George Bush leads John Kerry 48-46 percent among nation-wide LV’s, with 3 percent for Nader, 2 percent for none of these and 2 percent not sure/refused, according to a Harris Interactive Poll conducted 9/20-26.
Thanks for signing up!
TDS Strategy Memos
Latest Research from:
tds-wwc-roundtable
Editor’s Corner
By Ed Kilgore
-
September 30: Real Democrats Don’t Love “the Senate As an Institution”
I ran across a quote from Kyrsten Sinema this week that made me angry, so I vented my spleen at New York.
In a cloying little exchange of pleasantries before Arizona senator Kyrsten Sinema spoke from the podium of Mitch McConnell’s eponymous center at the University of Louisville on Monday, the Senate Republican leader called the Democrat “the most effective first-term senator” he’d ever seen. McConnell was probably being sincere given Sinema’s role, along with Joe Manchin, in saving the filibuster, the chief tool in the GOP’s obstructionist bag of tricks. He could have called her a “one-term senator” since her demise in 2024 seems all but certain after she alienated as many Arizona Democrats as she could, but that wouldn’t have been gracious. Instead, he went on to give her the highest token of his esteem, calling her a “deal-maker.”
For her part, Sinema noted that she and McConnell share a “respect for the Senate as an institution,” a statement she reinforced by calling for the restoration of 60-vote thresholds for executive and judicial-branch confirmations in the upper chamber, which were abolished by serial Democratic and Republican majorities in 2013 and 2017, respectively. Sinema is, you see, an old-school respecter of the Senate, which makes me sick to my stomach.
Anyone who spends time around the Senate (I worked there in the late 1980s and early 1990s and with Senate offices for years before and after that) is aware of the extremely high regard in which senators hold themselves “as an institution.” They don’t publicly bash House members as petty-minded, party-bossed parochial Lilliputians who have to spend all their time running for reelection. But the unstated though very real mutual disdain of the two congressional chambers is deeply rooted in the Senate’s distinctive constitutional role as an anti-democratic redoubt of entrenched privilege.
This is nowhere more apparent than in Sinema’s beloved filibuster, which in its most recent incarnation has made supermajorities a requirement for even routine legislation. But lest we forget, even if the filibuster went away, the Senate’s grant of equal power to all 50 states is profoundly undemocratic. The states themselves are not allowed to get away with such a gross misappropriation of legislative power. In the 1964 decision in Reynolds v. Sims, the U.S. Supreme Court held that, under the Equal Protection Act of the 14th Amendment, state legislatures had to respect the principal of “one person, one vote,” with seats in the upper as well as lower chambers being awarded in districts of equal population. As Chief Justice Earl Warren famously wrote in the Court’s opinion in a 8-1 decision:
“Legislators represent people, not trees or acres. Legislators are elected by voters, not farms or cities or economic interests. As long as ours is a representative form of government, and our legislatures are those instruments of government elected directly by and directly representative of the people, the right to elect legislators in a free and unimpaired fashion is a bedrock of our political system.”
The logic is the same with respect to the model for all those once-oligarchical state upper chambers, the U.S. Senate itself. But the Senate has its own separate, unassailable constitutional basis. The Article I, Section 3 provision of the Constitution providing for equal representation of states in the Senate is expressly exempted from amendment in Article V (“no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate”). So we are stuck with an anti-democratic chamber. But we don’t have to celebrate it.
It’s important to remember the two reasons we have a U.S. Senate. First, it represented a compromise with those in the founding generation who wanted an unelected body like Britain’s House of Lords to counteract “the people’s House,” the lower chamber. But more important, as James Madison made clear in “Federalist 62,” it was essential to the ratification of the Constitution that the country maintain its original character as a compact of states, not as a truly United States:
“It may be remarked, that the equal vote allowed to each state, is at once a constitutional recognition of the portion of sovereignty remaining in the individual states, and an instrument for preserving that residuary sovereignty …
“Another advantage accruing from this ingredient in the constitution of the senate is, the additional impediment it must prove against improper acts of legislation. No law or resolution can now be passed without the concurrence, first, of a majority of the people, and then, of a majority of the states.”
This understanding of the country as a modified confederation of states with a stronger central government than it originally had more or less perished with the outcome of the Civil War and the ratification of the Civil Rights Amendments (including the 14th Amendment, that great and still-evolving guarantee of individual rights against states rights). But the Senate remains as a relic of the era when McConnell’s hero Henry Clay and a host of other patriarchal slaveholders held the Union temporarily together by engaging in “deal-making” at the expense of human dignity. The 17th Amendment, ratified in 1913 and providing for the popular election of senators instead of letting state legislatures choose them, took the chamber as far toward democracy as a flawed Constitution would allow.
“Respect for the Senate as an institution” means contempt for democracy as a fundamental value. That is why those with respect for democracy — particularly those who profess to be a member of the Democratic Party — should do everything possible to minimize the Senate’s ability to function according to the Founders’ design instead of boasting about making the chamber even more susceptible to high-handed measures to frustrate the popular will.
Smooth, the best you can do is point out that Kerry confused Treblinka with Lubyanka? It’s surely no small deal to the parties involved, but (1) most Americans didn’t catch the gaffe and won’t cry wolf over it once it’s explained, and (2) at least Kerry didn’t confuse Osama bin Laden with Saddam Hussein. You tell me which gaffe we’ll still be paying for in years to come.
Gee, our friend Smoothie sounds…almost rattled, all of a sudden:-)
—
Maybe you will join the distinguished club of Hugh Hewitt , Townhall.com and Lucianne.com now? I’ve just ventured into the Conservative Echo Chambers of Horrors, and virtually all the journalists and bloggers — with the above mentioned exceptions — reluctantly conclude Kerry did better than expected whereas the Chimp wasn’t on top of his game.
MARCU$
thanks bill.
by the way, i think a great meme about this debate should be:
“President Bush looked lost, senator Kerry looked President.”
Only watched a few minutes of the debate since it started 2:00 AM GMT. However, it seems virtually all Internet pundits (Instapundit, PoliPundit, Kausfiles, the NRO Corner among the Kerry-bashers; Sullivan, Drezner, Josh Marshall on the center/left) think Kerry won on points!!! Not a perfect performance, but independent voters who thought they “knew” Kerry from the Swift Vets for Truth ads etc. will be pleasantly surprised. And it seems the focus was mostly on “Shrub’s” track record rather than Kerry’s senate votes.
It is way too early for all the gloom-and-doom predictions (or gloating predictions of a “landslide” by the other side) to start. If Kerry does well in the remaining two debates and if the Democrats can focus relentlessly on this Administration’s track record rather than irrelevant issues like who did what in Vietnam, anything can happen. But the real wild card is Iraq and Afghanistan. A dose of bad news may finally sink “Shrub’s” credibility. Or Osama bin Laden might be captured a few weeks before the elections… We just don’t know.
MARCU$
a little off topic, but i need to vent. IT took oreilly about 1 minute to start distorting the truth on his show today. He only sited the battleground polls in his tpm that showed bush winning. he ignored all the polls in pa and mi that show kerry winning. unbelievable.
Folks asked about reactions to Republican efforts to squash new voter registrations. This morning’s NY Times had an editorial condemning Repub Sec. of State in both Ohio and Colorado. Of course, NYT is not the ‘real world’ and folks must get this message to the local areas, but it’s a start. T.J.
Rui Tavares, try Air America http://www.airamericaradio.com/
I know you can listen to it there and also they have good comments. Without broad band you might not be able to watch it….
I suspect that the Michigan poll is an outlier. America Coming Together has pulled its staffers out of Michigan (I am told) and reassigned them to other states where the need is greater. I think that this is a sign that ACT is confident.
euzoius, Coldeye et al,
Some really smart people are virtually guaranteeing major legal battles in both OH and FL after Nov 2.
Gallup isn’t a polling firm, it’s a marketing tool.
Rasmussen Sep 30
K B
National 46 48
FL 49 48
MI 46 45
MN 47 46
OH 47 48
PA 49 45
I’m with Coldeye–where, indeed, is the outrage at these multiplying stories detailing various nefarious activities by these battleground Republican secretaries of state? Inventing out of whole cloth the most preposterous technicalities, technicalities beyond one’s imagining: registration paper being “too thin”, etc. Republican elected officials are operating as openly anti-democratic with no backlash accruing to them whatever. Are there just too many stories out there for these to break through? Is this type of chicanery just “expected” by the public in post 2000 America? One certainly hopes that our Republican friends are sowing the whirlwind with their disdain for democracy.
UT going for K/E? More lawn K/E signs than B/C in UT? Must be heresy there in UT.
I wouldn’t bet the farm on it, but there’s lots of folklore about things like this having predictive value. Ex: So called “barber poll”. Ask barbers around the country what they’re hearing. In 92 they predicted Bush pere, but Clinton won.
Then there’s the groundhog’s shadow and aunt martha’s rheumatism.
Rasmussen just reported Bush-Kerry tied in sixteen battleground states. Bush had been up by two points last week.
Coldeye, Regarding:
“Am I the only one who is just getting sick and tired of these games the Republicans are playing to supress voter registration or turnout, in places like Florida, Ohio, and Colorado? Look, I understand the need to prevent fraud but these little games don’t have any connection to that. They are more like the old poll taxes and literacy tests – the real purpose is to keep legitimate voters for the other side out of the process, and that’s just wrong.”
Those are some valid areas of concern for Dems; However, if newspaper reports are to be believed, Dems are putting themselves in a position to commit massive fraud unlike we’ve never seen before. Already fraudulent voter registrations have been uncovered in:
1. FLA, where NY voters, up to 20,000, were found to be registered in NY & FLA
2. WIS, The found a few dead Dems registered to vote
3. NEV, More dead Dems registered
4. OH, absentee Dems voting twice
5. IA, More Dem absentees voting twice
There have been other reports, but I can’t recall them off the top of my head. These alleged frauds appear to be committed by certain Dem leading organs in these states.
Alternatively, I have seen reports of Rep Secy of State discarding legitimate Dem voters cards. Who
knows if they are just throwing out forged ballots or what the truth is.
I just get the impression we may have 15 Floridas this year with all the lawsuits and recounts, if all these reports of fraud are to be believed.
First it’s Gallup, second it’s not a person, it’s a polling firm.
Given that all these polls are either tie or Bush +3, Bush probably has a one or two point lead. Given the DNC’s superior registration efforts, even one of the top guy working for the Bush campaign says that he’ll need a 5 point lead on election day to win.
Also of interest is that Rasmussen’s tracking poll has shown no pro-Bush drift at all in the weeks leading up to the debates. He has Bush consistently up on average of +2. Even the pollsters will tell you that tracking polls are much better indicators than 3-day snapshot polls. So Bush is leading by 2-3 heading into the debates. This is bad for an incumbent, horrible for a war-time incumbent, and beyond dismal for a war-time incumbent with no major domestic initiatives and a lackluster economy under his belt. Add in that many more would swing to Kerry if he would just show more clarity and leadership (Rasmussen reports today that 17% of voters are still persuadable, LA Times puts the number at 20%).
The stage is set for Kerry to swing things back his way during the debates. One thing he’s got to do is explain clearly his vote to authorize presidential authority for war. It’s simple, really -just say “Look, I think the president should have big stick when negotiating with tyrants to disarm. But I NEVER would have authorized such an incompetant rush to actual war, without good intelligence and a plan for keeping the peace. And I never would have administered the occupation with such pathetic incompetene.” Bush will reply with a smirk and some sound bite like “Well I’m glad he cleared that up”, but it won’t stick because it really does clear the issue up once and for all.
By the way, there is a transcript of Edward’s Imus interview on MSNBC.COM. It’s fun reading – he really is a charming person. Almost makes one whimsical for a switch in the ticket – or an Edward’s run in four or eight years.
I think the lead in Gallop’s OH poll showing RV for Kerry by 4 pts vs. down in LV reflects all the new registrations in OH. Our registration deadline is monday, October 4th at 9 am, so we are putting forth one more great push this weekend to get people registered. After that, its get out the vote.
polling results from ogden, salt lake, provo
K/E yard signs and bumper stickers 4 to 1 over B/C
Democrats are outregistering new voters in Ohio by margins of 10-1. These new registered voters may be a reason Kerry leads among registered but not likely (you can’t be a likely voter if you’ve never voted, in most polling models). However, the Ohio Republican Secretary of State has for weeks tried to disqualify most of the new registrations, on the grounds that they are on paper that is too thin and might get mangled in the mail. On this bizaare basis, he even tried to disqualify registrations contained in an envelope, or those that were hand delivered. And he’s trying to disqualify voters who don’t vote in the precinct in which they live. This makes no sense at all, because absentee ballots are allowed, and they are received and recorded in the state capital, far from where people live.
Am I the only one who is just getting sick and tired of these games the Republicans are playing to supress voter registration or turnout, in places like Florida, Ohio, and Colorado? Look, I understand the need to prevent fraud but these little games don’t have any connection to that. They are more like the old poll taxes and literacy tests – the real purpose is to keep legitimate voters for the other side out of the process, and that’s just wrong.
Interesting that Gallop has Kerry leading in OH in RVs. Someone here suggested he might be throwing a bone to his critics. Awful that we have to speculate like this, but that’s what he gets for putting his own credibiltiy in doubt with specious methodology. If that lead however, reflects something real and measurable in the real world, then it could spell real trouble for Bush.
Kerry has been up in every single non-artisan poll conducted in michigan for the last 3 months. Every single poll. Even before that, there are only 1 or 2 polls where he was behind by a point or 2. Even During the Republiucan convention.
The DFP poll is probably an outlier. My guess is that Kerry is up by 2-3 points. Given the Arab American vote aainst Bush and the huge union strength in Michigan. Kerry should carry it by 5-6 points.
This was Harris’ online poll, remember. They weight demographically and also use “propensity weighting”, which adjusts the results for likelihood to be online vs. offline.
Todays Det free press poll for michigan has kerry’s once comfortable lead down to 2 points, within the moe. DFP claims that as discussion has shifted to iraq over last 10 days, support for kerry has DECREASED among woman.
What gives??