I don't know if you follow political news as much as I do, (which is to say I don't know if you waste as much of your day on gossip as I do), but one very popular discussion topic is that the tea partiers and general anti-incumbent sentiment are going to lead to huge Republican gains in the House of Representative and perhaps even the Senate. Republicans keep whipping the media up with talks of 1994 and the Republican landslide that year.
There are a whole lot of reasons to discount any analogy with 1994. But what about the general idea of anti-incumbent rage and anti-government sentiments leading to a possible Republican takeover of one or both houses of Congress? Well my feelings on this (in order of weight) have been that 1) The number one variable that will decide the electoral mood is the economy. If jobs are growing at a good clip (say 150,000 - 250,000/month) by November, people will be in a much better mood. 2) The Republican brand is *ruined* and it will be a long time indeed before it can even begin to be repaired. 3) the voices of critics of government such as the teapartiers have been amplified completely out proportion to their actual weight. They are small in number, have not shown any signs of growing in over a year, and alienate many, if not most, people with their hostile rhetoric and posture. 4) President Obama, despite a massive, concerted effort to discredit him, is still very popular.
Now, that's all well and good you may say, that's my opinion and we've all got opinions. Let's have a look at this survey out today from the Washington Post. It's "advertised" as showing massive voter desire to "throw the bums out". If this happened, if everyone who had a representative up for election this fall voted against their representative in the general election, then Republicans would gain quite a lot of seats in the house. But this poll doesn't predict that. Look at the way the question is asked: "Are you inclined to vote to re-elect your Rep in Congress in the next election *or are you inclined to look around for someone else* to vote for?"
Why do I point this out? Because of the different ways that could play out. I might be "inclined to look" even if I was happy, but then not put forth the effort because I'm happy enough and looking is hard. I might be inclined to look *within my own party* for someone else to vote for in a primary, much like people were looking at Obama and Edwards even though she was the "preemptive frontrunner" for the Democratic nomination. Or I might be inclined to vote for the other party's candidate no matter who my party nominates. This poll doesn't tell us which is more likely.
But it does show that President Obama is *way* more popular than the Republicans and that he is still trusted to produce better policies for the country than Republicans. In my humble opinion, President Obama's stature with the electorate and his willingness to campaign this fall, the corresponding low regard for the Republican party, the DNC outgaining the RNC in contributions, difficult primaries for incumbents, and an improving economy all contribute to few democratic losses. So I'm going to stop listening to the Washington echo chamber gossip for a few weeks, or at least until some non-Rasmussen or Zogby poller shows me that Obama is unpopular and that Republicans are trusted.
No comments:
Post a Comment