Independents Leaning More Right?
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in Democrats, Independents, Polls, Republicans
Gallup has some numbers that might surprise.
Basically, the folks who decide the elections (the indys) are starting to consider the Republicans more and Dems better pay attention. Because the only reason they made such historic gains in 2006 is because the DNC targeted districts that wanted more moderate leadership and took seats from the GOP.
The last time Republicans were this close to Democrats in terms of total party support — during the second quarter of 2005 — George W. Bush was in the early months of his second term as president. But the Bush administration suffered a series of setbacks that year, including ongoing difficulty in stabilizing Iraq, a slow response to Hurricane Katrina, and the ultimately withdrawn nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court, to name a few. Rising gas prices and a struggling economy only added to the problems plaguing the Bush administration during Bush’s second term in office.
Still, Dems don’t have to worry about a President’s approval rating dragging them down. At least not yet.
More numbers…
Bush’s job approval rating sank over the course of 2005, from 52% at the start of the year to 43% by late December, including several sub-40% ratings in the fall. By the end of 2006, it had fallen to 35%, and it never again exceeded 38%.
During this time, an increasing number of Americans began to align themselves with the Democratic Party. The Democratic advantage in leaned party ID grew to as large as 14 percentage points in the fourth quarter of 2006 and again in the first quarter of 2008 — the largest gap in favor of either party since Gallup began regularly measuring leaned party identification in 1991. Democrats maintained a double-digit lead for 11 of 12 quarters between the second quarter of 2006 and the first quarter of 2009. This solid edge in party support helped propel the Democratic Party to major victories in the 2006 and 2008 federal elections.
No doubt the GOP will be hard pressed to gain seats next Fall, but could they gain a few?
I welcome your thoughts.
This entry was posted on Saturday, October 3rd, 2009 and is filed under Democrats, Independents, Polls, Republicans. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:47 am
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Mr. Meta. Mr. Meta said: DONKLEPHANT: Indepedents Leaning More Right? http://ow.ly/15SDSO [...]
October 3rd, 2009 at 7:24 am
The entire process hinges on two things.
Cap and trade and healthcare.
If they get cap and trade up and running before the elections next year the Dems are gonna take a huge thumping at the polls.
My utility company has already sent us letters telling us that our energy bills are going up 40 percent.
Thats huge in a recession. No matter whose fault the recession is Americans have very, very short memories and by june of next year…it will be Bush who???
October 3rd, 2009 at 10:29 am
And the utility company would never exaggerate, right doomed? LOL. I am against cap and trade, but that doesn’t make me trust the electric company.
Justin, I think there’s good reason why the middle is leaning right. They’ve seen the democrats in action over the last year. And It’s an echo of the complaints I consistently make and get savaged for. Moderates and independents don’t like the government spending well beyond its means, trying to establish big new programs with money it doesn’t have, and pretending that it can all be paid for by only raising taxes on the wealthy.
Warranted or not, the stimulus bull was loaded with unnecessary pork. Independents are comfortable assuming that both of the programs doomed cites will cost regular folks more money, and won’t change their minds because you cite reassurances from the congressional budget office.
Over the next 5 months, we are going tom see where the economy is really headed. If the holiday season is lean, that’ll be a bad sign,. And then we’ll start to see what the projections are for the next budget. Moderates and independents will be looking to see whether the next budget has overspending at the same scope as the last Bush and 1st Obama budgets.
Now, you can argue until you are blue in the face that the overspending of the last Bush and first Obama budgets was crucial and necessary to avoid a bigger recession. That is a questionable but defensible position. In other words, maybe you’re right or partly right about that.
But that doesn;t speak to the plain fact that the scope of the overspending in those budgets is utterly unsustainable over the longer term. Gov’t spending must come down substantially from 2008 and 2009 levels. To claim otherwise is innumerate. If spending doesn’t come down by at least say 10% over 2008-9 levels, many moderates will feel that we have no choice but to support whatever candidate insists on a renewed effort by the fed gov’t to spend within its means as a first principle.
If you are paying attention to the federal budget and you can do the math, then you understand how deadly serious a situation our nation is in with spending.
October 3rd, 2009 at 11:02 am
Kranky Kritter.
Our energy company uses almost predominantly coal fired plants. Obama has said he wants to drive the coal business out of business.
The Treasury department released numbers last week that said cap and trade will cost the Average American family 1700 dollars per year.
But anyways the democrats are going to be beaten to death over Cap and Trade.
As to the 2010 budget? It already got a prejected deficit of 1.5 triilion dollars. why? because only 14 percent of the stimulus has been spent. thats still 86 percent to go.
the 2011 budget deficit is expect to be 980 billion dollars in a good economy. Every economist I know, and I know a lot of them say that their is no way this recession ends before 2011 and it will be in danger of a double dip recession which could prolong it for another 2-3 years.
“Its the Economy STupid” Bill Clinton’s campaign slogan.
October 3rd, 2009 at 11:51 am
It may be self-centered of me, but I always have a major problem with this kind of survey — let alone drawing conclusions from it. I’ve been part of the self-identified Republicans; for the 4 decades I’ve been a registered Republican. But can I be considered “lean Republican” (which is presumed by the poll to be less likely to vote Republican)? Not any more.
For the past decade or more, it’s been almost impossible to find Republican candidates that I can bring myself to vote for in a general election. Occasionally someone slips in (Arnold Schwarzenegger, for example), but most moderate conservatives get blown out in the California Republican primary by the nut cases. Which means that come the general election I end up voting for a Democrat — or, when faced by someone like Boxer, going 3rd party.
So it looks to me like Gallup (and the rest of the polling organizations) need to think hard about rephrasing their question. Because the one they have has seriously diminishing predictive value.
October 3rd, 2009 at 11:59 am
Justin,
How quickly we forget!
Please see your last post from Friday.
Have a good weekend!
Agnostick
agnostick@excite.com
October 3rd, 2009 at 12:38 pm
The GOP can certainly win a few — likely a lot more than a few — seats even if these national preference numbers for independents stay at 48/42 and don’t imporve further for republicans.
The reason? If you could get those leaning numbers within each of the more competitive districts — those that went for Bush in 2004 and/or McCain in 2008 but were picked off by Democrats in 2006 and 2008 plus any others where Democrats won by narrow margins in 2008 — we’d probably see a mcu better split for the GOP. That’s why we call them swing voters and swing districts, after all.
Sure, it’s early and the numbers can change back. But the 2010 cycle starts in earnest no more than two months from now. So if you had to bet money now, you’d be smart to bet that the GOP will pick up somewhere between 10 and 20 House seats and a couple of Senate seats.
October 4th, 2009 at 9:17 am
Doomed, I have seen a vast range of figures projecting the cost of cap and trade, from a few hundred up to $3000 per family.
As I said, I don’t support cap and trade. But as bad an idea as I think it is, I would STILL assume that your utility company is exaggerating.
As to the budget? I am fairly sure that money for the stimulus package all got attributed to the 2009 budget, regardless of whether it has been spent yet. So if the projected deficit is 1.5 trillion, it should not be due to stimulus money that was allocated in 2009 but hasn’t yet been spent.
October 4th, 2009 at 8:56 pm
Guys have you ever heard of the “margin of error?”
In this case every result since mid-2005 has the Dems within three points of 50, and the GOP within three points of 40. And all but three of those polls were within two points of that 50/40 split.
It’s possible the nasty health care debate, and the economy are driving Dem numbers down and GOP numbers up. It’s also possible that nothing’s changed. We won’t know until the next Gallup poll comes out.
Regardless of these numbers the Dems could lose seats in 2010. The right-wing weirdos are 15-20% of the country. Turnout in 2010 will probably be 35%. As 20% is more than half of 35% the Dems could get their asses kicked. They certainly won’t lose the Senate, but they could lose the House easily.
It will all depend on who actually shows up on election day.
October 4th, 2009 at 10:07 pm
“Because the only reason they made such historic gains in 2006 is because the DNC targeted districts that wanted more moderate leadership and took seats from the GOP.”
Correction: the reason that the Dems won Congress in 2006 is because independents led a challenge to the US war policy in Iraq that the majority of Americans soon followed. It was independent voters in 2006 who went left, after delving into the centrist/right waters for the past 15 year, as Jackie Salit noted last year. http://bit.ly/14OsRw
What the polls don’t count, and the media doesn’t see, is that there is a growing movement of organized independents who are having an impact beyond their numbers because they are organized. Organization counts on the ground in elections, and historically.
October 5th, 2009 at 12:32 pm
Cap and Trade works quite well with dealing with sulfur emissions, it will work just as well for carbon emissions.
October 5th, 2009 at 2:56 pm
There is a significant number of people who want to see the President and majority of Congress be of different parties (only 12 of the last 40 years have had one party rule). This will likely cause a swing toward the Republicans. How big a swing will depend on what impact the stimulus has on the economy and if unemployment has started to decrease.