WaPo/ABC poll: The 14-point partisan gap
posted at 9:30 am on November 17, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
After a while, it gets to be a broken record, but we still have to ask: does anyone know how to poll out there? Despite every indication that the partisan split among Americans has narrowed considerably since the last Presidential election, won by the Democrat by seven points while garnering considerable independent and Republican cross-over votes, the new Washington Post/ABC poll uses a sample in which Democrats outnumber Republicans by fourteen points. Moreover, the WaPo/ABC poll has progressively widened that gap over the last four monthly polls:
- 11/15/09: 35/21/39 (D/R/I)
- 10/18/09: 33/20/42
- 9/12/09: 32/21/43
- 8/17/09: 35/25/34
Let’s have a reality check here. In the last four months, which party would have lost ~20% of its representation in the polls and had them shift to the independent column? With both Gallup and Rasmussen showing the Democrats losing the generic Congressional ballot for the first time in several years, it’s not the Republicans losing voters. And yet the Post and ABC conduct their public-opinion polls based on samples that not only wildly oversample Democrats but show the opposite trend of partisan identification.
Even while increasing the sample to the point of farce, Barack Obama and Democratic policies lost ground in this poll:
- Approval on health care: 47/49, was 48/48 in October
- Approval on deficit: 42/53, was 45/51 in October
- Approval on the economy: 51/47, was 50/48
- Support ObamaCare: 48/49, was 45/48
- Public option: Up 10 (53/43), was up 17 in October (57/40)
Maybe WaPo/ABC should use a 25-point gap the next time between Democrats and Republicans. That way they can get the results they want on the issues.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
Actually, it is. Democrats are not changing parties. Republicans are switching to third parties or Independent. It’s misleading, yes. People mistakenly identify conservatives as “Republicans” as a reflex, but the true conservatives are no longer identifying themselves as Republicans.
Liberals make the same mistake, many times suggesting that the loss in Republican numbers indicates a shift away from conservative values or beliefs, but it’s actually completely the opposite. The Republican Party no longer represents conservative values.
Gregor on November 17, 2009 at 12:20 PM
***
The real polls will occur in the 2010 and 2012 elections. The American People will vote out Comrade Obama (PBUH) and his minions then.
***
Some polls you can really believe in!
***
John Bibb
***
rocketman on November 17, 2009 at 12:23 PM
Thank you, Gregor, that’s exactly what I’ve been saying. I cannot understand why Ed Morrissey continues to forget that when he claims that these polls are not representative of realistic Party affiliation.
And it is plain to see that the entire Republican Party is either in denial or just doesn’t care.
jay12 on November 17, 2009 at 12:40 PM
Can you point to Party ID polls that show that this is incorrect? Because I can point to polls that show it’s about right. And that the gap has been widening over the past few months as there are fewer and fewer Republicans while Democrats hold steady.
(I suspect many that are leaving the Republican party are becoming independent Palin/Hoffman/Beck-style tea partiers, which would explain why Obama’s policies still do not poll well. It would also explain why the GOP numbers start to really go down and the independent numbers go up around June. Don’t conflate “independent” with “centrist”. I suspect there are many more far-right independents than there were a year ago.)
If you wanted to make a valid point, you could mention that among likely voters, the Dep/Rep gap is much smaller – about 5 points. But maybe you’re not interested in making a valid point.
orange on November 17, 2009 at 12:41 PM
Recent polls by both Rassmussen and others show the GOP with a lead on generic polls.
So a 14 point partisan in favor of the Dems is ridiculous.
The WaPo/ABC poll is pure garbage. But don’t tell that to AP who gladly uses any information to fit his “Palin is unpopular”-Meme.
Norwegian on November 17, 2009 at 1:03 PM
Ed,
Google images for “facepalm” and create a collection to use. The picture you constantly use is probably the lamest one. There are some gems out there.
uknowmorethanme on November 17, 2009 at 1:06 PM
Sarah is on Rush RIGHT NOW
Blacksmith8 on November 17, 2009 at 1:14 PM
Agreed.
Not all of us!
Well, you and I might disagree about what “conservative values” are, historically. But there’s no question that there is a far-right group out there that does not feel represented by the Republican party.
orange on November 17, 2009 at 1:15 PM
Maybe you are a troll repeating the Usual Talking Points, with no credibility. You’re BORING, Glenn, and only your fellow trolls care what you spew out.
The increasing dishonesty of media polling is obvious–too obvious for you to spin.
Janos Hunyadi on November 17, 2009 at 1:20 PM
Neither you nor Morrissey seems interested in the basic fact that there’s a difference between a generic Congressional ballot poll and a Party ID poll.
The question you should be asking is if the “independents” in these polls adequately represent the tea partier right wing (who don’t show up in Party ID polls, but do influence generic Congressional polls – thus explaining the difference between the two). Given the results of the poll in the post, I suspect they do, but I can’t prove that.
orange on November 17, 2009 at 1:20 PM
If it was so obvious you should be able to easily refute my point. Instead you resort to namecalling.
orange on November 17, 2009 at 1:21 PM
Crap, redux. Doesn’t your wrist get tired? Don’t you have any other hobbies?
Janos Hunyadi on November 17, 2009 at 1:21 PM
I think they know very well how to poll, and they are using their knowledge to produce a result most favorable to the left. This is nothing more than polling as propaganda. I don’t know if it’s the ultimate in trying to influence public opinion by telling the folks what “other people” are thinking, but it sure comes close.
n0doz on November 17, 2009 at 1:27 PM
The group that feels they aren’t represented by the Republican Party is anything but “far right.” But I’m happy when I find that liberals believe that. I hope they go on believing that. The longer they stay out of touch with reality, the better.
The Republican Party would be stretching to simply say they’re right of center. I’d argue they’ve actually slid to the left of it.
Gregor on November 17, 2009 at 1:28 PM
I still remember that back in 1980 the WashPost/ABC poll had Carter beating Reagan.
MB4 on November 17, 2009 at 2:01 PM
Well, the group that’s to the right of the Republican Party is the furthest-right group in the US, correct?
And since this group is no more than 25% of the population (probably much less, but certainly no more), then if 75% or more of the country is to the “left” of them, then they’re pretty far-right – at least relatively speaking.
I mean, if this group is not the far right, then who is to the right of them?
orange on November 17, 2009 at 2:24 PM
I see a guillotine in the SRM’s brief future.
noblejones on November 17, 2009 at 2:24 PM
You’re either completely out of your mind, or simply lying. Which is it?
Gregor on November 17, 2009 at 2:46 PM
Any poll is suspect when it starts with:
ABC
NBC
CBS
CNN
MSNBC
WaPo
NYTimes
AP
Newsweek
And any combination of the above raises the “suspect-edness” by a factor of x100.
mrt721 on November 17, 2009 at 2:50 PM
orange:
Pretty soon, the WaPo and their ilk will simply stop talking to Republicans at all, complaining they do not exists.
Back when Reagan won a landslide, some people said the Republicans were finished and that they were only 24% of the electorate. That was wrong.
The truth is in a lot of states the way party ID is established is based on the way people voted in the most recent elections. In Indiana, there is no party registration, but if you want to vote in the Republican or Democratic primary, then they will consider you a Democrat…however, last year a lot of Republicans vote in the Democratic primary to vote against Obama. Operation Chaos.
So, the truth is if you look at the 2008 national election, there was a 7 point gap between parties…if you look at the elections in VA and NJ, there was a huge leap to the Republicans.
So, the idea that all these Republicans are going to a third party, is absurd. The only place you saw that was in the 23rd NY…and even Hoffman considered himself a Republican.
Terrye on November 17, 2009 at 2:56 PM
What I should have said, is that they will consider you a Democrat or Republican based on how you voted in the most recent primary.
Terrye on November 17, 2009 at 2:59 PM
Your logic is incorrect. Those who are conservative are not the far right wing of the Republican party. Conservatives merely believe that government should pay its own bills without stealing more than is acceptable from the pockets of its citizens. We believe budgets should be reduced, not grown in times of recession and crisis, despite what some stupid Wall Street Bankers and frat house lawyers in the Dhimmicrat party believe.
Conservatives are the base group of the country (40%) that believes the government is out of control right now, failing to listen to the usually silent majority of folks who pay their bills on time, don’t go into massive debt to buy things they don’t need, or pay for people who won’t pay their own way (illegal aliens, welfare recipients who are on their 3rd generation of welfare cons on the dole, college professors who think they are smarter than people who make a living in business every day of their lives, journalists, and any lawyer who gives money to D causes).
Your supposition that conservatives are lunatic fringe elements who are out of touch with mainstream America is disproved by the fact that the country survived EXACTLY the way we are telling the politicians to act (STOP SPENDING MONEY unless the Constitution specifically gives you the function you claim) for over 200 years, and civilization is based on at least 2000 years of the EXACT same principles. Use your own money to pay for what you want, and government must stop using our money to pay for things we don’t want, including welfare for cheats and deadbeats, the AMA, the drug companies, the lawyers, the unions, etc…..
Liberals always have a way to demonize their fellow man and use propaganda to get their way. You are no exception. Ignore our protests and complaints, where none have been heard from before, to your political peril. Steal our children’s future, and the retribution for domestic and foreign policy foul ups will not be favorable to your politics for a long time.
Subsunk
Subsunk on November 17, 2009 at 3:00 PM
Those are not mutually exclusive in this case.
Aviator on November 17, 2009 at 3:18 PM
You’re either making a rational case or you’re namecalling. I know which it is. Do you?
orange on November 17, 2009 at 4:39 PM
There are far more conservatives than Republicans, and there are far more Democrats than liberals. A truism. It’s why your party, if it runs a fringe moonbat like Obama, has to have him sound as conservative as possible — and along with media sycophancy he can eke out a win.
ddrintn on November 17, 2009 at 4:52 PM
I never said they were. I said that some folks have become disgusted with the Republican party and are leaving it to become independents. Some of those folks might be centrists. Some others – the tea partiers – are far right folks.
Again, I must ask: if the tea partiers are not the far right, who is?
I would find this easier to swallow if I had seen conservative tea parties when Bush was adding a prescription drug entitlement. Or when he was getting us into foreign wars which add billions upon billions to the budget.
Wait, when did I say that? I never said anything like “lunatic fringe” or “out of touch”. If your opinion is that being far right makes you the “lunatic fringe”, then so be it. But don’t assume that that is my opinion as well.
What’s my propaganda? The polling data I linked to?
How am I demonizing my fellow man? I am not engaging in namecalling, not even against the people who are calling me names.
It’s a bit early to say how Obama will fare, but “domestic and foreign policy foul ups” sounds like the Bush years to me. Given that he left office with astonishingly low approval ratings, most of the country agrees with me. (am I once again resorting to propaganda by referencing poll data?)
orange on November 17, 2009 at 5:00 PM
Define “far right”. This oughtta be fun.
ddrintn on November 17, 2009 at 5:12 PM
Eke out a win? He got more votes for president than anyone in history. He more than doubled McCain in the electoral college. He won by a much bigger margin than Bush did in both 2000 and 2004 combined (granted, 2000 was a negative in popular vote margin, but anyway Obama’s popular vote margin was about 3 times the size of Bush’s margin in 2004).
How is that eking anything? It was a very decisive win.
orange on November 17, 2009 at 5:19 PM
Do you understand the concept of left and right in American politics? If you do, then it’s pretty clear: The folks on the right who are furthest from the center.
Do you think that the concept of far right simply doesn’t exist? I mean, somebody has to be in the furthest-right group in American politics, right? This isn’t rocket science, guys.
orange on November 17, 2009 at 5:23 PM
Of course I know the concept, but I want your definition of “far right”. What sort of opinions would someone on the “far right” hold? I hear the term “extreme right-wing” applied to people like Sarah Palin. What about Palin’s ideology is “extreme right-wing”?
ddrintn on November 17, 2009 at 5:39 PM
It was decisive I guess for Democrats, who hadn’t had a candidate get over 50% of the popular vote since what, 1964? But given the advantages Obama enjoyed, with a completely orgasmic media to go a long with a much-hyped “economic meltdown”, he did only eke out a win.
ddrintn on November 17, 2009 at 5:42 PM
You see, orange, here’s the thing. Lefties simply consider the views they hold to be “middle of the road”, and then radiate the spectrum from there. It’s delusional.
ddrintn on November 17, 2009 at 5:51 PM
I agree that to hold that view would be delusional. Fortunately, I have no problem recognizing that someone like Dennis Kucinich is far-left.
But you seem to deny the existence of the far-right. You sound like you’re doing the exact thing you’re accusing “lefties” of doing.
Hey: prove me wrong. Tell me who the far-right is. I told you someone who’s in the far-left though you didn’t even ask. I’ve asked several times who, if not the tea partiers, inhabits the far-right. Nobody has responded.
orange on November 17, 2009 at 6:01 PM
You have it. I gave it to you in the post to which you were responding. Here it is again: The folks on the right who are furthest from the center.
I’m not particularly interested in making this discussion about Sarah Palin. However, if (as you claim) she is not a member of the far-right, then it should be easy for you to list a number of prominent political figures who are to the right of her.
orange on November 17, 2009 at 6:04 PM
As is Obama, then. And Pelosi and Reid.
I’m not making any claim. I’m asking you what policy positions she holds that marks her as “far right”, and how that “far right” designation could apply to the country as a whole.
ddrintn on November 17, 2009 at 6:48 PM
Pravda.
bluelightbrigade on November 17, 2009 at 6:51 PM
You say the tea partiers are “far right”. Give me some examples showing their politics to be out of the mainstream, using specific issues and polling data.
ddrintn on November 17, 2009 at 6:58 PM
Given that Kucinich clearly has views to the left of those three, you are clearly mistaken here. I mean, when have those three advocated the following positions from Kucinich’s presidential platform?
Maybe there are a few exceptions, but I don’t believe Obama, Pelosi or Reid has advocated most of those things. If any of those three have advocated for all or most of those things, then I’ll concede that you are correct about that person.
For now, it seems that you are falling prey to the delusion that you are accusing “lefties” of.
I got that implication, but fair enough: if you believe that Sarah Palin is extreme right, then so be it.
Well, how many people would claim to be to the right of Palin compared to how many would say that she is to the right of them? I suspect the latter number is far greater. I can name quite a lot of prominent political figures that surely are to her left – Obama, Pelosi and Reid among them. I ask yet again: how many can you name that are to her right?
If you and I can name dozens upon dozens that are to her left and we can’t name any that are to her right, doesn’t that give a good indication that she is to the far-right? If not that, what would let us know that she is far-right? What metric can we use?
orange on November 17, 2009 at 7:04 PM
I ask you, how many politicians can you name to Obama’s left?
The gist of your post is that “far right” is just a sinister label to use against someone to the right of you, that you can’t stand. If you can’t identify a “far right” political position, what use is the label anyway?
More to the point, how are the tea partiers and Sarah Palin out of the mainstream politically? On what specific issues are they so on the fringe as far as national polling data are concerned?
ddrintn on November 17, 2009 at 7:08 PM
Aren’t most of these pretty standard lefty positions?
ddrintn on November 17, 2009 at 7:12 PM
I don’t have polling data on the tea partiers’ beliefs. Can you point me in the right direction? If you’d like to prove that they are mainstream (using specific issues and polling data), please do.
orange on November 17, 2009 at 7:14 PM
I thought you might have known already, since you labeled them “far right”.
Q.E.D.
ddrintn on November 17, 2009 at 7:17 PM
I already named one. Conyers is another. Off the top of my head, there’s Schakowsky, Bernie Sanders, I imagine Howard Dean. Anybody who supports single-payer is to Obama’s left, and there are many in the House who do.
Now, do you care to do the same? I’ve asked enough times: who is to the right of the tea partiers?
orange on November 17, 2009 at 7:18 PM
For starters, you could look into national polls on issues such as the size of government, taxation, abortion, national security, immigration and others. And then tell me with a straight face that Obama is “mainstream”.
ddrintn on November 17, 2009 at 7:19 PM
I suppose so. And yet with a few exceptions, Obama, Pelosi and Reid generally don’t support those positions. Pretty weird for far-leftists, huh?
orange on November 17, 2009 at 7:21 PM
You’re getting off the rails here. The point is that the tea partiers are far-right. Why are you getting into Obama?
orange on November 17, 2009 at 7:22 PM
Seems to me that Obama would be right at home with the above-named crew. Obama supports single-payer. He’s said so himself — I’ve heard it. Try again.
ddrintn on November 17, 2009 at 7:23 PM
You throw around the term “far right” without acknowledging the existence of the “far left”? Aren’t you “far left” in relation to where the country as a whole is ideologically?
ddrintn on November 17, 2009 at 7:24 PM
Ah, this is where we’re miscommunicating. I’m not sure how you got that impression, but I never intended to label anyone sinisterly. Frankly, I thought it was uncontroversial that the tea partiers are to the right of the Republican party, thus to the right of the nation as a whole. Since you can’t list anyone to their right, this seems pretty likely to be true. Feel free to actually refute this rather than going around in circles asking me about Obama and Palin.
If there is nobody to their right, then by definition, they are the far right. I don’t see why this is a source of conflict.
orange on November 17, 2009 at 7:26 PM
Pat Buchanan alone explodes your analysis.
ddrintn on November 17, 2009 at 7:28 PM
^ And, in a way, Ron Paul. So much for “far right”, then.
ddrintn on November 17, 2009 at 7:29 PM
It would be easier to isolate the views of individuals rather than try to overgeneralize based on a group. The basic ideas that animate the tea partiers is that government is getting too big and taxes are too high. If those are “far right” positions, then you’d have to say we’re a “far right” country. Ergo, you’re on the fringe, dude.
ddrintn on November 17, 2009 at 7:32 PM
Okay, you’re completely off the mark here. If you can’t answer any of my question or even remember the answers I gave earlier, I’m not interested in discussing this with you further.
As a reminder:
And another reminder, if you choose to look yourself in the mirror:
As I said before, it is indeed delusional. Have a good night.
orange on November 17, 2009 at 7:36 PM
And another reminder, if you choose to look yourself in the mirror:
You’re the one that threw the label “far right” around, and couldn’t back it up. Good night.
ddrintn on November 17, 2009 at 9:50 PM
Forgive the on-topic post.
Pollster: I’d like to ask you a few questions for our poll.
Victim: Okay.
Pollster: Let’s start with, are you a Democrat or a Republican?
Victim: Republican.
Pollster: (click)
Victim: Hello? Hello?
Merovign on November 17, 2009 at 10:48 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2