In general, which elected officials would you say are more ETHICAL?
Democrats -- 36
Republicans -- 33

We need to add a "because" that advances a narrative that Progressives offer more benefits for people than right-wingers.  ("Benefits" is marketing-speak.)  And we need to keep at it.

Something along the lines of "Republicans are corrupt because they're only about selfishness, while Democrats are about all of us - watching out for the interests of regular people."  Of course, we want professional wordsmiths to come up with a shorter, crisper version and focus-group test it...

Always add the "because."

Ethics reform will be the centerpiece of my campaign to replace Duke Cunningham.  The system is broken.  Democrats have to convince voters that WE are the ones who will restore honesty and integrity to Congress.  I've invited candidates from all over the country to sign on.  

Francine

Let's hope there are a lot more to come.

I would add a third point, which is a logical extension of these two: we have to explain how this connects with the Republican's extremist agenda: "Privatization" is a means to roll back the Civil Service Act of 1883 (aka "Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act"). That's the act that put an end to the spoils system and placed the civil service on the merit system.

While the GOP has long campaigned against "the excesses of the Great Society" (aka Civil Rights, Women's Rights, etc.), its real primary target has always been the New Deal (hence, ending "Welfare as we know it," undermining labor laws, so that union membership shrinks to almost nothing, and privatizing Social Security.)  But from Gingrich on, the target has been rolled back to the Progressive Era (Gingrich's propaganda college course took sharp aim at the progressives for trying to regulate business and its "free speech rights" to buy the whole government) and beyond.

Privatization is all about putting government money into the hands of GOP big buck supporters--not individual jobs, as was done under the spoils system, but billion-dollar operations for GOP corporate sponsors, as we've seen with Halliburton and its kin.

By attacking actually existing privatization and showing how its related to corrupting power of money on the one hand, and abysmal performance on the other, we will not only wield a powerful counterargument to the GOP's beloved slogan of "privatization," we will also highlight just how radical they are, how far they want to turn the clock back, how much progress they want to undo.

This is not an easy thing to get across to a public with such a weak grasp of history.  Which is all the more reason to take advantage of the fact that it's tied directly to something that's really gotten people's attention.  

Ordinarily, it would be difficult to make this argument to the American people. It would be hard to get their attention, much less keep it.  Now, however, a gift horse has been handed to us.  Let's saddle up, not look it in the mouth.

But the data used could just as well be used to support a post entitled, "'Culture of Corruption' a failed talking point."

Dems and Rethugs are within margin of error of one another as being seen as corrupt.

The real question is, can we take advantage of the growing scandals' publicity and move these numbers?

Perhaps your post just needed a question mark in the title.