Policy Starts With “P” and That Rhymes With “T” and That Stands for Trouble Right There in Dem City

The semi-secret Democracy Corps poll, about which I have already blogged here and here, is chock full of interesting data, and today I’m going to analyze the shift in their party issue handling numbers.  Our friends over at Democracy Corps beg to differ with my analysis thus far, and so have written a response piece on their blog.

To quickly rehash, their survey was done of 1,500 voters — segmented into three groups of 500 (why do Dems have more money for this stuff than our side?!) — 20 Tier 1 Dem seats, 20 Tier 2 Dem seats, and 20 targeted GOP seats.  In general, there isn’t much difference between the Tier 1 and the Tier 2 data (although there is on some questions), so I’m just lumping them together into the 40 Dem seats (1,000 interviews).

I beg to differ with their differs (if there is such a word), and will write a response response post on Friday.  The Greenberg team’s analysis is worth reading, because it provides a window into the thinking of one of the most influential Dem polling firms in the country.

But, between now and Friday I want to finish posting my thoughts on their survey.  Today we’ll go through the party issue handling section.  The folks at Democracy Corps make the case that by using the movement from a similar survey in April that I’m unfairly, and now to quote their response:

using an artificial base point – citing our April survey – well within Obama’s honeymoon, inflating the sense of movement.

Of course, that is not the perspective they had in April when they released that survey.  Back then, there were no caveats about inflated numbers for Dems because of the Obama honeymoon (which many Dems, not necessarily the Greenberg folks, believed would last until Obama went to heaven to sit at the right hand of God).  Besides, it has been a long time (2004 to be exact) since GOPers had numbers like this to get excited about.

Let’s take Democracy Corps newly-found argument to have merit, however, and leave the April data out of this analysis on party issue handling.  The data still points to problems for the Dems.  Problems that they haven’t had in quite some time.

When they asked voters in the key 40 Dem districts which party they thought would do a better job on the issue, the GOP did well on issues which in recent years we had fumbled away, and the Democratics (isn’t that what they always want to be called?) could do no better than tied on issues that the Dems usually do well on.

Let’s look at the issues.  On the historically GOP issues of taxes, the budget deficit, and government spending, the GOP has a nine to ten point lead in the target Dem districts.  In the target GOP districts, the GOP  has a four to 13 point advantage.

On the historically Dem issues of health care and Medicare, the Dem advantage in the Dem target districts is one and three points respectively — within the margin of error.  In the GOP target districts, the GOP has a one point advantage on health care, and a more typical eleven point deficit on Medicare.

And, on the current big kahuna issue — the economy, GOPers have a four point lead in Dem districts and a one point lead in the GOP districts.  The economy has recently been the province of the Dems.



Even though I said I wasn’t going to mention the April data (on page 10), the amount of movement since then is striking (see it for yourself).

After getting our clocks cleaned on issues for the last two election cycles, it’s very encouraging to once again control GOP issues and also be competitive on traditionally-Democratic issues.  While national surveys of adults might not show quite the same level of a GOP rebound starting, the Democracy Corps survey is more meaningful to political analysts like myself because the poll is focused on the most important congressional districts going into the 2010 elections.

Republicans would have to agree — the findings in this survey is the change we need.

Similar Articles

  • Public Education Update
    read more

  • Americans See China And Russia As Adversaries Posing Two Different Threats
    read more

  • A New Look At Ideology
    read more

  • Is social media your friend or a frenemy?
    read more

  • Trump’s numbers tied for his peak high as impeachment talk looms
    read more

Public Opinion Strategies helped us to clarify what we wanted to learn and then conducted research and analysis that shed light even beyond the questions we set out to ask. They were very receptive to our suggestions, responsive to our queries, and flexible when we needed them to be.

Public Opinion Strategies has consistently offered unparalleled advice and spot-on polling that has shaped how and where we spent money and deploy key resources. Additionally, they have always been an excellent steward of limited campaign resources, ensuring we spend wisely and not a dollar more than necessary in order to get the information we need.

Robert Blizzard and Public Opinion Strategies did a great job for us throughout our successful campaign for Congress. Robert gave us accurate data, spot on analysis, and professional advice, all of which were essential to our victory.

Public Opinion Strategies is one of our go-to pollsters when it comes to testing public support for bond ballot measures and other initiative proposals. They are available to provide ongoing consultation with regard to crafting of ballot questions, public outreach messaging, and related efforts.

ACLI has worked with Public Opinion Strategies for decades, through several tough industry battles—often ones in which public opinion does not naturally fall on the side of insurers. Yet Bill and his team consistently provide invaluable strategic advice by refining our messages and helping us frame our issues in a way that makes them understandable and persuasive.

The data from Public Opinion Strategies provided important insight and informed our public awareness campaign. We sincerely appreciate their professionalism and expertise in this arena.

Nicole McCleskey and the team at Public Opinion Strategies have been invaluable to me, both during my campaigns and as Governor of the State of New Mexico. It’s not just the accuracy of their numbers, but guiding the overall strategy that makes them so valuable.

Public Opinion Strategies has been a part of our team in Missouri for more than a decade. With their data and guidance, Republicans here were able to attain a majority in the House in 2002 for the first time in fifty years, and we have been able to grow that majority to the point that we now have a record, veto-proof majority.

In my tenure at two leading business associations, facing huge and complex consumer issues, I have benefitted enormously from the objective advisory skills of Bill and his team. They do their homework, they are rigorous, dispassionate and thoughtful. Turning questions into answers is a clever tag, but it’s also an apt description of the professional talents of the firm.

I consider Public Opinion Strategies to be a part of our team. That is the way we have always worked. They have helped us to understand our needs and fashioned research solutions to meet those needs. They have helped us to meet killer deadlines by being flexible, executing rapidly, and insuring quality. Teamwork is the best way to describe it.

Accuracy, speed, and deep knowledge of key issues and public sentiment are the hallmarks of quality opinion research, and on these measures Public Opinion Strategies consistently delivers. I have had the pleasure of working with Public Opinion Strategies for more than 15 years on dozens of issues, and they are undoubtedly the gold standard.

Public Opinion Strategies’ track record of success and wealth of experience in political campaigns and issue advocacy are why they are one of the most trusted and well respected public opinion firms in Washington, D.C. Their insights and perspectives have helped to inform a wide array of public affairs activities across multiple industries.

Social Media Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com