GOP getting crushed in polls, key races

[one...two...tree 2,762]

McCain risks looking inauthentic and conventional if he solidifies standing with conservatives and then races back to the middle to appeal to swing voters.

Photo: AP

By JIM VANDEHEI & DAVID PAUL KUHN

John McCain is planning to run as a different kind of Republican. But being any kind of Republican seems like some sort of death sentence these days.

In case you’ve been too consumed by the Democratic race to notice, Republicans are getting crushed in historic ways both at the polls and in the polls.

At the polls, it has been a massacre. In recent weeks, Republicans have lost a Louisiana House seat they had held for more than two decades and an Illinois House seat they had held for more than three. Internal polls show that next week they could lose a Mississippi House seat that they have held for 13 years.

In the polls, they are setting records (and not the good kind). The most recent Gallup Poll has 67 percent of voters disapproving of President Bush; those numbers are worse than Richard Nixon’s on the eve of his resignation. A CBS News poll taken at the end of April found only 33 percent of Americans have a favorable view of the GOP — the lowest since CBS started asking the question more than two decades ago. By comparison, 52 percent of the public has a favorable view of the Democratic Party.

Things are so bad that many people don’t even want to call themselves Republicans. The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press has found the lowest percentage of self-described Republicans in 16 years of polling.

“The anti-Republican mood is fairly big, and it has been overwhelming,” said Michigan Republican Party Chairman Saul Anuzis.

With an environment so toxic, does McCain have even a chance of winning in November?

The McCain camp thinks so — but only if he sands down the “R” next to his name. “Nobody ever gets elected president by running on their party label,” said Charlie Black, a senior McCain adviser. “The character, the qualities, the independence — that certainly allows him to rise over the party label. It is more important than usual to rise above the party label.”

This statement seems a little at odds with the current McCain strategy. The presumptive GOP nominee has spent much of the recent campaign fastening himself to the traditional Republican brand and even to Bush himself. McCain’s views on the war, the overall economy (especially supporting the Bush tax cuts he previously opposed), the mortgage crisis and judicial appointments are hardly the stuff of a new kind of Republicanism.

McCain risks looking inauthentic and conventional to both camps if he simply solidifies his standing with conservatives and then races back to the middle to appeal to swing voters.

For now, Republicans are heartened by how well McCain sometimes does in head-to-head polling with Barack Obama, the likely Democratic nominee. But it’s silly to watch those numbers: They fluctuate and reflect nothing more than momentary feelings about the candidates, and they come at a time when public attention is fixed on the final rounds of the Democratic slugfest.

Right now, most voters with any familiarity with McCain probably know him as a war hero, somewhat of a maverick in the Senate and a pretty affable candidate. Let’s see how they view McCain after Democrats use their decisive money advantage to paint him as a much-older Bush clone who loves an unpopular war and knows little about the economy.

Democrats provided us a look at their polling data from 17 swing states — data they’re using to craft new attacks on McCain as Bush 44. The Democratic National Committee polling, according to a memo it provided, has two-thirds of swing voters expecting McCain to pursue policies very similar to Bush’s. The voters’ top three concerns about McCain: his age, his support for the war and his similarities to Bush.

The latest DNC ad ties two of the three together, slamming McCain over the war and showing a picture of him embracing Bush. Lots more to come on that front, DNC officials said. The DNC will leave the age issue alone for now.

Many top Republicans seem heartened by Obama’s likely victory on the Democratic side. They say they’re confident Obama will pay a big price for his relationship with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the persistent questions about his patriotism and his inability to connect with working-class whites in swing states.

These are all big problems for Obama. But he will have a massive cash advantage when it comes time to fight back, and the Republican National Committee’s fundraising edge over the DNC won’t be enough to overcome it. Consider this fact: Since the beginning of last year, Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton and the DNC have raised $460 million total — about $200 million more than what McCain, Mitt Romney and the RNC raised together in the same time span.

Rich liberals operating outside the traditional fundraising structure are also in private talks to vastly outspend the GOP on issue ads and voter mobilization efforts.

Still, McCain’s biggest problem is the toxic political atmosphere for his party.

It’s so toxic, some Republicans are pointing to 1976 as a favorable historical comparison. That was the year Gerald Ford ran in the dark shadows of Watergate and lost to Jimmy Carter. Says ####### Wadhams, the chairman of the Colorado Republican Party: “When voters really homed in on the choice between Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter and what each stood for, Gerald Ford almost won the election despite this horrible environment.”

Almost.

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uui...0F23D92A0A68D89

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The response.

[GaryC 7]

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows Barack Obama attracting 47% of the vote while John McCain earns 46% (see recent daily results). Rasmussen Reports did not conduct survey interviews on Mothers’ Day and these results are based upon interviews conducted from Wednesday through Saturday. Rasmussen Markets data gives Democrats a 60.7 % chance of winning in November (this number has been steadily going down for the last 2 weeks)

New polling released today shows McCain leading Obama by three percentage points in both Virginia and North Carolina. Polling released over the weekend shows Obama leading big in Oregon and a toss-up in Michigan (see summary of recent state-by-state results).

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content...l_tracking_poll

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows Barack Obama attracting 47% of the vote while John McCain earns 46% (see recent daily results). Rasmussen Reports did not conduct survey interviews on Mothers' Day and these results are based upon interviews conducted from Wednesday through Saturday. Rasmussen Markets data gives Democrats a 60.7 % chance of winning in November (this number has been steadily going down for the last 2 weeks)

New polling released today shows McCain leading Obama by three percentage points in both Virginia and North Carolina. Polling released over the weekend shows Obama leading big in Oregon and a toss-up in Michigan (see summary of recent state-by-state results).

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content...l_tracking_poll

Which says nothing about the recent GOP loses. Gary, you can bury your head in the sand if you want, but there are right wing pundits out there who recognizing what is going on...this is a bad time for the Republican Party.

[GaryC 7]

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows Barack Obama attracting 47% of the vote while John McCain earns 46% (see recent daily results). Rasmussen Reports did not conduct survey interviews on Mothers' Day and these results are based upon interviews conducted from Wednesday through Saturday. Rasmussen Markets data gives Democrats a 60.7 % chance of winning in November (this number has been steadily going down for the last 2 weeks)

New polling released today shows McCain leading Obama by three percentage points in both Virginia and North Carolina. Polling released over the weekend shows Obama leading big in Oregon and a toss-up in Michigan (see summary of recent state-by-state results).

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content...l_tracking_poll

Which says nothing about the recent GOP loses. Gary, you can bury your head in the sand if you want, but there are right wing pundits out there who recognizing what is going on...this is a bad time for the Republican Party.

That poll was from friday. What recent GOP loses are you speaking of? Your failing to see the real truth that the GOP has a real chance at beating the dems in a year that should have been a cake walk. You remind me of a Hillary supporter only seeing what they want to see.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

If this is true - it suggests that GWB's unpopularity may have tarnished the reputation of the Republican party to such an extent that they may find themselves in the same position as the UK Tory party in 1997.

Personally, I'd be surprised if there were a landslide victory in November - but stranger things have happened...

I think it will be a close-fought race - but that's to more or less ignore any substantial voter impact from GWB's unpopularity. Is it really that bad?

[GaryC 7]

If this is true - it suggests that GWB's unpopularity may have tarnished the reputation of the Republican party to such an extent that they may find themselves in the same position as the UK Tory party in 1997.

Personally, I'd be surprised if there were a landslide victory in November - but stranger things have happened...

I think it will be a close-fought race - but that's to more or less ignore any substantial voter impact from GWB's unpopularity. Is it really that bad?

If McCain was a firm follower of Bush then I would say that McCain would have a problem. But McCain has gone his own way on a lot of Bush's policies and can document that. The choice this year is between a Senator with a proven hard line liberal voting record and a Senator with a proven track record of working with both sides. You tell me, who do you think will get more traction this fall?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

If this is true - it suggests that GWB's unpopularity may have tarnished the reputation of the Republican party to such an extent that they may find themselves in the same position as the UK Tory party in 1997.

Personally, I'd be surprised if there were a landslide victory in November - but stranger things have happened...

I think it will be a close-fought race - but that's to more or less ignore any substantial voter impact from GWB's unpopularity. Is it really that bad?

If McCain was a firm follower of Bush then I would say that McCain would have a problem. But McCain has gone his own way on a lot of Bush's policies and can document that. The choice this year is between a Senator with a proven hard line liberal voting record and a Senator with a proven track record of working with both sides. You tell me, who do you think will get more traction this fall?

I don't know Gary - but I will say that landslides have happened before. Regardless of how good a candidate McC is or not - it is within the realm of possibility for him to be torpedoed by public rejection of the previous administration, especially if he doesn't trump up that he's going to do things differently.

I have no idea whether this will happen - but if it does, it will surely mean that the negative public perception of the Bush administration and its policies has been grossly understated.

Edited May 12, 2008 by Number 6

[GaryC 7]

If this is true - it suggests that GWB's unpopularity may have tarnished the reputation of the Republican party to such an extent that they may find themselves in the same position as the UK Tory party in 1997.

Personally, I'd be surprised if there were a landslide victory in November - but stranger things have happened...

I think it will be a close-fought race - but that's to more or less ignore any substantial voter impact from GWB's unpopularity. Is it really that bad?

If McCain was a firm follower of Bush then I would say that McCain would have a problem. But McCain has gone his own way on a lot of Bush's policies and can document that. The choice this year is between a Senator with a proven hard line liberal voting record and a Senator with a proven track record of working with both sides. You tell me, who do you think will get more traction this fall?

I don't know Gary - but I will say that landslides have happened before. Regardless of how good a candidate McC is or not - it is within the realm of possibility for him to be torpedoed by public rejection of the previous administration, especially if he doesn't trump up that he's going to do things differently.

I have no idea whether this will happen - but if it does, it will surely mean that the negative public perceptions of the Bush administration has been grossly understated.

I have a feeling that when the rest of the country gets to know Obama and what his voting record is they will be equally turned off as the dems are by that little ® behind McCains name. At that point McCain will be able to show his decades long record of doing what he thinks is right rather than the rep party line and at the same time show Obama as nothing more that a straight liberal line voter. If the country really wants change then I would say that McCain has that point. The only change Obama has to offer is liberal dogma for conservative dogma.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The choice boils down to the continuation of an administration focused on the benefits of the few vs. the prospect of an administration that will focus on the many instead. To me, it's clear that the latter is preferrable.

[HAL 9000 96]

The choice boils down to the continuation of an administration focused on the benefits of the few vs. the prospect of an administration that will focus on the many instead. To me, it's clear that the latter is preferrable.

It is such a political sin to focus on the well-being of most versus the hyper-inflated profit of the very few, isn't it? No Ayn Rand defense of capitalism is necessary to separate greed from common sense.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

What recent GOP loses are you speaking of? Your failing to see the real truth that the GOP has a real chance at beating the dems in a year that should have been a cake walk. You remind me of a Hillary supporter only seeing what they want to see.

from the above article...

In recent weeks, Republicans have lost a Louisiana House seat they had held for more than two decades and an Illinois House seat they had held for more than three. Internal polls show that next week they could lose a Mississippi House seat that they have held for 13 years.

...

and then this part (ouch! that's got to hurt)

A CBS News poll taken at the end of April found only 33 percent of Americans have a favorable view of the GOP — the lowest since CBS started asking the question more than two decades ago. By comparison, 52 percent of the public has a favorable view of the Democratic Party.

Things are so bad that many people don’t even want to call themselves Republicans. The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press has found the lowest percentage of self-described Republicans in 16 years of polling.

....

Just have the checkbook ready in November, Gary.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The choice boils down to the continuation of an administration focused on the benefits of the few vs. the prospect of an administration that will focus on the many instead. To me, it's clear that the latter is preferrable.

It is such a political sin to focus on the well-being of most versus the hyper-inflated profit of the very few, isn't it? No Ayn Rand defense of capitalism is necessary to separate greed from common sense.

Especially if that greed is chipping away at what was once the foundation of America: It's strong middle class.

[Ban Hammer 13,352]

Just have the checkbook ready in November, Gary.

to pay taxes when the dems win?

[HAL 9000 96]

The choice boils down to the continuation of an administration focused on the benefits of the few vs. the prospect of an administration that will focus on the many instead. To me, it's clear that the latter is preferrable.

It is such a political sin to focus on the well-being of most versus the hyper-inflated profit of the very few, isn't it? No Ayn Rand defense of capitalism is necessary to separate greed from common sense.

Especially if that greed is chipping away at what was once the foundation of America: It's strong middle class.

Exactly. We are supposed to assume any trickle down economics will get to those in the middle. Yeah. Right.