Poll: Opinions on health care bill differ between two new surveys

READ FULL STORY HERE

One topic, two polls, and two very different results.

With President Obama’s signature affixed on the health care reform bill two prominent polling organizations have become the first to track the opinions of Americans on the subject. It appears that even after Sunday night’s landmark passage the complexities being voiced by the public continue to mirror those of the bill itself.

Many on the political left were quick to celebrate the results of a new USA Today/Gallup survey that shows a plurality of Americans now believe passage of the health care bill to be a “good idea”. However when asked whether they favor the recent passage of the bill through congress a just released Bloomberg survey finds half the public in opposition. By a 49-40% margin the Gallup poll shows support for the new bill. In a near reversal of those figures meanwhile more oppose than favor health care reform by a 50-38% margin according to Bloomberg.

Interestingly there is a strong similarity between the surveys that contradicts the widely different results between the two. Both Gallup and Bloomberg polled just over a thousand adults nationwide, meaning each gathered information from a virtually identical sample size and used the same classification of citizens. One potentially important difference comes in the time span each survey was conducted. Gallup was able to poll over a thousand individuals all on Monday, March 22nd. That was the day after the House secured enough votes for passage Sunday night. The Bloomberg release on the other hand collected responses over four days from March 19-22nd. Hard to say which poll is a more accurate reflection of the public but the Bloomberg survey failed to account for the immediate reactions of the country in full whereas the Gallup poll, done the day after, may have been bogged down by instant responses to the momentous event.

The Gallup poll shows emotions running high on the health care debate. Slightly more adults are angry (19%) than enthusiastic (15%) upon passage of the new bill. Those closer to the middle of the argument meanwhile lean towards a favorable view of the bill. 35% say they are pleased against 23% who are disappointed meaning that in total half of Americans (50%) evoke good feelings toward health care overhaul against 42% who think ill of it.

President Obama leaves the proceedings with far more positive ratings than either his fellow Democrats or the Republicans in congress, yet his numbers are, at best, similarly lukewarm. 46% of the American public feels the President did a “good” or “excellent” job in addressing the problems with the health care system over the past year. More than half however (51%) feel he did either a “fair” or “poor” job on the topic. Congressional Democrats get good marks from just 32% of the public with 63% viewing their efforts negatively. Republicans fare even worse with little more than a quarter (26%) of Americans giving them high marks for their efforts against 68% pegging them with a mediocre or failing grade on the subject.

Bloomberg backed up their findings with a series of specific questions for American adults. Despite overall rejection from the majority of the public on the passage of this specific bill through congress some 64% either “somewhat” or “strongly” agree with the idea that the government has a role in making sure all citizens have access to affordable coverage. This helps to explain the general feeling of the electorate who are overwhelmingly pro-reform, in some fashion, but mostly against the specific bill that just passed through congress. Also helping to illustrate that point are the slim majority (51%) of Americans polled who believe in the general sentiment that it would be more costly to do nothing about health care than creating a plan to overhaul it. Nearly eight in ten (80%) meanwhile disagree with the concept that health care is currently fine the way it is.

Asking other questions the Bloomberg poll reveals that 60% of the public considers health care a largely private matter that should be taken care of by the specific individual. Grasping the complexities of the subject is also viewed as difficult for most. A whopping 75%, including 49% who strongly agree, think that health care is too complicated a subject and the current proposals were too difficult to understand for most. Modestly more adults (48%) think health care reform will help others more than themselves (43%). By a margin of 53-42% most believe current reform measures add up to a government takeover. Furthermore most Americans approve of immediate action on health care but they do so by a fairly modest 51-47% margin over those who’d prefer to focus on other issues first.

Analysis: What were the determining factors for Democrats voting for or against health care?

READ FULL STORY HERE

History was made last night at 10:45pm when the House of Representatives passed President Obama’s long awaited health care reform bill. There were several deals cut and concessions made over the last few days of the proceedings but ultimately few surprises from the chamber when it came time to actually cast their votes.

Republicans remained universally opposed to the bill with 219 of 253 Democrats casting their vote in favor of its passage. The ramifications of health care reform will continue to be debated for years, perhaps decades. In the meantime this significant moment in history is highlighted by a greater, or perhaps dubious, display of current political conditions in Washington. An increasingly fractured electorate led by increasingly polarized parties. While there is little need for analysis in the party-line voting behavior that categorizes the GOP on most major issues, the level of support given by Democrats to the bill is an interesting case study.

Nate Silver’s recent blog on his website

www.fivethirtyeight.com does a terrific job in illustrating where the levels of support and opposition could be found within the Democratic ranks. As he points out it wasn’t too hard to find and could be determined by the association of “yea” and “nay” voters in a handful of categories.

Silver first analyzes the percentage of popular vote obtained by President Obama in each congressional district from 2008 that a current House member resides, excluding retirees. Also in the instance of those, such as Pennsylvania 7th District Congressman Joe Sestak, who are running for statewide offices he lists Obama’s percentage bracket from the state as a whole in 2008.

We he found was universal opposition from Democrats residing in districts where the President struggled in 2008. Where Obama got less than 40% of the vote in that election all twelve Democrats representing those districts opposed the health care bill. There was tentative support in the 40-49% range with 17 of 30 (56.7%) Representatives offer up a “yea” vote to the bill. Where Obama got better than 50% support from American voters he got nearly 100% support from Democratic politicians. 195 of 202 (96.5%) members of the House residing in districts where the President won a majority vote in 2008 offered their support for health care. This included 70 of 75 (93.3%) in the 50-59% bracket, 61 of 63 (96.8%) in the 60-69% range and all 64-Representatives from districts where the President pulled in better than 70% of the popular vote.

In addition to Presidential success there is also a fairly obvious correlation made between support of the health care bill and the competitiveness of the race each House member is in for 2010. Congressmen who are either retiring or can be classified as residing in “safe” districts according to polls supported the bill in 160 of 169 instances (94.7%). Likely Democratic districts found the support of 30 out of 39 Representatives (76.9%) and those leaning towards sitting Congressman got the support of 15 in 23 instances (65.2%). Toss-up districts or those that lean towards the Republican opposition meanwhile generated a slimmer majority of support. 14 of 22 Democrats (63.6%) under this classification voted for the bill.

Of course another important variable in deciding how votes were cast dealt with the political ideology of the Representative in question. Silver defines each Democrat as being either “Very Liberal”, “Liberal”, “Mainline”, “Mainline-Moderate”, or “Moderate-Conservative” based on their voting track record. Those who were either liberal or “very” liberal unsurprisingly offered up their whole hearted support for the bill, 51 of 51 in each category. Mainline Democrats were also strongly supportive to the tune of a 96% “yea” rate. The more moderate wing of the party closely reflected the support of Democrats overall. Just over 86% of this category supported the bill matching the better than 86% of Democrats who cast their vote in favor of health care in general. Lastly far and away the greatest number of those opposed could be found in the conservative wing of the party. Exactly half of the conservatives or "Blue Dogs" (25 of 50) supported and opposed the measure.

Silver goes on to highlight other variables such as the “Stupak” coalition, insurance rates by district or state and lobbying dollars. Support or opposition from Democrats however seems to rest in the three basic areas categorized above. The three most important questions each Representative had to ask oneself were 1) how much of an asset is President Obama to my political wellbeing, 2) how competitive is the race for my district this fall, and 3) what are my personal feelings toward the abortion language in the bill and where do I stand on a woman’s right to choose?

Opinions will range on which side showed the greater level of character or approached their vote more altruistically, just as the debate on the health care bill itself will continue to rage on. What will never be known for certain are the motives for each individual member of Congress. Were the Republicans, universally opposed to the bill, unified by logic and rejection on philosophical grounds, or simply by the mantra of party line voting behavior? On the other hand were the Democrats, with several dissenting voices in tow, supporting the bill on the grounds of knowing what the right choice was for the greatest number of Americans? Or were their voting decisions directed by the will of a President and cries of change from their constituency?

PHOTO CREDIT: ASSOCIATED PRESS / Charles Dharapak

Analysis: Where will the 2010 midterms rank among greatest political comebacks?

With so much political talk of late revolving about the upcoming midterm elections it might be as good a time as any to take a look back. The Republican Party seems primed for a comeback in 2010 but whether than can retake both chambers of Congress or simply cut into the Democrats relatively large lead remains to be seen.

The GOP will need a net gain of forty seats to take back the House of Representatives and, as reported on previously, projection estimates range from anywhere to the upper-teens in seats added to as many as fifty. Ten victories in the Senate meanwhile will be necessary for control and most publications peg the Republican’s odds as fairly slim but hardly impossible in achieving that goal.

Below is a list of the ten biggest midterm election years for either party since the start of the 20th century. There have been 55-congressional elections over that period and 27 that have not coincided with a Presidential campaign.

Rank: 10-tied, Year: 2006, Party: Democratic, House: +31, Senate: +6

Notes: The current political landscape of America was dramatically shaped by the events of 2006. With historically low approval ratings President George W. Bush suffered major loses in the midterms that year during his sixth year in office. By historical standards the Democrats’ 31-House victories and six Senate pickups are fairly modest. It was important however in giving them control of both chambers of Congress for the first time since 1992. Harry Reid was ushered in as Senate Majority Leader and Nancy Pelosi became the first female Speaker of the House as a result of the Democrats congressional victories and a popular vote take of nearly 54%.

Rank: 10-tied, Year: 1966, Party: Republican, House: +47, Senate: +3

Notes: Many point to 1966 as the beginning of what would later be known as the “Republican Revolution” that culminated in Ronald Reagan’s realigning Presidential election of 1980. Due in a large part to President Lyndon Johnson’s crumbling popularity, the Vietnam War, race riots and conservative rejection to big government spending the GOP picked up 47-House seats and added an additional three in the Senate. Due to their large gains in Congress through the late 50s and early-60s the Democrats maintained a substantial majority in both chambers but the Republican comeback helped pave the way to Richard Nixon’s improbable election victory for President just two years later.

Rank: 9, Year: 1974, Party: Democratic, House: +49, Senate: +4

Notes: If 1966 was a year where the Republican Party engineered an impressive comeback that lead to two Richard Nixon election victories 1974 was the year that Nixon administration came crumbling down. It was miserable year for Republicans who were stunned by the President’s resignation after the Watergate scandal and were additionally criticized by the public after Gerald Ford’s subsequent pardoning of the now former President Nixon. Some close victories in the Senate increased the Democrats advantage to 61-38 over the Republicans and they picked up nearly 50 additional seats in the House after winning over 57% of the popular vote.

Rank: 8, Year: 1922, Party: Democratic, House: +76, Senate: +5

Notes: Undermined by a split in party leadership the Republicans suffered major midterm defeats, particularly in the House, in 1922. Warren G. Harding was riding a strong economy and successful Presidency two-years into his first time in the White House but at congressional levels the GOP had become divided by conservative and progressive factions within their party. Their massive 302-131 advantage in the House after Harding’s landslide victory in 1920 would erode to a 225-207 advantage over their Democratic rivals by way of 77 pickups for the minority party. The Republicans also lost six-seats in the Senate; five to the Democrats and one more to Henrik Shipstead of the Farm Labor Party. The GOP retained a 57-41-1 majority in the Senate.

Rank: 7, Year: 1942, Party: Republican, House: +47, Senate: +9

Notes: The outbreak of World War II and weariness over the long tenure of the Franklin Roosevelt administration resulted in significant Democratic loses in 1942. Breaking with tradition Roosevelt ran and won a third-term for President in 1940. The move was viewed with controversy, particularly by the political right. Additional weariness over FDR’s policies regarding the war and economy just loosening itself from the grips of the prolonged Great Depression eroded significant Democratic majorities in Congress. With 47-victories the Republicans climbed back to a modest 222-209 deficit in the House. Their impressive nine Senate wins meanwhile helped shrink what was a massive Democratic majority.

Rank: 6, Year: 1994, Party: Republican, House: +54, Senate: +8

Notes: it’s difficult to talk about 2010 without being reminded of 1994. That was the year the Republican Party, through a massive grassroots effort, took back both chambers of Congress with impressive margins of victory. Although their roughly six-point victory in the popular vote nationally appears fairly modest the cumulative result was an historic thumping. Winning 54-seats in the House and another eight in the Senate the GOP went from being a considerably minority party to the clear majority in the middle of President Bill Clinton’s mercurial first term in office. Becoming the first House Speaker to lose his seat since the Civil War Democrat Tom Foley gave way to Republican Newt Gingrich who would become the symbolic leader of the Republican Party for the rest of the decade.

Rank: 5, Year: 1930, Party: Democratic, House: +52, Senate: +8

Notes: The failing economy that presaged the Great Depression of the 1930s resulted in predictable and resounding loses for the Republican Party in the 1930 midterm elections. Similar by numbers to what took place in the opposite direction in 1994 the impact of what took place decades earlier gets our edge as slightly more significant due its paving of the way for Franklin Roosevelt’s landslide victory in 1932 and sustained Democratic majorities for many years to come. Eight Senate victories left the Democrats just one seat shy of a majority although the Farmer-Labor with one seat acted as a strong ally to Democrats and essentially balanced the chamber. The GOP retained a narrow edge in the House as well but special election victories for the Democrats after the election helped them to a 218-216 lead.

Rank: 4, Year: 1938, Party: Republican, House: +81, Senate: +6

Notes: Although majorities in the House and Senate were still many years away for the Republican Party the GOP did mount an impressive comeback in 1938. It was the middle of President Franklin Roosevelt’s second term. FDR swept to a landslide victory in 1936 and helped usher in an era of political dominance for his Democratic Party, but many rejected his policies and political decisions. Confidence in the “New Deal” was perhaps weakened by an economic recession that hit in 1937. The President’s infamous “court packing” plan was also met with heavy resistance from the GOP and public alike. Then there was the simply fact that with such large majorities and a number of freshman congressman on board after 1936 it would simply be difficult to defend such large political territory. The Republicans won 81-House seats and six in the Senate but the Democrats retained their large majorities in both chambers.

Rank: 3, Year: 1910, Party: Democratic, House: +58, Senate: +10

Notes: Before the ratification of the 17th Amendment U.S. Senators were chosen by a state legislature. 1910 was the last midterm election where a state by state popular vote was not used, but even by then many parts of the country were adopting the new format. Struggling for years as the minority party the Democrats launched an impressive comeback in 1910 that would set the stage for Woodrow Wilson’s Presidential victories in 1912 and 1916. The Dems picked up ten House seats although they still trailed their Republican opposition by eight. Their gains in the House were more impressive. Major factions within the Republican Party between conservative followers of President William Howard Taft and progressives loyal to former party leader Teddy Roosevelt helped the Democrats win a total of 58-seats and retake control of the House. Roosevelt would go on the challenge sitting President Taft for the GOP nomination just two years later and launch an impressive albeit unsuccessful campaign as a third-party candidate for President.

Rank: 2, Year: 1946, Party: Republican, House: +55, Senate: +13

Notes: Hailed as the “greatest Republican victory since Appomattox ” by the Chicago Tribune the 1946 midterm elections swept the GOP into power in both the House and Senate for the first time since 1930. The successful Presidency of Franklin Roosevelt ended abruptly in 1945. Upon his death Vice President Harry Truman assumed the reigns but found political waters difficult to navigate. Strapped with tough choices, controversial decisions and a sagging approval rating the Republicans launched a massive attack in Congress during the 1946 midterms. Trailing 242-191 in the House the Republicans came out of 1946 with an impressive 246-188 lead. In the Senate their staggering thirteen-seat pickup swung a 57-38 deficit to a 51-45 seat majority. The Democrats failed to pickup a single Senate seat and were forced to play defense. The Republican landslide made President Truman’s stunning victory in the 1948 election all the more impressive. 1946 was also notable for the addition of two freshman congressman to the House; John F. Kennedy of Massachusetts and Richard M. Nixon of California .

Rank: 1, Year: 1958, Party: Democratic, House: +49, Senate: +16

Notes: It was a close call but our winner for most impressive midterm election year goes to the Democratic Party from 1958. Many moderate Republicans had come into political power following huge victories for the GOP in the 1946 election and on the coattails of popular President Dwight Eisenhower. America had enjoyed a post-war economic boom through the late-40s and 50s as well but an economic recession in 1958 reversed things temporarily. Cold-War hysteria had gripped the country but a liberal backlash to the practices of Joe McCarthy’s communist witch-hunt as well as strong labor union opposition to President Eisenhower’s right-to-work programs set the stage for a Democratic revival. Although they held a solid majority in the House and a narrow lead in the Senate the Democrats 49-House pickups and whopping sixteen-Senate victories ushered in a second wave of political dominance for the Democrats that had started under FDR in the 30s. Successes in 1958 helped set the stage for John F. Kennedy’s narrow victory in the 1960 Presidential election and gained both he and successor Lyndon Johnson favorable support towards their major social and economic programs of the 1960s.

Analysis: Republicans will make midterm gains, but taking back Congress is doubtful for 2010

READ FULL STORY HERE

After making impressive gains since 2006 that included a sweeping mandate in the Oval Office Democrats appear stuck in a rut. Republicans are energized meanwhile and have crafted a message of fiscal responsibility while taking advantage of the low approval of the Democratically controlled Congress and shrinking popularity of President Obama. It all sounds familiar.

Cries of 1994, the year the GOP gained 52-seats to take back control of the House of the Representatives, can be heard. Health care was a big issue then just as it is now. The Democrats had a President occupying the White House but struggling with a shaky approval rating in his second year, just as they do now. Many political observers have talked about the possibility of a Republican renaissance in 2010 even while polls show them still licking their wounds from a difficult recent stretch.

One of these observers, Isaac Wood, is a contributor to Larry J. Sabato’s much hailed “Crystal Ball” website. Sabato is the director for the Center of Politics and a professor at the University of Virginia. The “Crystal Ball” was perhaps the most accurate predictor from a pool of dozens of analysts on Election Night 2006. That year Sabato and company accurately forecasted the Democrats 29-seat pickup in the House as well as their takeover of the Senate.

The Republican Party would need a net gain of 40-seats to take back the House this year and, after Scott Brown’s stunning special election victory in Massachusetts last month, a total of ten victories for Senate control. While Republican heavyweights such as Karl Rove are pointing towards factors that could pave the way for an autumn political season resembling that of 1994, Wood sees a rather modest comeback for the GOP underway.

1994 was the only time in the last 35-years that either political party picked up over 40-seats in an election. Isaac Wood does not predict the Republican wave in 2010 as strong enough to put the party back in power either. The “Crystal Ball” projects a Republican pickup of 24-30 House seats, averaging out to 27 as of February. In the Senate they see seven additional seats as likely to be filled by the GOP starting next year, three short of what is needed to recapture that body.

“Crystal Ball” labels 102-districts as being competitive in 2010. The Democrats may have hit a ceiling after impressive gains in the past two Congressional elections but there is still hope for the party that they can minimize loses this November. Barring the unforeseen the economy will of course take center stage. While job loses should continue to hinder the Democrats throughout the year, if other aspects continue to rebound and if President Obama can keep his approval ratings at or above the 50% threshold losses could be slight for the party in power.

Since World War II the average pick-up in a midterm year is 22-house seats. Currently the “Crystal Ball” shows thirteen of those seats very likely or guaranteed to fall to the Republican Party and another eighteen toss-ups or leaners could be heading in that direction over the next few months. Unlike the Democrats in 2006 however the GOP is vulnerable in a few races where they currently hold seats. The Democrats are favored to win in Delaware and Louisiana and have a good shot at picking up control of a district in Illinois as well.

As is usually the case come midterms when one party substantially outnumbers the other in Congress they also have more territory to defend. This makes the chore of keeping wide margins in tact all the more difficult. By sheer numbers as well as the political tide that favors Republicans this season fending off advances will be a difficult task for the Democrats. Beyond the competitive races there are 28-districts that the “Crystal Ball” rates as likely holds for the Dems and another nineteen leaning their direction. The GOP meanwhile has seven races leaning their direction and another fourteen likely to be retained. This gap of twenty-six seats in addition to other favorable dynamics in competitive races for Republicans helps depict their potential upside heading towards November.

Wood, Sabato and their team at “Crystal Ball” have labeled 102 of the 435-races for 2010 as being competitive. Below is the breakdown between parties;

Competitive Seats: 102-total
Democratic: 78 (28-likely, 19-leans, 18-toss, 13-leans GOP)
Republican: 24 (14-likely, 7-leans, 1-toss, 2-leans DEM)

The ceiling for the Republican Party then would be 78. That would mean Republican victories in the total number of competitive races in seats the Democrats hold without any loses suffered in the 24 the GOP currently occupies. Since only a miracle or monumental disaster for the Democrats could make that number obtainable the next relevant number is 50. This would again include the Republicans defending all 24-competitive seats they currently hold while picking up victories in every race where A) a Democrat is favored to lose, B) in a toss-up battle, or C) those that currently lean in the direction of the GOP. Again this seems like wishful thinking especially when considering Republican vulnerabilities in at least two House races and the practical impossibility of winning every race come November that they trail modestly in as of February.

The magic number of course is 40 and piecing together a scenario where Republicans can simply take back the House with a narrow majority is far more manageable.

If for instance the GOP retained all 24 of its vulnerable seats, picked up the thirteen Democratic possessions that polls show leaning Republican and the eighteen toss-up races their total would balloon to 31. To get the extra nine victories needed for a majority the GOP would then need to win slightly less than half of the nineteen races where Democrats are favored to win. They could also win a majority of those Democratic leaners or pull off a few upsets in races where they are heavy underdogs, ala Scott Brown, to help offset the strong possibility of losing control of a couple of their own seats.

While many could look at the “Crystal Ball” prediction of only 27-victories for the Republican Party as low-balling some basic statistical analysis could show a strong possibility of even less than that total. Looking back at those 102-competitive races perhaps we can attribute odds to the likelihood that each one will be retained by one party or taken away by the other. In all instances where either a Democrat and Republican candidate is “likely” to win lets assume their chances of actual victory are 90%. In races where one or the other “leans” as the favorite we’ll place their odds at 70%. “Toss-up” races then would be a 50-50 proposition.

Using these figures the Democrats would suffer several defeats but still retain an average of 51.4 of their 78 “vulnerable” seats this November, nearly 66%. The Republicans then would pickup the other 26.6 seats lost by Democratic candidates, similar to the 27 projected by the “Crystal Ball”. However we need to apply this same math to the 24-seats currently under the control of the GOP. That means Republicans on average are likely to retain 18.6 while losing 5.4 of their currently held seats, or 78% retained.

Subtracting their net losses in currently held seats from their net gains in those under Democrat control we can calculate the Republican Party will, on average, net 21.2 seats this November. That’s similar to the historical midterm average of 22 and while it shows progress for a party that has struggled in recent years it still keeps the GOP well shy of their goal to retake control of the House of the Representatives.

PHOTO CREDIT: ASSOCIATED PRESS / STEVEN SENNE

Poll: Latest political trends show most states leaning Democratic yet conservative

READ FULL STORY HERE

Unaffiliated voters are growing in numbers, the Democrats remain strong at local levels yet conservatives outnumber liberals in every U.S. state.

These finding come compliments of recent studies from Rasmussen Reports and Gallup tracking current partisan trends and the ideological landscape of America in early-2010.

A plurality of adults (35.4%) still refer to themselves as Democrats but that is now the lowest total recorded in more than seven years according to Rasmussen. Each month the organization updates its partisan trends recording ideological shifts amongst Democrats, Republicans and unaffiliated adults. In January of 2009 Democrats outnumbered Republicans by 8.3% nationally and a year earlier their advantage was 5.6%. Now that total is down to 3.1% rebounding somewhat from a 1.5% lead in December that was the narrowest Democratic Party advantage since August of 2005.

Although they’ve made up some ground over the past year it’s not all roses for the Republican Party either. 32.3% of the country now view themselves as Republican and while that total is within an average range for the Party it is only equal to the current total of unaffiliated adults. Also standing at 32.3% unaffiliateds are at their highest level since May of 2007, the last time that they were equal to or exceeded the number of Republicans in the country. The growing displeasure for both major parties may also be reflected in the 65% of voters now holding mainstream or populist social and political views. Rasmussen describes mainstream Americans as leery of both big government and big business and more likely to trust the wisdom of their fellow citizens.

“The American people don’t want to be governed from the left, the right or the
center. The American people want to govern themselves.” – Scott Rasmussen / Rasmussen Reports

Turning our attention to two recent studies by Gallup we take a state by state look at current party identification and political ideologies. Gallup conducted their research through a massive sample size of nearly 354,000 adults nationwide including more than 20,000 interviews in Pennsylvania alone. What they uncovered were slight shifts from 2008 to 2009 favoring Republicans but not enough to offset the clear advantage Democrats hold at state and local levels. The survey measured the number of Americans solidly or leaning toward the Democratic Party at 49%, down from 52% in 2008. Republicans meanwhile gained slightly up to 41% in 2009 from 40% last year.

The District of Columbia who has voted for the Democratic candidate in every Presidential election in its history has nearly 78% affiliating as a Democrat – a margin of 66-percentage points over Republicans. At 54% and holding a 22-point margin Wyoming is the most Republican state in the country. Only five states (Wyoming, Utah, Idaho, Alaska, and Alabama) feature a considerable advantage of better than five-percentage points favoring the Republican Party. On the flip side a whopping 34-states, including the District of Columbia, have greater than a five-point advantage in Democratic affiliation.

In the Tri-State area Delaware ranks strongest for the Democratic Party with a 21% advantage over Republicans. New Jersey also scores high for the Democrats holding an eighteen-point lead over the GOP. Pennsylvania meanwhile gets lumped in closer to the middle of the pack but still offers a twelve-percentage point lead for Democrats over Republicans in the state.

The Democratic advantage in party identification is tempered somewhat by a large ideological lead for conservatives over liberals. As previously mentioned there are no states where liberals outnumber conservatives, although the District of Columbia has a 15% liberal to conservative gap, and in only three states (Vermont, Hawaii, and Massachusetts) are the ideological totals nearly identical.

Conservatives outnumbered liberals 40-21% in 2009 according to Gallup research with an additional 36% identifying as politically moderate. Alabama is both the most conservative state (49.4%) and features the widest disparity (34.6%) between major groupings on the political right and left. The fewest liberals (13.9%) for a state reside in Alabama’s neighbor Mississippi. At 28% Vermont contains the most liberals outside of D.C. and also features the smallest conservative to liberal margin of just 0.8%. Over half of the states in America (26) have conservatives outnumbering liberals by over twenty-percentage points.

Typically Democratic states also tend have more politically moderate adults. Rhode Island, Hawaii, West Virginia, Vermont, Connecticut and Delaware all are composed of moderates by more than 40%. The First State however ranks just 30th on the list of most liberal states (19%) behind Pennsylvania’s 23rd ranking (20%) and New Jersey who is number nine (24.7%).

Poll: Support for health care plan plummets, Democrats push ahead

READ FULL STORY HERE

The big discussion in Washington begins just as the American public is voicing its strongest opposition to date.

A day after the Senate begins debate on health care legislation a new survey from Rasmussen Reports shows the highest level of opposition yet recorded. In a staggering reversal from last week the poll suggests just 38% of American voters now favor the Democratic health care plan against 56% who are opposed. The previous poll taken on November 13-14 showed support had grown to its highest level since mid-September with 47% of voters in favor against 49% in opposition.

This past weekend Senate Democrats narrowly obtained the sixty vote supermajority needed to commence with talks free from the threat of Republican filibuster tactics. As reported on by Time Magazine’s Karen Tumulty in an article from this morning, the Republicans are stepping up their efforts to derail the Democratic plan.

The minority intends to launch a series of surgical strikes on key parts of the bill, and to raise questions about whether it all adds up to what the Democrats are claiming…What they [Republicans] are counting on now, and what they are hoping to inflame, is public doubt. – Karen Tumulty / Time

The latest Rasmussen poll that also showed support for the plan at 45% earlier this month may come as sobering news to the Democratic Party’s aspirations of passing legislation before the end of the year. Those “strongly” in favor of the plan are outnumbered by those strongly against by better than a two to one ratio (21-43%). Also according to Rasmussen just 16% of voters believe health care costs will go down with the passage of this current plan against 60% who think they will go up. Nearly three-quarters of Democrats (73%) favor the plan but 83% of Republicans are against it, as are seven in ten non-affiliated voters. Democrats consider health care reform the top priority for President Obama while Republicans and unafilliateds side with debt reduction as being his most important job.

Fox News is also on the beat and reporting on survey results that are even harsher than those put forth by Rasmussen. The Fox poll shows support for the plan stuck at 35%, its average from the past four months. As Americans become more educated on the reform proposals of Congress the opposition continues to increase, standing now at 51%. The high level of opposition being tracked in recent polls is not at the expense of the numbers of those seeking significant changes to our health care system. Quinnipiac in a recent survey shows that 61% of the American public is eager for reform even as it opposes the current Democratic plan on the table.

Gallup just released a poll focusing its attention on the full list of health problems being cited by the American public. Access to health care again leads the list with nearly a third of poll responders (32%) considering it to be their top concern. While that figure has remained fairly steady from last year the emergence of the H1N1 “swine flu” pandemic has entered the new list at 16%. Obesity and cancer have registered declines but its concern over the cost of health care, down seven-points to 18%, that marks the most notable drop from November of 2008.

President Obama who had until recently maintained the majority of approval from Americans has cratered below 50% in several polls. It is specifically his lack of popularity on the issue of health care that has inflicted the most damage to his credibility with the public. The previously mentioned new poll from Qunnipiac University pegs the President’s approval on health care at a 41-53% positive to negative margin. Just 19% think that Obama can ram home the health care plan while keeping his promise not to add to the federal deficit - 72% disagree.

In spite of concern and negativity surrounding the issue Senate Democrats are well aware that the greatest challenge is not with the Republicans or even the current mindset of the American public. Top priority for majority leader Harry Reid is to keep his own party in line. The big four Senators who tentatively voted with Reid on Saturday but could sink the plan are centrist’s; Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and notable independent Joe Lieberman of Connecticut. Not only are three of the four Senators from heavily Republican-leaning states Lieberman is viewed at best as a wavering Democrat, troubled by economic concerns and a government run plan allowing for public option.

These four votes could be the key for Democrats in their plan for a victory on health care reform. Winning over the hearts and minds of the American public however represents another task altogether.

PHOTO CREDIT: ASSOCIATED PRESS / ALEX BRANDON

Analysis: Obama's approval rating, who has it right?

READ FULL STORY HERE

Fox News made some waves this morning when it released the results of a survey showing President Obama’s approval rating had dropped to a new low.

According to their polling Obama has cratered well below the 50% threshold, standing now at an even 46-46% approval to disapproval margin. That represents a drop from the 50-41% rating split the President received from the previous Fox poll released three weeks ago. Most polls are subject to some varying form of discrepancy and error. Efficient polling is not an easy task to undertake. Yet with a media and public perception so driven by the effects of numbers it is important to get an understanding of how those numbers are being gathered.

One big thing stands out about the Fox News poll when measuring the validity of these most recent figures is the sudden and dramatic drop of support from independents. While it’s typical for political independents to sway more rapidly in their level of support than the more locked in Democrat and Republican blocks Fox shows a highly volatile group of voters.

In August President Obama’s approval rating among independents stood at a 49-44% approval to disapproval margin. Two polls conducted in September showed his totals ranging from 51-42% to 46-41%. Then Obama cratered in early-October, down to a 42-47% split only to rebound considerably late in the month to 49-34%. Suddenly the President’s numbers have plummeted again, down a startling sixteen-points to his current 34-51% standing in just three weeks. What gives here?

Considering that the approval ratings given from Democrats and Republicans in the poll have remained almost identical from late-October could we expect another jump in independent support for Obama next month? If so it’s very likely the President will go back over the 50% threshold, but is this all a true reflection of what the electorate thinks of the President's job performance?

While having little impact on the results from this poll Fox is also somewhat notorious for gathering a higher percentage of Republican voters and a far lower percentage of self-describe independents than what are generally agreed upon to be their national totals. Although the poll was conducted from 900-registered voters the fairly high +/- 6% margin of error between political groupings brings that total down to 844-responders. 40.5% claimed to affiliate as Democrats, 38.4% Republicans and 21.1% independents. However Rasmussen Reports who studies partisan trends each month and works in affiliation with Fox concludes the current party balance is 37.8% Democrat, 31.9% Republican and 30.3% independent.

Fox’s low score for President Obama is balanced against the opposite extreme by a recent survey from ABC News/Washington Post. Showing remarkable consistency over the past three months the President’s approval rating in this poll stands at 56% with a disapproval of 42%. Sadly unlike Fox the ABC poll does not offer us any data on how each political group responded to their questions. That the ABC poll also uses random sampling and pulls their data from 1,001 “adults” instead of “registered” or “likely voters gives is some insight as to why there is such a large ten-point gap between the two aforementioned polls.

The tendency is for a higher percentage of Republicans to vote and be registered to do so. This means a sampling of all adults would favor President Obama and Democrats in general as those who are not voters or enlisted with any party tend to lean to the left. Furthermore the party balance recorded in this poll sends up something of a red flag; 35% Democrat, 21% Republican, 39% independent. Even after leaners are taken into consideration the totals are still 54% Democrat, 38% Republican and 47% independent. The sixteen-point gap between Democrats and Republicans and the nine-point lead independents hold over the GOP are both in all likelihood greatly exaggerated.

Interestingly if we chose to apply the data collected from the Fox News survey on the preference of each political party to this ABC poll the President’s approval rating would only come in at 46%, an identical total between polls. Still the skew in numbers towards those affiliated with the Democratic Party undoubtedly plays a major role in these positive totals for Obama.

So where does the truth lie? As in most cases probably somewhere in the middle. The average of eight major polls, including Fox and ABC, taken this month calculates President Obama’s approval rating at just over 51%. This total is exactly half-way between the 46% recorded by Fox News and the 56% gathered from ABC News/Washington Post.

PHOTO CREDIT: ASSOCIATED PRESS / Pablo Martinez Monsivais

Poll: Is the Republican Party primed for a comeback in 2010?

Two recent polls from Rasmussen Reports and Gallup point to the strong possibility of a Republican comeback in the 2010 midterm elections.

The Rasmussen survey confirms a growing trend of voter preference for the Republican Party on a generic ballot for the Congressional elections held next November. Currently the GOP holds a 43-37% lead over the Democrats with a high number of unaffiliated voters (43-20%) favoring Republican candidates at this point. The Democratic Party has not led according to Rasmussen since holding a modest 41-39% advantage in late-June.

Whereas Rasmussen has shown a modest lead for the Republican Party over the past several months, Gallup’s survey showing a preference for the GOP is the first occurrence of that this year. Currently Republican candidates lead 48-44% on the hypothetical ballot. That is up from a two-point deficit last month and a 50-44% lead for the Democratic Party being tracked as recently as late-July.

While both parties get typically strong support from their constituents the major swing to the right has been with independent voters. 93% of Republicans favor a GOP candidate and 91% of Democrats prefer a member of their own party. The Republican Party now holds a considerable 52-30% lead amongst independents according to this latest Gallup poll however. This is a major change from polls taken in late-July that showed the Democrats holding on to a narrow 43-42% lead with independents.

The average approval rating of Congress taken from seven major national polls hovers at just 27%. The harshest verdict comes from Gallup who measures the House and Senate at just a 21% approval and 72% disapproval. A recent Associated Press-GFK survey shows somewhat more promising numbers (33-64%) but clearly those figures continue to be mired in the negatives.

Interestingly Democrats continue to show stronger approval ratings than their Republican counterparts despite these latest findings from Rasmussen and Gallup. The gap is not as wide as it has been in recent months however. According to one recent survey conducted by CNN/Opinion ResearchDemocratic approval ratings in Congress are at 38% with 59% disapproving. When asked the same question about the GOP adult responders approved 33% of the time against 66% who did not.

Another seemingly odd twist comes from Rasmussen, the same organization who has continuously measured a Republican advantage on their previously mentioned generic Congressional ballot since the end of the June. Rasmussen actually shows the margin of Americans identifying themselves as Democrats over Republican growing slightly. Currently the survey shows Democrats with a 5.9% membership edge nationally. That figure is up three-tenths of a point from September and a full point from as far back as July.

The success or failure of the Obama agenda will undoubtedly weigh heavily on the chances for many Democratic Congressman in vulnerable districts. History has not been kind to the party in control of the White House come time for the midterm elections. In only four instances has the party of the sitting President picked up seats in the House of Representatives during a midterm although it has happened twice in recent years.

The Republicans behind George W. Bush accomplished the rare feat bagging a net of eight seats in 2002 benefiting from redistricting after the 2000 census and the public approved "War on Terror". President Bill Clinton’s popularity balanced against the growing unpopularity of House Speaker New Gingrich allowed the Democrats to net an impressive five seats in 1998 bucking the trend of the infamous “six year itch”. The other two instances where gains were made came during the height of President Franklin Roosevelt’s “New Deal” in 1934 and in the middle of Republican Teddy Roosevelt’s popular first term in 1902 when an increase in the Electoral College added seats for both parties.

Gallup will not begin to model likely turnout until much closer to the 2010 elections, but given that Republicans usually have a turnout advantage, if normal turnout patterns prevail in the coming election, prospects for a good Democratic showing appear slim. Of course, the elections are still nearly 12 months away and conditions could shift back in the Democrats' favor over this time. -- Jeffrey M. Jones / Gallup.com