ABC/WaPo: Dems Way, Way, Way Ahead

by Chris Bowers, Mon Nov 07, 2005 at 08:19:47 AM EST

This is such a large lead, I honestly think there is something wrong with the poll:ABC News/Washington Post Poll. Oct. 30-Nov. 2, 2005. N=1,202 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3 (for all adults). Fieldwork by TNS.

"If the election for the U.S. House of Representatives in November 2006 were being held today, would you vote for the Democratic candidate or the Republican candidate in your congressional district?" If other/unsure: "Would you lean toward the Democratic candidate or toward the Republican candidate?" Options rotated

(Registered Voters)
Democratic Candidate 52 Republican Candidate 37

Wow. Like I said before, my first reaction is that this is a bad poll. I suppose it is possible that the reason why Democrats are doing so much better in this poll than in other generic ballots is because ABC-WaPo pushed the leaners. It does seem feasible that Democrats could have a large lead among solid, and a large one among leaners as well. More from the poll:Asked about 10 different issues, respondents said that the Democrats would do a better job than Republicans on all except terrorism, where the parties split evenly. The Democrats' biggest margins were in the economy, health care social security and education.

Sixty percent of those polled said the Democrats are more open to ideas of political moderates compared to 24 percent for Republicans. The split was 56-33 on whether the party is more concerned with the needs of "people like you," and 50-40 on which party better represents the respondent's values. Republicans have an edge on strong leadership.

Perhaps these numbers are too good to be true, but it certainly shows Dems with a lot of momentum going into tomorrow's elections. Numbers like these have realignment written all over them.

Tags: House 2006 (all tags)

Comments

10 Comments

Sort by

permalink

no freaking way...

warms my heart, but no freaking way.

There's an old adage among old pollsters that goes "nothing beats something every time."

Meaning, it's easy to pull the lever for a generic candidate, but once that candidate gets a face and faces a barrage of smear ads, it's an entirely different ballgame.

This is good, but by no means an assurance we got it in the bag.

Fight on brothers and sisters, fight like we're behind by 15 points.

New on EWM: "Operation Choke the Chicken"

DHS won't be caught with its pants down by Avian Flu

by The Muse 2005-11-07 08:30AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: no freaking way...

Sounds like an argument for proportional representation. :)

by nanoboy 2005-11-07 01:41PM | 0 recs

permalink

Sounds about right to me...

Those numbers sound completely accurate to me. Trust in Republicans is falling. Democrats have always polled better in most catagories. Understand though that these "generic" Democrats against "generic" Republicans. Democratic ideals have always aligned closer to that of the American people than have Republican ideals. Always. This is nothing new. Take a look at the comprehensive Pew Research report of earlier this year.

The problem is for individual Democratic candidates to figure out how to win that "strong leadership" catagory and convince voters that they will actually implement the ideas and plans that Americans want implemented. Americans don't trust actual democrats to get the job done. Strong leadership is what we Democrats need. We need leaders that are not afraid to lead. We need leaders that are not afraid to stand up and speak out for Democratic ideals because democratic ideals are American ideals.

The problem is the RWNM. When Democrats speak out the RWNM attacks them and makes it sound as if these ideals that American citizens agree with are commie-pinko ideas. Democrats needs to figure out how to say the same things, make it clear they believe them and will actually make them happen, and at the same time counter-act or better yet, pre-empt the RWNM attacks on them and their ideas.

This poll sounds completely accurate to me.

by Andrew C White 2005-11-07 08:50AM | 0 recs

permalink

New leadership

I think the American public is ready for a change. However it's been shown that they don't like the current Democratic leadership. That's why we need new faces and candidates for 2008.

Biden, Lieberman, Hillary, Kerry, et. al need to move aside.

The way to cement these "generic" advantages is to find new Democrats with very low negatives.

by exLogCabin 2005-11-07 09:11AM | 0 recs

permalink

I'm tired of

the usual suspects. Aren't there term limits?

by Paul Goodman 2005-11-07 09:49AM | 0 recs

permalink

Open to the ideas of Political Moderates

This is only the first step. The critical step is to repay moderate support by actually doing something for them. It is possible, for instance, to balance the budget by calling for shared sacrifices: taxes on the rich, cuts for the poor. If a Democratic Congress can balance the budget, people will start to think that the party really has changed, and that Clinton wasn't just a fluke.

Oh yeah, close the border.

by Paul Goodman 2005-11-07 09:49AM | 0 recs

permalink

Apparently you missed another poll

There is a poll that George Stephanopolous quoted yesterday on his show with Dems ahead 55-37 on "Who would you like to see in charge of Congress after the 2006 elections?"

I'll try to find the company of the poll.

by Fenway Steve 2005-11-07 09:53AM | 0 recs

permalink

oops

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/PollVault/story?id=1283170

Ok guess they were the same thing, I thought that "who would you like in charge" was not from the same poll, sorry.

by Fenway Steve 2005-11-07 09:59AM | 0 recs

permalink

Scares me

Those numbers make me fear that that this country will experience an actual terrorist attack. Funny things happen when crooks get desparate.

by janinsanfran 2005-11-07 10:30AM | 0 recs

permalink

Margin of Error

A normal, honest variation in results, inherent in all polling, could explain this apparently huge difference. The poll quotes a margin of error of ± 3%. This means that if the poll were repeated many, mnay times, roughly 68% of the repeats would be within ± 3%, and roughly 95% would be within ± 6%. This also means that 5% (1 out of 20) would be further than ± 6% away.

This poll could very well be the 1 in 20. Given the number of polls which are performed, that '1 in 20' poll will pop up from time to time.

To get a graphical feel for this, go take a look at any of the charts at Pollkatz, like the latest Bush disapproval ratings. You'll see slight systematic differences between the polls, but for any particular pollster, you will also see random variation -- the occasional poll which seems much too high or much too low. Random variation.

Of course, even taking this into account, the numbers look great for us.

by Kelly Miller 2005-11-07 06:47PM | 0 recs