Poll:Americans want Democrats in power

I voted for Ronnie as president, I voted for Bush in 2000. Before then I voted for him as Gov of Texas. I think the real Bush has been abducted by aliens. I agree that the Congress and the Presidency is the Republicans to win or lose.
They have been thier own worst enemy. They have erected a massive shield of silence and secrecy. Bush has not only blown any chance he had of bi- partisianship but has some of the republicans mad at him.

If you look at the past presidential elections both sides are pretty even. The swing vote is what makes the difference in a lot of places.
 
We havent had a decent president from either party since Calvin Cooledge. His statement that he found no authorization for bills he vetoed in the constitution were classic.
 
Like others, I had very high hopes for GW. The centrist image he tried to project in his campaigns was a cover for some real conservative values.

His problem is that he doesn't do an effective enough job in selling his policies to the public. He has allowed his opponents and the media to define him on issues like tax cuts, privatization of social security, the invasion of Iraq and others. Reagan, the Great Communicator, went straight to the American people to get what he wanted.

If the situation in Iraq gels as it should, I'm absolutely certain that history will show Bush's accomplishment there as a major turning point in American and world history. The goal in Iraq is much larger than one single country.

On the original topic of polls showing Americans wanting Democrats, one thing is missing: polls that show that the majority of Americans are dissatisfied with congress, but satisfied with their own representatives.

The media needs to generate stories. This year's elections may very well show that the media once again over-hyped their predictions.
 
ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, NPR, Air America, Public TV, LA Times, NY Times, Yahoo, All of Hollywood, and College Professors
Click to expand...

Hey, slow down that train! I taught PolSc 1113 (Intro to American Gov't) for two years at OU. Then I taught it for three at Rogers State College in Claremore. Plus one year I taught American History from 1865 to the Present.

I'm not a social conservative but I'm a fiscal one plus strong libertarian leanings. But I figured most students walking into my class expected someone to try to convert them to a left wing point of view. I didn't want to confirm their suspicions, except from the other direction. It didn't seem right to complain about profs pushing left wing ideas and then to push right wing ones instead. I had a fellow prof who kept Rush books on his book shelves in full view of visiting students. I thought that was a bad idea. Not only because I can't stand five minutes of Rush but because it identifies you from an ideology point of view to students. So they can either try to write and say what they expect you want to hear, or they can get hostile and argue with you about everything.

I decided to teach in a fair and objective manner. As much as possible. I'm a natural at being the devil's advocate. If one class seemed to all take one side of an issue, I made sure to argue the other way. When we would get to a controversial issue, I would try very hard to explain both sides.

There are always teacher surveys at the end of a semester. I had one I passed out for myself. On it I asked students to try to identify my personal ideology. Some would say I was slightly left. Some said very left. Some said I was a moderate. Some said I was very conservative. It somehow seemed to be up to the ideology of the observer. Since I basically got an even split between right and left, I figured I was doing a good job.

Of course I don't teach any more since my entire department at RSC got canned but that's another story!

Gregg
 
On the original topic of polls showing Americans wanting Democrats, one thing is missing: polls that show that the majority of Americans are dissatisfied with congress, but satisfied with their own representatives.

The media needs to generate stories. This year's elections may very well show that the media once again over-hyped their predictions.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It is a total horse race right now on whether the Democrats can win back control of the House. The odds are still against them in the Senate. And who knows where we will be in 2008.

If you are wondering "what are the odds" in political races, I like to look at this site. The numbers can change rapidly depending on news stories:

http://www.intrade.com/

Go over to the left side and click on Politics. There are current numbers for 2006 and 2008. Things like "Will the Republicans retain control of the House" etc. Or "Will Hillary be the Democratic Nominee in 2008?"

Worth keeping an eye on. I watched this futures market through the 2004 election and they were very close. I keep thinking about sending them some money to open an account because I do think I know enough about this stuff to make some extra change here and there!

Gregg
 
Just checked and the current numbers are:

(50 would be like a 50-50 chance. As the number goes past 50, the odds are going up. So a 60 would be a 60% chance.)

Will GOP retain control of the House in 2006 54.5

Will GOP retain control of the Senate in 2006 81

I don't think the Democrats should be planning any victory parades just yet.

Gregg
 
I would say it depends on the school. Location, size, and just the general "type of school." At OU in Norman, OK, it seemed like we had a little of everything. Yeah, I guess I would say slightly more left of center but not a LOT more. (PolSc Department) You have grad students teaching most of the required American Government classes and OU grad students tend to be a pretty conservative lot by national standards.

Rogers was in Claremore, OK. Smaller town. Mostly local profs. (As opposed to a bigger university that recruits nationally.) Nearly all of the PolSc staff was conservative. (I already mentioned the guy who had a shelf full of Rush stuff.) I can remember one female who was over on the left but she was about it. We had one older female instructor who was from Mississippi. She thought the "War Between the States" was still going on, Lincoln was the worst President in history, and all Yankees were suspect. She was a grand old lady in many ways but you had to watch what you said!

Big universities on the coasts, yeah, I can see that. They want to receive those big endowments from wealthy alums. And those wealthy alums like to say liberal things to show how they are really good people despite their money. But state schools in the heartland aren't usually that way!

Gregg
 
Oh, all this talk about OU and RSC has unearthed a memory.

We left the Norman area for the Tulsa area in Summer of 93. So spring of 93 was my last teaching semester at OU. And April 1993 was my last month in the Active Army Reserves. (I was Active Army in the 25th ID before that.) I was a Drill Sergeant in the Reserves. Anyway, it was an emotional time for me when I realized I was teaching on what was legally my last day "in the military." I had tried very hard to keep my ideology out of the classroom but I decided to break my own rules. I went to OU to teach that day in my duty uniform. Highly shined jump boots. Green camo BDU's. Pistol belt. Round brown. It was great to see the looks on the faces of my students. (And yes, I know I was breaking the rules. You aren't supposed to wear the uniform to someplace unless it is required for your duty. I realize that. I broke the rules. Sue me.)

I can still remember the last day I was in the Active Army and I made a special trip to 25th ID HQ at 5 PM just so I could salute the US flag coming down in uniform one last time. Teaching a bunch of civilians while dressed one more time in BDU's was the same sort of thing. I remember it and I bet some of them do as well. Maybe it even tipped one or two of them into joining the Army down the road!

Gregg
 
I don't think the Democrats should be planning any victory parades just yet.
Click to expand...

And the reason it's a horserace instead of a cakewalk....that's the Democrats' fault. ;)


I do believe these polls are valid and reasonably represent public opinion. Having said that, I don't believe that they'll gain control of either house. There's just not enough seats in play.
 
we need to bleed off the phoney Republicans who don't hold values that Republican voters want...not Democrats who are against the same values and take litle effort to conceal it...
BUSH is corrupted...his father was weak and ineffective..and the sad thing is I wanted to like and support both of them...as I voted for both of them...globalists & puppets of America & Earth, Inc.(he did fool me for a while thinking he was something he truly wasn't)....Kerry...bleah!!
 
tulsamal, thanks for the story; OK I'm suing you! You're quite a character. I attended OU undergrad from 87-92. Too bad I didn't have you as a prof. I'm sure I would have enjoyed it. 'Unfortunately' for me, I CLEP tested out of most of that first year stuff.
 
The think I find interesting about the AP article is this:

Headline: "Most Americans Plan to Vote for Democrats"
First Paragraph: "the latest Associated Press-Ipsos poll found that Americans by an almost 3-to-1 margin hold the GOP-controlled Congress in low regard and profess a desire to see Democrats wrest control after a dozen years of Republican rule. "
Sixth Paragraph: "The AP-Ipsos survey asked 789 registered voters if the election for the House were held today, would they vote for the Democratic or Republican candidate in their district. Democrats were favored 51 percent to 40 percent. "
Last Paragraph: "the survey of registered voters had a margin of error of 3.5 percentage points."

So... is it 'most' , ' a 3-1 majority', or 1% over half +/- 3.5%?
This is what causes folks like me to wonder if their phrasings might have something to do with their own viewpoints....
 
And then here's the data on who they polled:
REGISTERED
VOTERS
Strongly Republican ........................ 17
Moderately Republican...................... 25
Definitely Independent/neither........... 5
Moderately Democrat ...................... 32
Strongly Democrat........................... 21
Refused/not sure............................. -
Total Republican ............................. 41
Total Democrat .............................. 53

So, with a sampling that's 12% higher in Democrats, Democrats are favored by 1%. Doesn't sound like an earth-shattering threat to the GOP to me. How exactly does that translate into 'Most' voters plan on voting Democrat?
 
In 1999, people were just as fed up with Clinton's gang as they are with Bush now. This is no different. Whichever party is in power pisses off a large percentage of the voting population, and they get kicked out. In six years, the GOP will be out and the sheeple will vote for the same old losers, just with a different name.

And so, as Vonnegut said, it goes.
 
This is something that really bothers me, as a people we complain, bellyahe,and fuss about all the ills of the Political spectrum and yet we claim this party or that party is the fault of this or that when in fact the party actuall has nothing to do with it at all, it is the people IN THE PARTY, and THE PEOPLE THAT VOTED FOR THE PARTY,that are at fault here.

We all complain that this person or that did not do what he, or she was supposed to do, or what they campained to do, if elected but the fact is, they said and promised what ever we wanted to hear, to get themselves elected, so let me see here, is the politition at fault, or are the PEOPLE AT FAULT here.

To not vote in an election, for any reason, is to give a pass on the situation at hand, and say my vote don't count, and you are exactly right, as when you DON'T VOTE IT DON'T COUNT, so that is not a good thing for the Country or It's People.

We must if we want to have a Government that amounts to anything at all VOTE, not the Party Vote, but the Man/Woman, issue, or to change the outcome of things, there can not be a non vote, if we want to take back the Government to make it again what the FOUNDING FATHERS ENVISIONED it to be. A REPUBLIC, not a DEMOCRACY.

It is a crying shame that here in the United States of America, the best place on Earth to live we only have about 50% of the population that go to the polls and vote, and even worse of the 50%that do vote about 40 - 60% of those vote a straight Party Ticket, that my friends is not voting that is condoning bad actions of the Party simply because that is the Party You belong to, and to this I say we would all be better off if there was no Party at all and we just voted on the person based on their Honesty, convictions, dedication, and Integrety, Now aint that a scarry thought to actuall look at the individual instead of the Party, I guess that is why I choose to be an Independant Voter and dissavow any Party Afilliation what so ever.

But what do I know I'm just a 64 year old guy with an 8th grade education, and no pilititcal aspirations, or background.
 
Last edited:
I don't worry too much about polls. You can make them arrive at any opinion you want. Just stand outside Yankee Stadium after a game and ask people if they like baseball. See what I mean? However, I will be doing my very best this coming November to see that we don't let this country fall into the hands of the Demoncrats. I'm not real happy about alot of things the Republicans do either, but it's definitely better than than the alternative, IMHO! As a gun owner I feel there is NO question which party will defend our gun rights better.:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top