Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Recent Polls - Congress 2008

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
DeSwiss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 05:04 PM
Original message
Recent Polls - Congress 2008
Recent Polls - Congress 2008

Polls listed online at Gallup:

George Washington University Battleground Poll conducted by the Tarrance Group (R) and Lake Research Partners (D). July 15-18, 2007. N=1,000 likely voters nationwide. MoE ± 3.1.

"And, still thinking about the 2008 elections: If the election for Congress were being held today, and you had to make a choice, would you be voting for the Republican candidate or the Democratic candidate in your congressional district?" If unsure: "And which party's candidate do you lean toward at this time?"

Democrat - 47% Republican - 40% Unsure - 13%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll. June 22-24, 2007. N=907 registered voters nationwide. MoE ± 3.5.

"If the elections for Congress were being held today, which party's candidate would you vote for in your congressional district?" If unsure: "As of today, who do you lean more toward?"

Democratic Candidate - 53%
Republican Candidate - 41%
Other Candidate (vol.) - 3%
Don't Plan To Vote (vol.) - 1%
Unsure - 2%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll conducted by the polling organizations of Peter Hart (D) and Neil Newhouse (R). June 8-11, 2007. N=1,008 adults nationwide. Results below are among registered voters.

"In the next election for U.S. Congress, do you feel that your representative deserves to be reelected, or do you think that it is time to give a new person a chance?"

Deserves To Be Reelected - 41%
Time for New Person - 48%
Unsure - 11%

more: http://www.pollingreport.com/cong2008.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Harry, Nancy: Nice work
Submitted by lambert on Tue, 2007-08-21 11:54.

A new Gallup Poll finds Congress’ approval rating the lowest it has been since Gallup first tracked public opinion of Congress with this measure in 1974. Just 18% of Americans approve of the job Congress is doing, while 76% disapprove, according to the August 13-16, 2007, Gallup Poll.

There was a slight interruption in the downward trend in congressional approval ratings at the beginning of this year when party control changed hands from the Republicans to the Democrats following last fall’s midterm elections. In January 2007, 35% of Americans approved of Congress, a significant increase from the 21% who approved of Congress in December 2006.

But that “honeymoon” period for the new Democratically controlled Congress was brief, as its job ratings dropped below 30% in March 2007 and have now fallen below where they were just before the Democrats took over.

http://www.correntewire.com/harry_nancy_nice_work


*** - Well, that NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll was a surprise to me. Only 41% think the existing Reps should return To Congress in 08, while 48% think its time to give a new person a shot at running things. And 11% either can't make up their minds, or just don't give a shit anymore.

So, if these polls are any kind of indicator, it would appear (at least to me), that "Off The Table" may not be limited to the impeachment of Bush/Cheney before its all said and done. One can hope.....


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
That Is Quite Enough Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 05:07 PM
Response to Original message
1. Congress's plan for reelection is backfiring.
Expect to see the Democrats losing more seats than they gain in 2008.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deja Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Quite a possibility.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeSwiss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. I think you could be right.
One part of the problem as I see it, is the existing system of Congressional seniority that is in play here, and which significantly undermines the majority opinion of Americans to impeach and to get the hell out of Iraq.

In effect, we're being told by Congressional "leaders" what's important and what's not. That they know what's best for us better than we do. That to impeach Bush/Cheney would divert attention away from "more important matters." And that to "abandon" Iraq would create a level of Middle East instability that Americans would later regret. Particularly the threat that would be made against a continuous supply of oil. And the electorate in the various Congressional districts are hard pressed to vote against their own reps for fear of losing out on the influence, clout and control that is availed to those in power through their committee assignments, if they're forced to start all over again with a newbie. And the incumbents play that song for all its worth.

As to the impeachment diversion, I would think that if America could hold an election during a civil war, we can probably impeach a President and a Vice-President while conducting an illegal war in another country. And while there is certainly truth to the instability question if we leave Iraq, the Middle East has been unstable since Harry Truman recognized the state of Israel in 1948. To me it seems to be more a matter of degree of instability which fluctuates somewhere between terrible and absolutely abhorrent.

Its the paradigm that needs changing. Because we should have been moving in the direction of energy independence since the first oil embargo in the early 70s. The handwriting was on the wall -- and we ignored the message. No one thought in the early 70s that those backward little sheikdoms would ever pose a serious threat to the "greatest nation on earth." Congress didn't want to deal with those realities then either. Just like we aren't now. Yet by refusing to change the paradigm of how and where we get our energy, we tie ourselves to those who possess it and become beholden to whatever issues that are important to them. And the more we divide people by our policies and actions the more they resent us. Its a descending spiral that can only end badly for everyone. IMHO

DeSwiss -
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC