The Enthusiasm Gap Quantified

Public Policy Polling sums it up nicely:

This year isn't getting away from the Democrats because voters are moving toward the Republicans en masse. But the enthusiasm gap is turning races that would otherwise be lean Democratic into toss ups, turning toss ups into leaning Republican, and turning leaning Republican into solid Republican.

In terms of specifics, PPP examined ten races across the country and found that if the expected 2010 turnout matched the 2008 electorate then these races would either be solid Democratic, leaning Democratic or competitive. For example, Elaine Marshall running for Senate in North Carolina would have a small lead instead of trailing. Indeed, Senate races in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Missouri would be competitive.

On our side, I guess we have the EQ going for us. The EQ? The Extremist Quotient. If it weren't for the fact that the Christian Reconstructionist Sharron Angle is the GOP nominee in Nevada, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid would be trailing by double digits instead of leading by a point or two. That's an EQ of some 12-15 points. Or take the Alaska Senate race. If Murkowski had won the GOP nomination, she would have led in the polls by 25 points. Now that the Tea Party extremist Joe Miller is the GOP nominee, he leads Scott McAdams by just six for an EQ of 19 points.

Tags: US 2010 Mid-Term Elections, enthusiasm gap, polling (all tags)

Comments

4 Comments

Democrats need to get out and vote

You think Obama will protect us from Republican majorities?  Think again.  He's ready to work with them to slash Social Security.  We need to keep the House and Senate Democratic to stop the Obama/GOP Social Security cuts.

by Kent 2010-09-03 02:26AM | 0 recs
Bloggers could help I think

How about helping to fire up the troops and get people tuned in and interested?

by RichardFlatts 2010-09-03 11:07AM | 0 recs
the rational voter

The Democratic party is the people's party, we win when we create jobs for people and we lose if we don't. In January of 2009, when unemployment was over 7%, Obama said of his stimulus plan:

There is no doubt that the cost of this plan will be considerable.  It will certainly add to the budget deficit in the short-term.  But equally certain are the consequences of doing too little or nothing at all, for that will lead to an even greater deficit of jobs, incomes, and confidence in our economy.

Unemployment is now over 9%, and regularly bumps over 10%, the deficit of jobs, incomes and confidence is even greater than it was last year. Obama did too little.

Voters make rational decisions, there is no evidence that our Democratic President, House and Senate have addressed their fundamental concern: earning a living. Apologists for the administration say that Obama did the best he could, but voters know from experience that Republicans are willing to do what it takes to get the economy going, including running up massive deficits and voting for massive stimulus, if only in the form of inefficient tax breaks. Democratic voters can rationally disengage from this election, knowing that a Republican takeover at least includes the possibility of real action to improve the economy. Republican voters take heart in both economic policies that will benefit them and Republican control. Persuadable voters hear Democratic denial or excuse making, and Republican plans to cut taxes. 

Our best chance to improve our chances in this election is to propose a real change in fiscal policy. If Obama and Democratic leaders were to acknowledge that they did not do enough, and were to clearly and consistently argue that the best way back to sustained and strong job growth is a large investment in the American people, then they could draw a contrast with the Republican plan of cutting taxes for business and cutting benefits for workers and give Democratic voters a plan to vote for.

Failing that the best plan is a harshly negative campaign designed to undermine Republican enthusiasm and a strong ground game. This appears to be Obama's midterm strategy.

by tib 2010-09-03 12:16PM | 2 recs
He has a strategy?

I thought he was just going to be all nonpartisan and sit it out and see who wins. He can always work with the Reps if they win, or alternatively, he can work with the Reps if they don't.

by mcarnes 2010-09-03 10:45PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads