The report, released August 18th, notes that “With foreign policy and defense issues at the forefront of the presidential campaign this year, swing voters’ views on a range of (foreign policy) issues take on added importance. On eight of the 11 foreign policy issues in the poll on which there are significant partisan gaps, opinions of swing voters are closer to those of Kerry supporters than to those of Bush voters.
On several issues, the differences between swing voters and committed Bush voters is substantial. More than half of swing voters (53%) regard strengthening the United Nations as a top priority compared with 35% of Bush voters who have this view. And about twice as many swing voters as Bush supporters view global warming as a major concern (35% vs. 18%). ”
UPCATEGORY: Ruy Teixeira’s Donkey Rising
TDS Strategy Memos
Latest Research from:
Editor’s Corner
By Ed Kilgore
-
October 23: Four Fear Factors for Democrats
I figured this was as good a time as any to come clean about reasons Democrats are fretting the 2024 election results despite some quite positive signs for Kamala Harris, so I wrote them up at New York:
One of the most enduring of recent political trends is a sharp partisan divergence in confidence about each party’s electoral future. Democrats are forever “fretting” or even “bed-wetting;” they are in “disarray” and pointing fingers at each other over disasters yet to come. Republicans, reflecting the incessant bravado of their three-time presidential nominee, tend to project total, overwhelming victory in every election, future and sometimes even past. When you say, as Donald Trump often does, that “the only way we lose is if they cheat,” you are expressing the belief that you never ever actually lose.
The contrast between the fretting donkey and the trumpeting elephant is sometimes interpreted as a matter of character. Dating back to the early days of the progressive blogosphere, many activists have claimed that Democrats (particularly centrists) simply lack “spine,” or the remorseless willingness put aside doubts or any other compunctions in order to fight for victory in contests large and small. In this Nietzschean view of politics, as determined by sheer will-to-power (rather than the quality of ideas or the impact of real-world conditions), Democrats are forever bringing a knife to a gun fight or a gun to a nuclear war.
Those of us who are offended by this anti-intellectual view of political competition, much less its implicit suggestion that Democrats become as vicious and demagogic as the opposition often is, have an obligation to offer an alternative explanation for this asymmetric warfare of partisan self-confidence. I won’t offer a general theory dating back to past elections, but in 2024, the most important reasons for inordinate Democratic fear are past painful experience and a disproportionate understanding of the stakes of this election.
Democrats remember 2016 and 2020
It’s very safe to say very few Democrats expected Hillary Clinton to lose to Donald Trump in 2016, or that Joe Biden would come so close to losing to Donald Trump in 2020. No lead in the polls looks safe because in previous elections involving Trump, they weren’t.
To be clear, the national polls weren’t far off in 2016; the problem was that sparse public polling of key states didn’t alert Democrats to the possibility Trump might pull an Electoral College inside straight by winning three states that hadn’t gone Republican in many years (since 1984 in Wisconsin, and since 1988 in Michigan and Pennsylvania). 2020 was just a bad year for pollsters. In both cases, it was Trump who benefitted from polling errors. So of course Democrats don’t view any polling lead as safe. Yes, the pollsters claim they’ve compensated for the problems that affect their accuracy in 2016 and 2020, and it’s even possible they over-compensated, meaning that Harris could do better than expected. But the painful memories remain fresh.
Democrats fear Trump 2.0 more than Republicans fear Harris
If you believe the maximum Trump ‘24 message about Kamala Harris’s intentions as president, it’s a scary prospect: she’s a Marxist (or Communist) who wants to replace white American citizens with the scum of the earth, which her administration is eagerly inviting across open borders with government benefits to illegally vote Democratic. It’s true that polls show a hard kernel — perhaps close to half — of self-identified Republicans believe some version of the Great Replacement Theory that has migrated from the right-wing fringes to the heart of the Trump campaign’s messaging, and that’s terrifying since there’s no evidence whatsoever for it. But best we can tell, the Trump voting base is a more-or-less equally divided coalition of people who actually believe some if not all of what their candidate says about the consequences of defeat, and people who just think Trump offers better economic and tougher immigration policies. While the election may be an existential crisis for Trump himself, since his own personal liberty could depend on the outcome, there’s not much evidence that all-or-nothing attitude is shared beyond the MAGA core of his coalition.
By contrast, Democrats don’t have to exercise a lurid sense of imagination to feel fear about Trump 2.0. They have Trump 1.0 as a precedent, with the added consideration that the disorganization and poor planning that curbed many of the 45th president’s authoritarian tendencies will almost certainly be reduced in 2025. Then there’s the escalation in his extremist rhetoric. In 2016 he promised a Muslim travel ban and a southern border wall. Now he’s talking about mass deportation program for undocumented immigrants and overt ideological vetting of legal immigrants. In 2016 he inveighed against the “deep state” and accused Democrats of actively working against the interests of the country. Now he’s pledging to carry out a virtual suspension of civil service protections and promising to unleash the machinery of law enforcement on his political enemies, including the press. As the furor over Project 2025 suggests, there’s a general sense that the scarier elements in Trump’s circle of advisors are planning to hit the ground running with radical changes in policies and personnel that can’t be reversed.
Only one party is threatening to challenge the election results
An important psychological factor feeding Democratic fears of a close election is the unavoidable fact that Trump has virtually promised to repeat or even surpass his 2020 effort to overturn the results if he loses. So anything other than a landslide victory for Harris will be fragile and potentially reversible. This is a deeply demoralizing prospect. It’s one thing to keep people focused on maximum engagement with politics through November 5. It’s another thing altogether to plan for a long frantic slog that won’t be completed until January 20.
Trump has been working hard to perfect the flaws in his 2020 post-election campaign that led to the failed January 6 insurrection, devoting a lot of resources to pre-election litigation and the compilation of post-election fraud allegations.
Though if you look hard you can find scattered examples of Democrats talking about denying a victorious Trump re-inauguration on January 20, none of that chatter is coming from the Democratic Party, the Harris-Walz campaign, or a critical mass of the many, many players who would be necessary to challenge an election defeat. Election denial in 2024 is strictly a Republican show.
If Harris wins, she’ll oversee a divided government; if Trump wins, he’ll have a shot at total power
As my colleague Jonathan Chait recently explained, the odds of Republicans winning control of the Senate in November are extremely high. That means that barring a political miracle, a President Harris would be constrained both legislatively and administratively, in terms of the vast number of executive-branch and judicial appointments the Senate has the power to confirm, reject, or simply ignore.
If Trump wins, however, he will have a better-than-even chance at a governing trifecta. This would not only open up the floodgates for extremist appointments aimed at remaking the federal government and adding to the Trumpification of the judiciary, but would unlock the budget reconciliation process whereby the trifecta party can make massive policy changes on up-or-down party-line votes without having to worry about a Senate filibuster.
Overall, Democrats have more reason to fear this election, and putting on some fake bravado and braying like MAGA folk won’t change the underlying reasons for that fear. The only thing that can is a second Trump defeat which sticks.
I see VoteHillary.org which pushed a 2004 Hillary Rodham Clinton Draft presidency is now pushing her for president in 2008. The site is http://www.votehillary.org I have heard it will be launched as early as next week.
Ruy:
Since you don’t have trackback enabled…I wanted you to know that I used your piece on a blog post:
http://preemptivekarma.com/2004/08/we-are-sultans-of-swing.html
send them a few emails… tell them just how you think… in English.
I watched Inside Politics and was pissed off because they spent more than 10 min talking to that lier spewing out his poison about Kerry’s record on the swift boat and they knew all to well that the Washington Post article, with proof from the military records, that his story was a lie. They didn’t even give equal time to Kerry’s side nor did they even mention the story as reported in the Washington Post. Maybe they are taking over for FOX as being “Fair And Balanced”.
I suppose its easy and somewhat expected for persons to start sweating beads of anxiety and why not?
About 8 months ago, everyone was thinking that Kerry had very few of the qualities needed to be president and most were hoping that he would pick a prospective VP that would swing the line his way. Right now however, everyone is somewhat surprised that this same Kerry is now in the lead on every issue and seems to be holding his own quite well, even with his cool, relaxed, calculated, timely demeanor and his long face too.
Its this lead from a person who wasnt quite expected to lead that has everyone wondering and calculating and figuring out stuff, and polling and working out the neck and necks and every other thing.
However, when I stop to think about it, I dont think that Kerry is surprised by his current position. I think that he is truly a reflection of his demeanor. I get the feeling that this game is playing out according to plan, even tho its causing some people to be drenched in sweat with worry and anxiety.
I remember hearing some people say that they are glad that he picked Edwards because Edwards could back him up with better speeches and better facial presentations etc… but, from the looks of it, I dont get the impression that Kerry is even thinking of Edward much.
So much so, that he has sent Edwards off to spread the word, while he handles his end of the campaign. I dont and cant think of anyone who can come right out and say that Kerry is making a mess of things. Kerry is rising like cream to the heart of the game. I read his response to the swift boat ads today and he was right on the mark. hard hitting and yet using the best of English and with words well chosen and well placed. Personally, I dont think todays speech is his best speech yet, but from what I read, I get the distinct impression that he has more to say and will say it.
From what I read today, I dare Bush to personally launch an attack on Kerry to the tune of Kerry’s response to the Swfit boat ad. I dare Bush to change his tune and not continue in his previous mode of saying that Kerry is an honorable Veteran.
Kerry is on the move and hence I agree with the other posts which note that someone needs to check on the GOP and Pat Roberts and Jerry Falwell and that crowd. Someone needs to monitor things and challenge the republicans to be clean this time around.
I dont think that there is any real need for anxiety about Kerry. He seems to know what he is about and he is playing his cards the way he wants to. I have not seen or heard any recent mis-steps from him and currently he is under relentless attack from the GOP fronts.
Even tho I have noticed alot more support from the rank and file dems and various supporting organisations, I still think that its important that every kerry supporter beat the streets, wear out some soles and tell somebody to vote for Kerry.
The world needs a change in the White House. One thing that is certain, is that the world will breathe a sigh of relief when Bush departs this White House. The world stands a better chance of quelling the attacks of terrorist under a Kerry regime. The World stands a better chance of getting help to fix Iraq and the world under a kerry umbrella. The World is much more prone to getting help with just about every world issue if people vote for Kerry.
Unfortunately Americans are not voting for a president this year, the burden is now to vote for a leader of the free world and thats not a role the George Bush can fulfill.. I am very sorry GWB but you just dont cut it. Kerry deserves his opportunity to prove his metal.
Cheers
to SC. Thanks for clearing that up I read it like the writer meant it and didn’t notice the spelling.
I read somewhere that the Kerry campaign had recruited about 2000 lawyers who were going to spearhead efforts in targeted states to monitor the election and respond to fraud. In my state the Kerry campaign is recuriting volunteers with the goal of having a pollwatcher at every polling site. So I think there is concern at the top and actions are being taken. I do think that it is important to publicize every attempt at fraud as widely as possible now so that when the fraud occurs on election day, people will not be surprised. Of course some fraud is hard to detect. I was a poll watcher at an election about twenty years ago and we had a high number of people who came in to vote only to discover that their names were not listed at that site. We gave them absentee ballots so they could vote anyway. It turned out that the business responisble for printing the voting lists had “accidently” printed the names of Democrats at the wrong polling sites. The business was a small local concern owned by the chair of the county Republican party.
Also our state Kerry campaign is calling all Democratic and independent voters and urging them to switch to absentee ballots.
The Republicans will cheat in this election. I expect that soon they will start rumors of Democratic cheating since accusing us of their crimes is part of their way of operating.
If you think your state Kerry campaign is not planning for for ways to deal with election fraud, then call them up, get active, voice your concerns. But the fact that the kerry campaign in my safe Kerry state is planning for fraud should be reassuring. If steps are being taken here, they must be taking steps in Ohio and Florida.
Link is to WashPost article this AM discrediting central claims of one of Kerry’s most vocal Swift boat critics:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A13267-2004Aug18.html
Wonderful letter, BT. Honestly, I find myself in a lather of anxiety over the coming election. It has long been my contention that Republicans do not really want educated voters or honest elections because that would be a losing situation for them. When we have a media which is also corporately owned and pretty much do the bidding of the people in power, what hope is there. I feel like we are spitting in the wind!
I don’t usually get so discouraged, but we’ve just been treated to 2 weeks of swift boat ads by the Republican slime machine, and I have a bad, bad feeling that there’s going to be more mud thrown by them shortly, and they are so carefully crafted that they are difficult to dispute. Josh Marshall has a good article this morning about this. We’re going to have to get as good at throwing dirt as the Republicans. God knows, Bush has given us enough to work with!
I’d like to see an ad that talks about the 500 or so men that Bush skipped over to get into the TANG. How many of those men were subsequently drafted to Viet Nam and how many of them died so that the shrub could sit on his ass swigging beers and not showing up for duty?
I’m angry about the dirt these Republicans throw, and I think it’s time we threw some back.
I think Fact Checker is referring to the use of “then” instead of “than”. It’s a common mistake, unfortunately.
“than” means you are making a comparison. “then” means that something else happened next. Very different words, even thought there’s only one letter different.
The headline should be
“Pew Research Center Report Shows Swing Voters Closer to Kerry Than Bush”.
By using “then”, it makes it sound like swing voters were closer to Kerry, but are now closer to Bush.
BT, that’s a terrific letter! (I have read Toobin’s book.) Of course, this problem is bigger than Florida, enormous as Florida is. Maybe we need lawyers to get started filing suits (or something) now. The NY Times has a good editorial this (Thursday) morning on this subject in its broadest context.
BTW, if you or sympathetic others you know are having trouble getting worked up about free and fair elections I’d recommend as page-turner bedtime reading Jeff Toobin’s book on the Florida recount, Too Close to Call.
Michael, I couldn’t agree more, with one exception.
I agree wholeheartedly with Bel’s pleas to ordinary citizens to get involved and help our cause, recognizing that many are doing so now.
While it would be comforting to believe that the DNC, state Dem parties, and advocacy organizations can and will take care of these problems for others of us who share these concerns, I think we are better off assuming they need all the help they can get.
Re Florida, I sent this letter to an influential, sympathetic national columnist this morning:
Dear ,
Pardon my language, but what in the hell has the federal government been doing on election reform during the Bush Administration? The changes they enacted awhile back were mildly helpful as I understand it, but nowhere near what obviously needed to be addressed following the Florida debacle. The buck stops at the White House for this for yet another example of abysmal, utterly failed leadership–this time, at inexcusable peril to the health of our democracy.
What does it say about the level of confidence people have in our voting systems when the Florida Republican party is urging voters to vote absentee, and when many other citizens in jurisdictions with electronic voting machines but no paper trail backup are deciding for themselves that if they want their votes counted, absentee is the way to go?
Regarding the circumstances reported in Bob Herbert’s column earlier this week in the NY Times, why is it that no one–absolutely no one–evidently even believes it is appropriate to demand that Governor Bush see to it that an immediate, impartial, and thorough investigation be launched to determine whether federal voting rights laws have been violated in this instance?! The investigation needs to be completed swiftly and the results shared openly with the public.
Evidently, by the lights of Republican doctrine, it’s just fine for the US Supreme Court to find a sufficiently compelling federal interest in how Florida does its voting to shut down the recount ordered by the Florida Supreme Court in 2000. But it’s not enough of a federal interest for the other two branches of the federal government–controlled by the same party– to take vigorous action to see to it that the problems which led to this extreme and unusual (and of course unjustified) intervention be rectified.
How can we possibly find ourselves in the situation we are in 11 weeks before this election? Amazing.
(end of letter)
Fact Checker, I don’t understand your comment? It looks fine to me.
The is not directly relevant to the Pew poll but is nonetheless extremely important, I feel: There have been a spate of stories in the press lately–notably Paul Krugman’s latest column–concerning the honesty of the coming election. Will all the votes be accurately counted? Will all eligible voters who wish to vote be permitted to do so? I hope the Democratic Party at the highest levels as well as the various “good government” organizations and the media are monitoring these issues very closely. They obviously go to the very core of our democracy.
“Swing Voters Closer to Kerry Then Bush.” So, which is it? Typo perhaps?