The Wall Street Journal has finally noticed something I have pointed out before - that while approval of Republicans is low, the public is not enamoured of the Democrats, either. But as is so common with MSM writers in New York and LA, John Harwood remains clueless to other equally vital truths. Harwood, after noting that the Democrats cannot hope to win this fall simply because the Republicans are not polling well, suggests that Republicans can win this fall if they "attack Democratic foes and separate themselves from President Bush's struggles." In the actual fact, one course is risky and the other would be absolutely suicidal.
Harwood makes the normal mistakes so typical of people who don't read far below the headlines from opinion poll press releases. He cites the "generic" poll which says Americans prefer Democrats to Republicans, without considering how drastically those numbers change when specific names are placed. He cites the "wrong track" polling, without realizing that the national elections do not proceed in alignment with such polling - the 2000 "right track" polling and 2004 "wrong track" polling led Democrats to think they would win the White House, but in both cases the polling proved to be disparate from the actual voter intention. So it is no surprise to me, that Harwood failed to note that while the media blasts away at President Bush's Job Approval polling, they never stop to consider that the President continues to enjoy significantly higher polling than either party in Congress. To be blunt, the most obvious fact from the polling is that if one is a Republican running for election or re-election, they need to be linked to this President, and if one is a Democrat, they need to be careful not to contrast themselves with this President. Negative attacks on George W. Bush will back-fire on the attackers, and while this may seem counter-intuitive, it is a critical fact.
Ironically, the basic strategy to winning any of the election races is pretty straightforward. A candidate needs to know what is most important to his constituents, and address those needs, directly and repeatedly. And any candidate, whether Republican or Democrat, should be wary indeed of trusting the media - the track record of advice from New York or Los Angeles should be warning in itself.
Permalink | Send To A Friend | Linking Blogs | Digg this!
Filed under:
Polls
Comments (7)
Harwood makes the normal... (Below threshold)1. Posted by FreeKeys | July 28, 2006 5:17 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Harwood makes the normal mistakes so typical of people who don't read far below the headlines from opinion poll press releases. He cites the "generic" poll which says Americans prefer Democrats to Republicans, without considering how drastically those numbers change when specific names are placed.
Knee-jerk automatic generic "conventional wisdom" still says Republicans are "for the rich" and Republicans are "intolerant," hence the generic poll results. But voters know THEIR Republican congressman is "in touch" and tolerant AND sincerely concerned about national security, so that's "different."
Nonetheless, Tradesports has now tipped to likely Democrat control of Congress after November (anything in their 65% ballpark usually proves accurate). Pelosi 2 heartbeats away from the Presidency, anyone?
The new media stilll has a LOT of work to do to correct the "conventional wisdom," IMHO.
1. Posted by FreeKeys | July 28, 2006 5:17 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 28, 2006 17:17
2. Posted by Steve_in_Corona | July 28, 2006 6:32 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I have confidence we hold the House, but the Senate worries me a lot.
However, if we lose 6 seats in the Senate (and they would be PA, MT, RI, MO, TN, OH) without gaining any open race blue-state seats - it will be in large part due to the failure of GOP Senators to listen to DJ here.
Chafee would be cruising to reelection if he would be like the Maine RINOs instead of going out of his way to poke the eye of the President and GOP. Now, not only does he have a strong primary fight, but most Republicans WANT him to lose.
Look at DeWine...yet another guy who thought the ticket to reelection as a GOP incumbent was to start acting like a Democrat.
If Talent does the same thing in MO, and the primary winner in TN does as well (start sounding like Dems) those seats are very much in play.
But I think Pelosi stays in the minority for at least 2 more years.
2. Posted by Steve_in_Corona | July 28, 2006 6:32 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 28, 2006 18:32
3. Posted by Charles_in_Texas | July 28, 2006 11:29 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
DJ,
This is a good post with ABSOLUTE BRILLIANCE here:
"the track record of advice from New York or Los Angeles should be warning in itself".
I challenge ANYONE, anywhere to find even ONE factual, completely NON-SLANTED and truthful story from CBS, CNN, NSNBC, ABC, NBC, the L.A. and N.Y. Times, or the Washington Post on any aspect of Iraq, Israel or anything related to military morale, etc. etc. etc.
Political stories MAY SOMEDAY achieve the above definition of honesty and integrity from the same suspects. Do not hold your breath.
3. Posted by Charles_in_Texas | July 28, 2006 11:29 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 28, 2006 23:29
4. Posted by The macker | July 29, 2006 12:08 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
DJ,
Good analysis.
Congress' poll numbers are well deserved They are a weak and dismal lot.
4. Posted by The macker | July 29, 2006 12:08 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 29, 2006 00:08
5. Posted by Adjoran | July 29, 2006 1:31 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
A lot of the people included in the "wrong track" and "disapprove of Bush" numbers believe those things, but NOT because they agree with Democrats. Many of them disapprove of spending, for example, and wish we were acting more forcefully to resolve the Iranian situation. Those aren't likely to vote for the typical "beat the retreat to defeat" Democratic candidate.
The fMSM fails to consider that disapproval can come from the right as well as from the left. They merely assume all those in dissent lean Democratic.
House and Senate are safe, barring new catastrophic events. Had Senator Dole been any better at recruiting strong candidates to oppose weak Democratic incumbents early than Senator Allen before her, we might even be looking at a net gain of a seat or two.
And yes, those who find themselves in the most trouble - except for Santorum - are those who have tried to assert their "independence" from Bush.
5. Posted by Adjoran | July 29, 2006 1:31 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 29, 2006 01:31
6. Posted by Charles_in_Texas | July 29, 2006 3:04 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I agree that Chaffee of Rhode Island and DeWine of Ohio have problems. Chaffee has to go, even if he is Replaced by a DemoncRat.
Burns of Montana has lobbyist problems. The other Republican incumbents (including Talent of Missouri) will win, most of them by landslides. Also, Anyone who thinks Kyl of Arizona has a problem is smoking loco-weed.
I think we will pick up current DemoncRat seats in New Jersey, Washington and probably Michigan, while keeping Tennessee. We also have a chance in Nebraska and West Virginia. (Re-elect a 90 year old man, or NOT?)
So, losing in Rhode Island and winning in N.J. and Washington gives the Republicans + 1. Burns, DeWine and Talent will win... Santorum may not. NET Result--- The Senate Stays the same.
6. Posted by Charles_in_Texas | July 29, 2006 3:04 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 29, 2006 15:04
7. Posted by Kimyl Oh! | July 31, 2006 2:17 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Who give a shit who is in charge of congress; President Bush has been overlooking that branch of government since early 2001. Although maybe that "veto" thing gave him a little macho high.
The Dems will pick up a few seats in both chambers, but none of it will matter until 2008, when we have a President who wants to work with congress to enact the will of the people.
7. Posted by Kimyl Oh! | July 31, 2006 2:17 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2006 02:17