phone numbers so it follows that it's the young who are difficult to poll; it's the older voter you'll find at the end of most landlines, and you'll find fewer and fewer of those as time goes on, too.

    Exit polls have been rendered bunk by the states that permit early/mail-in voting. They don't exit any poll even though they vote.

    Not to mention that party affiliation is badly skewed this year--people who are independents could be Tea Party supporters who would refuse to identify themselves as Republicans, and they could be Green Party type people. Using the terms "self-identified conservative" and "self-identified liberal" is just as useless given that the latter term has been vilified over the previous decade. And not to mention people who just jerk around polling people just because they called at dinner time.

    I don't have any good reason to believe ANY poll.

  •  polls: (0+ / 0-)

    I'm sick of them to the point that I can barely watch anymore. Am I the only one who sees polls as self-full-filling prophesies? 90 to 95% accurate? Well holy shit, you hammer the electorate 24/7 with the "fact" that your candidate is in the dumper, why the fuck would you bother to get off the couch to go vote? People like Chris Matthews and Chuck(the numbers faggot)Todd constantantly telling us how hopeless it all is make my head hurt. Make my HAIR hurt for Christ's sake!
    Wake up people, the only way to change this demographic is to use the repugs biggest weapon against them.
      Remember Judo? Use your opponent's strengths against him! FEAR. Dems have to stop aiming their best arguments on the "choir"and start to scare the shit out of those working and unemployed constituency who have given up on the system and make them see that if they think things are tough now,there is truly a nightmare awaiting if the don't get out and vote against the PARTY not the individual. Show the people who made the middle-class why they will never get to be middle-class if they let those scumbags back into power.

       I used to be a republican,then I learned how to read.

  •  as an older, much older than aged 50 (0+ / 0-)

    member of the 'older' chort, and as someone who has been voting Social Democrat/LiberalDemocrat from the day i was old enough to vote in both the UK and the USA I take slight umbrage at this analysis that odler people tend to either vote or turn Republican, presumably out of fear,, as they turn 50.

    That's load of total cod-wallop based on speculations about possible outcomes fro exit polls taken no later than four years ago.

    How on earth anyone is expected to draw and conclusions about which way so-called older people will vote in this mid-term is beyond me.

    So I shall just ignore this analysis and the polling data as well.  Why? because that kind of vague, vaguely insulting accusation tends to draw equally insulting comments from posters here who will blame any loss on who? OLD PEOPLE. That is every bit as bad as the Death camps bullshit.

    There is equally compelling analysis emanating from people such as Charlie Cook, that the cohort that will stay home this time and are the least enthusiastic are in fact African American, Latinos and YOUNG PEOPLE. Where did I hear that? this morning on MTP.

  •  Great diary..... (0+ / 0-)

    explains a lot.  Also confirms what I already knew which is that people are not going back to Repukes.  The so called independents going back that way are mostly just Repukes too embarrassed to be associated with them so that doesn't mean anything.

    The key takeaway is that 1/3 of Dem voters are not planning to show up for this election.  So it's all about the enthusiasm gap.

  •  The Dems cannot govern... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Tryptophan

    I spent a week out in Las Vegas and that's all I ever heard.  Well, you elected your second best candidate for president two years ago.

    Whaddya expect?

  •  It's all GOTV (0+ / 0-)

    in an electorate with less than 50% turnout.  The Dems MUST get 2008 Obama voters back to the polls.  This is why the neglect of the base in the name of bipartisanship has been such a disastrous mistake (thank you, Rahm).  Obama has to really turn it on in the next two months and has to be VERY partisan.

    If looks could kill it would have been us instead of him.

    by jhannon on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 09:38:56 PM PDT

  •  What about Cell Phone Only people? (0+ / 0-)

    In my opinion, a much larger number of young people fall into the category of being "Cell Phone Only" people. How are the pollsters dealing with this phenomenon? Are they demonstrating an adequate capture of those people? Are they missing a disproportionate amount of the younger voters because they don't own landlines and have phone numbers that do not fall into the landline phone patterns because they kept their old phone number when they moved from state to state? I think this may have some impact on polling numbers and may be underreported in their breakdown of how they polled the population.

    "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." -- George Carlin, Satirical Comic,(1937-2008)

    by Wynter on Sun Sep 05, 2010 at 10:06:57 PM PDT

  •  Buyer's remorse (0+ / 0-)

    The Democratic Party got drunk on their power. They will be swept out by the very same forces that swept them in and for the exact same reason.
    Sorry, but it's not like you weren't warned.

  •  GOTV (0+ / 0-)

    The GOP are already beating the drum about "voter fraud".  Ben Johnson on Floyd (Brown) report as already started smearing / attacking Voting for America, which has been posted on the AARP website.

    Not much response, so either Seniors know this is BS or it doesn't resonate yet.  

    The question about polling data:  Is a voter swayed by the data:  Gee, I want to vote like for the supposed winner?  

    Are we lemmings or thinking adults?  The rational mind should ask, what would happen if the GOP won control of Congress.  If that doesn't scare everyone, then we need more than GOTV, we need to teach people how to connect the dots!

  •  A *conservative* estimate? Get him! (0+ / 0-)

    Good post, but I think the best thing is not to pay too much attention to the polls.

    "Conformity is the jailer of freedom and the enemy of growth." -- JFK

    by Tryptophan on Mon Sep 06, 2010 at 07:46:26 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site