It’s the issues, stupid.

(We interrupt our regularly scheduled coverage of the ongoing Republican Victory Party hosted by H-Man for this dash of cold water on Tea Party fantasies. – promoted by Voyageur)

Yes, Republibags are jazzed up about birth certificates, taking health care away from sick children, and putting Wall Street crooks back in the driver’s seat, but that’s not doing it for the rest of us.

According to a new poll released by NEWSWEEK, Democrats are up 8 points in the generic poll (50-42), and President Obama — a proven fighter who has been taking a lot of cheap shots from the far right and is still standing — has half the country in his corner. Compare that to Clinton in 1994 who had a 36 percent approval rating and Bush in 2006 with just 33 percent approving of the heckuva job he did.

But let’s get down to brass tacks. Who does the country trust on the issues?

Another factor that has garnered a lot of potentially unwarranted attention is “the issues.” Simply put, in the NEWSWEEK Poll, voters said they trust Democrats more than Republicans to handle pretty much every problem currently facing the country: Afghanistan (by 6 points), health care (by 12), immigration (by 2, though that figure is within the margin of error), Social Security (by 14), unemployment (by 12), financial reform (by 14), energy (by 19), and education (by 19). Voters even prefer Democrats to Republicans on federal spending (by 4 points), taxes (by 5), and the economy (by 10)-the GOP’s core concerns.

Folks are angry and for good reason. The Republicans took a wrecking ball to our economy, pink slipped 8 million American workers — shipping most of those jobs overseas — and if given a second chance they have pledged to do the exact same thing!

The choice couldn’t be more clear. Democrats are fighting FOR the middle class and Republicans are fighting AGAINST the middle class. I know who’s corner I’ll be in for this round and the next.

Fired up, ready to go!

154 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. bjwilson83 says:

    Republicans are fighting to give the middle class a voice.

      • bjwilson83 says:

        Democrats have been giving Soros, Stryker, Gill, Bridges, Polis, etc. a voice for some time now.

        • Aristotle says:

          there are approximately 1000 wealthy GOP donors.

          If you’re not wealthy, voting GOP is voting against your best interests.

          • bjwilson83 says:

            Because until recently, Dems had way more money than Republicans.

            • MADCO says:

              Added together they have more money than all the R’s in Colorado. (I think the heavy hitters have declared residency elsewhere – could be wrong.)

            • Aristotle says:

              Because there are – get this! – people and interests who give to both parties!

              Whoa dude! Mind blowing!

              I’ll give you a few seconds to wrap your head around that.

              ….

              Okay, so not everyone is as partisan as we are. In fact, lots of people – people who do care about politics and the issues – are either honestly middle of the road, or (if they’re wealthy or if you’re talking about a special interest) are too pragmatic to pledge alliegance to either party. These people – the ones with the deep pockets, at least – tend to give money to whomever appears poised to win the election. That ensures that they have access to elected officials.

              In recent election cycles, that party was the Democratic one, so the Dems raised a lot more money than the ‘pubs. See, special interests only want to make sure their voice is heard, and they don’t give a rat’s ass what letter follows the politicians’ names. They only care that they bet on the right horse.

              Now, there are a handful of wealthy individuals who do identify with one party and reliably give most of their money to that party. Same with a few special interests, but that’s only because each major party has become the champion for certain groups. But most wealthy individuals give their money to the GOP because the GOP champions the wealthy, not the middle class or the poor. That’s been true for more than a century.

            • sxp151 says:

              I’ll just put a big red X through your post, and let you find the mistake.

              Have you ever considered a career as a Republican shill? That sounds like it might be a more natural talent for you. It pays well and there are always openings. If you can shave your legs and dye your hair blond, you can get a regular gig on Fox News.

    • Ralphie says:

      support extending the middle-class tax cut without a $700 billion giveaway to millionaires?

      Go ahead and campaign on that, BJ.  Make sure you tell people that when you’re out walking precincts.  Let us know how they react.

      By the way, Go Blue, even though the results of the generic poll are heartening, I think generic polls are useless.  Everyone has to judge their own congresscritter.  How they feel about someone else’s doesn’t matter.

      • bjwilson83 says:

        It’s a fact of life. Question: how many jobs did Bill Gates create in his life time?

        • Ralphie says:

          As a matter of fact, they COST jobs.

          http://tax.com/taxcom/taxblog….

          But you never let facts and figures interfere with dogma, do you?

          • bjwilson83 says:

            Get wealthy; then slam the door shut for anyone else.

            • Aristotle says:

              because Gates understands that tax cuts don’t help him create opportunities for others.

              Don’t just take my word for it; you did notice that the economy crapped out on Bush’s watch, right? The tax breaks certainly didn’t create any jobs or else that wouldn’t have happened.

              • bjwilson83 says:

                The economy crapped out in 2007 after Dems won the house. Bush tried to regulate Fannie and Freddie 17 times, but Dems blocked it. They are directly responsible.

                • dukeco1 says:

                  be so consistently ignorant?

                  Since your connection to reality seems in question, why don’t you go see the movie “Wall Street”? There is a scene in the flick which features a bunch of men in blue suits sitting around a table.

                  They are the managers of the big Wall Street banks. They are discussing the bailout they would eventually get from George Bush, even though they were responsible for pushing our economy over a cliff. This group of men, depicted in Oliver Stones’ film, really exists. I wonder how many of them are Democrats. What do ya think, Beej?  

                • Aristotle says:

                  then you’ll have to say it a lot. I’m kind of stubborn about sticking to the facts, and the fact is, under regulated banking caused the economy to crap out. If it happened in 2007, then it’s even LESS to do with the Dems because Congressional acts do not affect the economy instantly. They take years to show up, so anything that happened in 2007 or 2008 can not be affected by anything that Congress passed those years.

                  Why is it that you can never make a detailed argument to support your case?

              • d'Anconia says:

                Bill Gates and Paul Allen started MicroSoft in Albuquerque, NM in 1975. In 1978, Bill Gates approached the City of Albuquerque to provide “tax-incentivized” financing to expand the company. When the City of Albuquerque declined, Gates and Allen moved the company to Bellevue, WA.

                So…it appears that Bill Gates does (or DID) understand that “tax cuts” do help him create opportunities for others.

            • sxp151 says:

              If you change the tax rates on the wealthy, it doesn’t affect the people who aspire to be wealthy. They’ll still want to make more money.

              • bjwilson83 says:

                They’d just be taxed more. Instead of trying to expand and hire more people; they’ll just take their money and sit on it.

                • Ralphie says:

                  You’d be a lot less ignorant if you had read the link I supplied above.

                • sxp151 says:

                  OK, consider a thought experiment.

                  You make $12,000 a year. If you get a job as a professor, you can make $45,000.

                  But you currently pay nothing in income taxes, and if you make $45,000 a year, you might pay $10,000 in income taxes.

                  OH NOES! Why bother making $45,000 a year?

                  Except even after taxes you’ve increased your take-home pay by $25,000, to $35,000.

                  Now which do you prefer: making $12,000 and paying no taxes and taking home $12,000, or making $45,000 and paying $10,000 in taxes and taking home $35,000?

                  Not YOU, per se, but an intelligent rational actor. Which would s/he prefer?

                  • Gray in Mountains says:

                    you might still try to become a millionaire even though you would only get the tax cut on the 1st $250K?

                    1+1+1+1=4

                    1+1+1+1+1-.5=4.5 4.5 is a larger number than 4. I want 4.5

                    Ask Homer Simpson how many Duffs or doughnuts he wants. Seems like Homer is smarter than BJ.

                    • ClubTwitty says:

                      or whether I prefer mint chocolate chip or rocky road.  

                      ‘Thought experiment.’  Get it?  Apparently not.  

                      No one cares how much you earn in your government subsidized job.  No one cares how much you pay in taxes.  No one knows such about anyone on here.  So, what’s your point?

                      (Oh, never mind, having a point requires more than just spitting up GOPlygook).  

                    • Aristotle says:

                      He posed a good question, and you’re ducking it. If you don’t like the numbers, plug in your own, then answer the question.

                      God loves those who admit they’re wrong because He loves those who speak the truth, and those who are modest. Keep that in mind if you wish to enjoy your heavenly reward, which is never guaranteed no matter how strong your faith.

                    • bjwilson83 says:

                      At what point do taxes become so large that the small increase in income is not worth the extra effort.

                      My heavenly reward is guaranteed, not based on anything I do, but based on what Jesus Christ did. I will admit I’m wrong when I’m wrong. In this case, I am not wrong.

                    • Gray in Mountains says:

                      folks were still seeking more wealth

                    • bjwilson83 says:

                      so there was no way for such folks to get said wealth.

                    • sxp151 says:

                      You really don’t know how capitalism works, do you?

                    • bjwilson83 says:

                      You really don’t know how the world works, do you?

                    • sxp151 says:

                      Think for half a second before you post.

                    • bjwilson83 says:

                      There are plenty of executives working for CEO’s that get rich. Or how about football players working for a general manager?

                    • ClubTwitty says:

                      if it meant it would cost you an additional 4 and a half cents?  

                    • RedGreen says:

                      CT, don’t try to corner the beej with numbers. He’s an aspiring mathematician, and, apparently, a student of economic behavior. If he says four cents in taxes will keep an entrepreneur from making that extra dollar, who are we to argue? It’s just common sense!

                    • sxp151 says:

                      I’ve never met someone so completely uninformed about capitalism. Communists, capitalists, socialists, fascists, none of them are as utterly clueless about capitalism as you.

                      The fact that you wouldn’t work harder for more money tells me that you’re just lazy, which is why I think you’ll never finish grad school. Then you’ll end up as an adjunct, and never make more than $20,000 a year. But I guess since you won’t pay income taxes, you’ll actually be richer than those who make $100,000 a year. Somehow.

                    • bjwilson83 says:

                      Once upon a time, your posts at least made sense.

                    • sxp151 says:

                      But here I am, trying to explain what you got wrong as though you cared about facts.

                    • ClubTwitty says:

                      That’s just funny.  Spoken like a boy who has never lived in the real world, never had to find a real job, never had to compete for a contract.  

                    • bjwilson83 says:

                      I’ve worked for a county, a restaurant, two hotels, two grocery stores, a telecommunications company, a national laboratory, and a university. Not to mention keeping a stellar academic record in order to win a full scholarship to college. I worked my way up. Don’t try to lecture me on finding jobs in the real world or competing for a contract.

                    • ClubTwitty says:

                      Good for you.  How was it, ‘competing’ for that dishwasher ‘contract’?

                       

                    • bjwilson83 says:

                      You did mention “finding a real job”, correct? How many jobs have you had? You were probably born with a silver spoon in your mouth.

                    • ClubTwitty says:

                      and have been employed ever since.  How many?  Gee, it would be hard to count, as I was 14 in 1980 before you even burdened the planet.

                      Paper boy, dishwasher, bus boy, waiter, salesman, canvasser, ski instructor, teaching assistant (since you want to count that as a job), field director, business owner, consultant, marketing professional, radio host, executive director, convenience store clerk, census worker, sandwich maker, cook, camp counselor (Eagle Scout), book reviewer, pizza delivery…

                      I’m sure there have been a few more.  

                      I think I have yet to see a silver spoon…

                    • ClubTwitty says:

                      Columnist, lawn care, landscaping, painter…

                      It’s kind of fun, remember all the jobs I’ve had…

                    • bjwilson83 says:

                      But hey, at least it got you into politics. Too bad you were eventually reduced to census worker and pizza delivery. Maybe if Obama hadn’t killed all the jobs you’d have something better.  

                    • ClubTwitty says:

                      And I never wanted to be in academics.  Nor am I now in politics.  I prefer real work.  

                    • marilou says:

                      what’s a “marketing professional”?  A door-to-door salesman?  Fuller brushes or Mary Kay?

                    • ClubTwitty says:

                      brings out the ugly in anyone.

                    • Aristotle says:

                      You want that dollar completely tax-free? Is that right?

                    • bjwilson83 says:

                      I would prefer no taxes, no government, just anarchy. *Sigh* of course taxes are necessary, but they should be as low as possible.

                    • Aristotle says:

                      Just sayin’.  

                    • MADCO says:

                      You’ve made this pronouncement before, but with no factual analysis to demonstrate that you have any idea how a government budget works.

                      How big is the budget now? (federal or state)

                      How big should it be? (if less – what gets cut?)

                    • Aristotle says:

                      … but that’s presuming to know the mind of God. NOTHING is guaranteed, and the preacher who tells you otherwise is a false one.

                      And your theoretical answer to the original question doesn’t hold water until you do some of the work in question. I saw kind of an answer downthread, but it made me think you don’t understand how capitalism works. More on that later.

                      BTW, how much tax is too much? Ask this guy.

                    • bjwilson83 says:

                      The looming defeat in November seems to have knocked you off kilter in recent days.  

                    • dukeco1 says:

                      Read the book, “the Wealth of Nations”, by Adam Smith, or just shut up on the subject of capitalism…OK?

              • marilou says:

                they just buy muni bonds.  It’s all about return on investment.

      • jpsandscl says:

        I think there is evidence (I’ll Google it later) that generic polls can point to strong undercurrents and tidal shifts. I think we saw that in 2006 and 2008.

        It’s also funny that Republicans still get great press about their ’94 “tidal wave”, but even that was a ripple compared to the tsunami of 2008! Dems have been gaining ground for quite a while now, but you’d be forgiven for not knowing that because the press never likes to tell the Democratic success stories with the same fervor they reserve for Republican mediocrity…

    • MADCO says:

      I know they don’t believe it- how could they when even a math major, irresponsible though she may be, cannot add it up.  Math class is tough.

      • bjwilson83 says:

        Whatever your degree is, you must have cheated to get it.

        • Froward69 says:

          the very same tactics we read on a daily basis from you bj, H-man, LB, OBR and marilou.

          you seem to believe the propaganda spoon fed to you and then repeat it endlessly hoping for it to become truth.

          the rest of us spend every day not just debunking it but wasting our time on the same lies you and those others spread.

          1) the economy tanked because of Bush’s and republican economic policies. Had Bush not vetoed EVERYTHING that came out of Congress in 2007 we might have avoided it.

          2)once President Obama placed regulations on the Bush Bank Bailout. it actually turned into a good thing as not only is it being repaid but will turn a PROFIT for the Taxpayer.

          3)the stimulus also is turning into a success as not just jobs saved but keeping Millions from going hungry

          4)republicans are not just into saying NO to President Obamas Ideas but also NO to republican Ideas Obama agrees with.

          5) over tha past 6 months the republican minority have held up additional stimuli the would extend Unemployment benefits, Promised Aid to Hati and Employment Opportunities for Millions.

          then republicans have the Gaul to run on the High unemployment numbers that they created.

          • GalapagoLarry says:

            With all the Rovian money pouring into these races, I fully expect more “Rovian tactics” to come. Registration challenges at the polls, for instance. I’m really surprised he hasn’t smoozed the more unbalanced religious leaders in Colorado more to jump into these races more agressively. Although, after first declaring that social issues wouldn’t be a part of this cycle, good old Chaput and his newsletter have been grumbling about gay marriage again.

            And we’ll see what happens after “Pulpit Freedom Sunday”, or whatever it’s called.

        • sxp151 says:

          Charming, as ever.

          Obama cut taxes for 95% of Americans. You got a tax cut, like 95% of Americans. Even if you smoke, your taxes were cut so much that you’re still paying less to the government than you were under Bush.

        • MADCO says:

          Oh… because even though repetition doesn’t make them true, it does lead people to believe them.  That’s just mean … or even evil depending on which lies you are repeating.

    • Froward69 says:

      stupidity, ignorance, blatant misinformation or flat out propaganda.

      you really do not care for the plight of regular middle class (or lower) Americans, Do you?

      • bjwilson83 says:

        I’m doing my best to save the middle class. Obama is doing his best to destroy it.

        • Half Glass Full says:

          And I’m sitting here with a larger tax break than I had under Bush, finally some protection against losing health insurance if my employer decides to fire me, finally an end to the drain of our national resources that was Iraq, finally some understanding that global warming truly is a threat, finally a rational approach towards environmental protection and energy policy, finally some efforts to save jobs for middle class Americans, finally an effort to bring back financial regulation…

          All I’m hearing from the Republicans is “where’s Obama’s birth certificate” and a pathetic, how-dumb-do-you-think-we-are effort to lay all the economic problems that developed over the years prior to 2008 on Obama’s feet – and most importantly, absolutely no solution except “more of the same” of the policies that got us into this mess in the first place – and shills like you try to tell me that the Republicans love the middle class and Obama hates us?

          C’mon. Get real.

          • bjwilson83 says:

            but that is not the same as a tax cut. You’re going to have to pay higher health insurance premiums. We do indeed have an end to the war in Iraq, thanks to one George W. Bush. When Dems like Reid were going around proclaiming the war lost, he had the courage to follow through with the surge strategy which ultimately worked. Global warming is not a threat. Energy policy is anything but rational, with the government artificially subsidizing forms of energy which are not economically viable, and will not become so in the foreseeable future (wind, ethanol, etc.). When something good is developed, the free market will ensure that it is implemented.

            Republicans are turning over a new leaf, getting rid of the old, corporate owned, establishment Republicans. The conservative candidates that we have nominated are not questioning Obama’s birth certificate (in fact, they are calling them “dumbasses” if I remember correctly). The new crop of candidates have conservative solutions to fix our nation’s economy and Obama’s bloated, bankrupting, mismanaged approach to it.

            • ClubTwitty says:

              Between 2005-2009.

              Your point?

              And why do you think so poorly of our military?

              http://www.grist.org/article/p

              A hair-raising Pentagon report [PDF]  on the potentially imminent and colossal national security threat posed by climate change has been making its way around the Internet since its release in late January, and this week it picked up considerable speed.

              Fortune magazine was the first major news outlet to cover the report; the “Climate Collapse” feature in its Jan. 26 issue raised many an eyebrow in business and Beltway circles. Then, this past Sunday, a somewhat more histrionic article on the report ran in the British Observer and has been swirling through blogs and listservs.

              While The Observer sensationalized the story with its erroneous claim that the report was “secret” and “suppressed by U.S. defense chiefs” when in fact it had already been publicly discussed, the document is worthy of even the British press’ flair for melodrama. After all, intimations of fast-approaching environmental catastrophe sound a lot different coming from the Pentagon than from the Ph.D.s who have been uttering these warnings for decades.

              The report wasn’t penned by members of the “Chicken Little sky-is-falling crowd” (as Republican leaders like to call global- warming activists), but by Peter Schwartz, former head of planning for Shell Oil and sometime CIA consultant, and Doug Randall of the Global Business Network, a California think tank.

              • bjwilson83 says:

                Yeah, those have been going on for a while. Global warming is still false. Did you know that governments pay people to spread rumors in order to control people?

                http://online.wsj.com/article/

                • ClubTwitty says:

                  I believe that you are supposed to say that AGW is ‘false’ since saying that ‘global warming’ is false makes you look like an even bigger idiot than you normally appear, which–itself–is an accomplishment.  So congratulations on that, at least.

                  It’s an article about a Pentagon report put out under the GW Bush administration.  You might notice the letters ‘PDF’ in the quote above.  It’s a type of file.  In the article it’s a link.  You can click on these (‘links’) and your browser opens another window or tab, and–voila!–you can read the report yourself, or have someone read it to you.  Of course, it may challenge your deeply held, albeit idiotic, beliefs, so you probably won’t want to.  

              • marilou says:

                are rising because people don’t want to pay their own medical bills.  They want someone else to do it for them. ClubTwitty, get a high deductible policy and see what your rates do.  

                • Ralphie says:

                  Insurance is just a socialist invention to keep you from bearing the responsibility of selling all your earthly possessions and going to debtor’s prison if you get sick.

                  Buck up, old man.  Only sissies buy insurance.

                • Gray in Mountains says:

                  are rising because the insurance companies are greedy pigs.

                  • MADCO says:

                    and because we have outstanding, and expensive healthcare.

                    Of course, 28% profit margins is expensive too.

                  • marilou says:

                    Microsoft is at about 48%.  Greedy pigs they are.

                    Obummer got off his airplane with a pig under each arm.  A marine saluted and said, “Nice [Microsoft] pigs, sir.” Obummer said, “Actually they are Arkansas Razorbacks.  I got one for Nancy Pelosi and one for Hillary Clinton.”  The marine responded, “Excellent trade, sir.”

                    • MADCO says:

                      Don’t want to pay for insurance, you best plan not to get sick.

                      http://articles.latimes.com/20

                      That put WellPoint’s profit margin at 7.3%, the highest of the five big insurers. Margins at the other four ranged from 3.4% for Louisville, Ky.-based Humana to 7.1% for Philadelphia-based Cigna.

                      I confused margin with the the SGA expense that is actually a little over 30% – Medicare and Tricare is less than 3%

                    • marilou says:

                      insurance company profit is 3 – 4%.  What’s wrong with that?

                      You are wrong about Medicare overhead.  Not counted in that 3% is what is paid to private companies that do the administration.

                      http://www.takebackmedicine.co

            • MADCO says:

              Tough sell outside of Denver metro.

          • GalapagoLarry says:

            You’ve got it. You’re real. But:

            Middle class and poor TeaPublicans have a religion. They worship the rich. Their golden calf is greed. Not recognizing that the top 2% is comprised of only 2% because 98% don’t make it, they believe that they’ll make it into the NBA of the greedy. They’ll get into that heavenly realm ruled by the Invisible Hand of the Market in the sky (Can the church give me an “Amen?!), if they believe strongly enough and if they prosylitize. And so they must evangelize, which is what we get here in their factless posts. And, in spite of the cripling Republican economic mess we’re in, they believe, against overwhelming odds, they, the Chosen, will make it.

            This is the only tenet of their religion. Forget protection from overpowering corporations, forget the economic and spiritual costs of war, forget that our planet home is in dire danger, forget a future of clean energy and onshore American manufacturing, forget our countrymen denied the dignity of work, forget our nation’s conquest by financial pirates. And forget respect for our women’s ability to manage, for and by themselves, healthful lives; and forget acknowledging the dignity and civic rights of those who don’t look or fuck like TeaPublicans prefer. Hell, forget our country! Forget America! Listen to their sermon, repeated over and over again: Kneel before the rich. Follow your greed.

            Oh, and, President of the greatest nation on Earth or not: Stop that black guy! He’s got their TV. How are they going to slaver over their preachers if they don’t have that?

        • Voyageur says:

          WQhich is why you hate unions…they created so many 50k middle class members that you want working for Wal-Mart at minimum wage.

    • Go Blue says:

      how sad is it that people take you as seriously as this guy? Grow up and get a clue.  

  2. Voyageur says:

    I’m citing this tagline from Newsweek poll because it speaks to the discussion we had the other day about how cell phones bias polling results.  This poll seems to have gone to great lengths to correct for the cell-phone issues.  Cheapo robocall polls like Rassy are far more prone to cell phone error.  Since we know cell-phone only users are a young — and Democratic leaning —

    Democgraphic, this may account for the more favorable numbers generated for Ds than the R majorities reported by the robocallers like Razzy and Magellan.

    This poll was conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International on September 29-30, 2010. Telephone interviews were conducted with a nationally representative sample of 1,025 adults, 18 years and over, including 691 adults reached on a landline telephone and 334 adults reached on a cell phone. Results use a two-stage weighting procedure: (1) to correct for different probabilities of selection associated with the number of adults in each respondent’s household and their household telephone usage patterns; and (2) to adjust the sample demographics to Census Current Population Survey parameters for gender, age, education, race, region, and population density. The overall margin of sampling error is plus or minus 3.8 percentage points for results based on 1,025 adults. Results based on smaller subgroups are subject to larger margins of sampling error.

  3. RedGreen says:

    Not sure that’s what this is, V.

    Polls regularly show Democrats have an edge on all sorts of issues that are important to people. But issue polls aren’t elections, and they sure as heck aren’t governing.

    So more people wanted single-payer health care, when asked about that last year when Congress was debating … but the Koch Brothers and some insurance giants ginned up a made-for-cable rebellion that successfully kept this not only off the table but tarred reasonable, Bob Dole-style health reform as a socialist takeover.

    Again and again, Democrats gets suckered by polls like this — “the people are with us! if only they follow through at the ballot box! and then they’ll pressure Congress too!” — and lose the battle, whether in elections or when the governing actually gets done.

    The Colorado Model (on a local level) and the Obama campaign corrected this to a degree by putting a well-oiled system in place to translate public sentiment into votes. But the enormity of the problems (two wars, enormous deficits, a collapsed economy, and a changing economy that’s shedding jobs to India and China) faced by the big Democratic majorities, and the Republican strategy of ensuring tepid success if not outright failure by government, leaves voters, understandably, wondering whether Democrats can govern. That’s where a Tea Party movement grabs the public imagination and swamps the results of polls like this.

    Now, maybe Democrats can turn out voters above pollsters’ “likely voter” models — the machines are in place and have a track record — but there’s a lengthy history of voters voting against their interests and with the more emotionally engaging story, and there’s little reason to think that isn’t the terrain of this year’s election.

    • Half Glass Full says:

      I think you’re right. The Republican candidates are garnering more support than they should have – perhaps not enough to win, but more support than they deserve – by changing the subject and doing everything they can to simply prevent government from working. Because then they say, “See? Government doesn’t work.”

      And then they propose extending the tax cuts for the ultra-rich because we’ll do so much better with them. As if we’re doing so wonderfully now, with those same tax cuts having been in effect for most of the Bush years.

      It’s a stupid argument, but as you point out, sometimes the “emotionally engaging” argument wins out over reason.

    • DavidThi808 says:

      And I would add that many don’t see us Dems actually stepping up to fix the big problems.

    • GalapagoLarry says:

      I remember thinking, Oh, how I hope a person of Obama’s intentions becomes America’s leader! But, Oh, how I hope he loses, because he’ll be crushed by the HOPEless mess he and we inherit.

      In the end, Hope won me over. But in the end, will the enormity crush us all?

      To those who question if this mid-term is meaningful: Remember the enormity of the problems dumped upon us. Would more of the same serve well our beloved nation?

  4. Laughing Boy says:

    Newsweek is the only poll in the RCP index that has the Dems up.

  5. bjwilson83 says:

    For Dems, it’s more like: “Pooped out; time for a nap.”

  6. H-man says:

    If the Dems have the issues, why are they not running on their record?  

    Heard any Dem talk about what they voted for? Crickets.  

    Even DeGrette is laughed at when she shows up at a debate and says the stimulus worked.

    You can debate whether any policy was good or bad, worked or didn’t work, but as to what the public thinks about all your wonderful policies all you need to do is listen to what your candidates are doing.  

    They are running as fast as they can away from everything they did.  

    Any Colorado Dems running on healthcare?  

    Any Colorado Dems running on Stimulus?  

    Any of them heard saying taking over auto companies was a good thing and some other industry is next?

    If the Dem candidates don’t believe the people are with them on what they have done, why would anyone else?

    By the way, the polls show the candidates are right.

  7. H-man says:

    New Denver Post / 9 News Poll Buck up 48-43.  Key takeaways, Buck significantly leading with Independents and Hispanics. All statewide offices, except Gov, showing Republican leads. this looks like a very large wave.

    Those issues seem to be working really well for ya. Keep up the nice work.

  8. Go Blue says:

    with the Cons on Pols. The level insecurity when it comes to campaigning on kitchen table issues is hilariously high.

    And for all their bumper sticker retorts, it’s not worth arguing with assholes that have road rage.

     

    • Half Glass Full says:

      While BJ, H-man and Libertad simply offer up the same one-sentence, one-syllable-word pep rally points, only RedGreen has offered you a rational, reasoned response. I’d be interested in your response to RedGreen.

    • Libertad says:

      Newsweak? It’s about the economy stupid. The tax and spend policies have failed.

      Please review the Denver areas economists jobs forecast for next year 30,000-40,000 more jobs lost.

      University of Colorado economist Richard Wobbekind recently estimated that the state will lose 30,000 jobs this year, up from his 20,250 estimate in late June.

      Patricia Silverstein of Jefferson County-based Development Research Partners last week forecast a net loss of 40,000 Colorado jobs in 2010.

      Read more: Denver-area economists see more job losses for 2010 – The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/busi

      Its only getting worse and everyone knows it. What are your big new ideas? What economically devastating programs do you have planned next?

  9. dwyer says:

    Disclaimer:  Races are not about issues or personalities.  Political races are about winning.  I am looking forward to when the dems will begin doing that.

      • dwyer says:

        I was being too subtle.  My remark was really directed towards CP on the grounds that if it is the issues and the dems are right on the issues,  why are the repubs ahead in all races with the possible exception of CD7, CD1 and the governor’s race.

        • H-man says:

          1) obviously they don’t have the issues and 2) it is not just about the issues.  In large part it is about what they have done, their record of achievement or lack therof. But you got that, too.

          • dwyer says:

            To Clarify:

            I am a democrat and I do think we have the issues.  I believe that democrats have failed to define the issues and have not answered the multiple falsehoods which have been propagated.  I deplore the smugness exhibited by dems who argue that we are right on the issues and therefore there is no need to refute, educate, or explain.  That right makes might.  I don’t think so.

            My overwhelming statement to the dems is “This is a failure to communicate.”

  10. Interlocken Loop says:

    http://www.denverpost.com/elec

    Tancredo is polling consistently within ten to twelve points of the Mayor.  This could actually turn into a very competitive race.

    For the other statewide offices it could be a clean sweep for the GOP.  Buescher and Kennedy have both run boring campaigns that have put them behind.  Unless he makes a mistake Suthers wins by at least twenty.  Amazing given the Kimball case and the flap over Pay Day lending regulations.  

  11. paulrosenthal says:

    Hey Coloradopols, curious to know what you think of the poll in today’s Denver Post.  Seems like it was a phone poll, which I wonder about the accuracy of.  As you know, a lot of folks (like me) only have cell phones, especially younger folks and may not be included accurately in the poll.

    I also find it remarkable that a large number of people haven’t “begun to focus” on the various other statewide races like Sec. of State, when they magically have an opinion about US Senate and Governor?  One would think if there were such a “Republican wave” that people would easily be able to decide.  

    • Ralphie says:

      Yes it was a robopoll, and I don’t like robopolls.

      But if people younger than 50 were undersampled in this survey, Democrats need to be even MORE worried.

      Ballots are mailed in 10 days.  There isn’t a whole lot of time left to turn around these numbers.

      This isn’t handwringing.  It’s starting to look like what is.

      I can’ help but wonder if Bennet’s net minus favorable-unfavorable is a residual effect of Romanoff’s scorched earth campaign.

      What concerns me are the downticket races.

      • Middle of the Road says:

        on Adam Schrager’s show right now with the AG candidates. I can’t help but wonder if the average voter even knows who either Suthers or Garnett is, let alone what they stand for.  

      • H-man says:

        I think Bennet’s negatives are based on at least four factors, some of which he had no control over, some of which he has control over.

        No control over

        1. His voting record

        2. The fact he is an incumbent

        3. The residual of the primary, but to be fair the Republican primary was just as negative.

        Had control over

        1. He has run, and others have run on his behalf, a negative, factually out of context, campaign.  When a campaign goes negative it increases negatives all around.

        To be fair to Bennet, he is running against a pretty stiff head wind.  This is his first time running and he is not a natural outgoing person.  He has to work at being likeable.  He just picked about as tough a cycle to cut his teeth on in a generation as was possible.

        • sxp151 says:

          is so mean and unfair! Waaaaaaahh!

        • Libertad says:

          On his voting record. You say he had no control over it, and I see your point — he was taking orders from Obama-Pelosi.

          However, Bennet is refusing to be accountable by having others say for him that he had to vote with Pelosi-Obama so he could avoid a primary.

          Its just not true, he choose to make those votes, now he can’t live up to them so he’s using excuses.

    • BlueCat says:

      It’s so sweet and innocent of you to find it remarkable that “a large number of people haven’t even ‘begun to focus’ on various other statewide races…”.  Try going door to door some time and you will discover that not only not focusing on but not having any idea who people like SOS, AG, Treasurer or the candidates challenging them are is not the least remarkable but the norm. “Large numbers” couldn’t tell you who their own US Rep is. Even when you are going door to door with a list of people who voted in the last election. Most have no idea who their state house and senate members are. It’s not as if any of these people have ever appeared on American Idol, you know.

      • Froward69 says:

        although most (D&R)Voters are not aware of the names of people down ticket. some(R)voters are. Whereas (D)Voters are more apt to vote straight ticket. (R)voters are split looking for names. Tancredo v Maes for example.  

        the moderate republicans who now feel purged from the party. Are especially looking for names.

        • BlueCat says:

          pretty much nothing about AG,SOS,Treasurer, State Leg. What you say about individual v straight ticket voting among Ds and Rs is interesting but not particularly relevant to Paul’s quaint surprise that so many aren’t focused on those races yet. Most likely many of the ones who do plan to vote R or D but chose ” not focused” did so because the names as yet mean nothing to them.  They didn’t know which was R and which was D. “Not focused” mainly means ” I have no clue who these people are”. That’s highly unremarkable.

          My experience in going door to door for D Joe Rice over the years is that the only people who cut me off with a curt “Which party is he?” are Rs who refuse to hear one more word after getting the affiliation. But I get very few of those responses. Most of our Rs are very polite. On the other hand, quite a few Rs in HD38 have been voting for Joe since 2006.

          The Dems who have never heard of him often ask “which party?” after listening to something about him and go on to say that they will certainly be voting for him because they will definitely only vote D, which supports your experience of Ds as more likely straight ticket voters.

          Most Ds in my neighborhood, except for a few grumpy old ones, have been so angry at all Rs and everything R since the GW years, they won’t consider an R. Period.

  12. reubenesp says:

    and hopefully the Dems can do a better job of selling themselves soon.  But both Dems and the party led by the orange man are equally hated.

    The closest races will be decided on turnout which means that Bennet, Markey and Salazar win.

    Suthers wins because of his strong endorsement of Monica Marquez.

  13. colawman says:

    Obviously Michael Bennet puts little faith in the Newsweek polls. He has not mentioned his votes in full support of the Obama agenda during the run up to the election. Why has Bennet tactically avoid any association with Obama since his primary victory?   I think I will rely more on Bennet’s actions as an indication of how Colorado voters feel about Obama and his policies.

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.