Bush leads Kerry 45-42 and 48-40 in two polls of nation-wide RV’s conducted 9/17-21 and 9/22-26 respectively by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press.
Thanks for signing up!
TDS Strategy Memos
Latest Research from:
tds-wwc-roundtable
Editor’s Corner
By Ed Kilgore
-
December 18: Democratic Strategies for Coping With a Newly Trumpified Washington
After looking at various Democratic utterances about dealing with Trump 2.0, I wrote up a brief typology for New York:
The reaction among Democrats to Donald Trump’s return to power has been significantly more subdued than what we saw in 2016 after the mogul’s first shocking electoral win. The old-school “resistance” is dead, and it’s not clear what will replace it. But Democratic elected officials are developing new strategies for dealing with the new realities in Washington. Here are five distinct approaches that have emerged, even before Trump’s second administration has begun.
If you can’t beat ’em, (partially) join ’em
Some Democrats are so thoroughly impressed by the current power of the MAGA movement they are choosing to surrender to it in significant respects. The prime example is Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, the onetime fiery populist politician who is now becoming conspicuous in his desire to admit his party’s weaknesses and snuggle up to the new regime. The freshman and one-time ally of Bernie Sanders has been drifting away from the left wing of his party for a good while, particularly via his vocally unconditional backing for Israel during its war in Gaza. But now he’s making news regularly for taking steps in Trump’s direction.
Quite a few Democrats publicly expressed dismay over Joe Biden’s pardon of his son Hunter, but Fetterman distinguished himself by calling for a corresponding pardon for Trump over his hush-money conviction in New York. Similarly, many Democrats have discussed ways to reach out to the voters they have lost to Trump. Fetterman’s approach was to join Trump’s Truth Social platform, which is a fever swamp for the president-elect’s most passionate supporters. Various Democrats are cautiously circling Elon Musk, Trump’s new best friend and potential slayer of the civil-service system and the New Deal–Great Society legacy of federal programs. But Fetterman seems to want to become Musk’s buddy, too, exchanging compliments with him in a sort of weird courtship. Fetterman has also gone out of his way to exhibit openness to support for Trump’s controversial Cabinet nominees even as nearly every other Senate Democrat takes the tack of forcing Republicans to take a stand on people like Pete Hegseth before weighing in themselves.
It’s probably germane to Fetterman’s conduct that he will be up for reelection in 2028, a presidential-election year in a state Trump carried on November 5. Or maybe he’s just burnishing his credentials as the maverick who blew up the Senate dress code.
Join ’em (very selectively) to beat ’em
Other Democrats are being much more selectively friendly to Trump, searching for “common ground” on issues where they believe he will be cross-pressured by his wealthy backers and more conventional Republicans. Like Fetterman, these Democrats — including Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren — tend to come from the progressive wing of the party and have longed chafed at the centrist economic policies advanced by Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and, to some extent, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. They’ve talked about strategically encouraging Trump’s “populist” impulses on such issues as credit-card interest and big-tech regulation, partly as a matter of forcing the new president and his congressional allies to put up or shut up.
So the idea is to push off a discredited Democratic Establishment, at least on economic issues, and either accomplish things for working-class voters in alliance with Trump or prove the hollowness of his “populism.”
Colorado governor Jared Solis has offered a similar strategy of selective cooperation by praising the potential agenda of Trump HHS secretary nominee, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., as helpfully “shaking up” the medical and scientific Establishment.
Aim at the dead center
At the other end of the spectrum, some centrist Democrats are pushing off what they perceive as a discredited progressive ascendancy in the party, especially on culture-war issues and immigration. The most outspoken of them showed up at last week’s annual meeting of the avowedly nonpartisan No Labels organization, which was otherwise dominated by Republicans seeking to demonstrate a bit of independence from the next administration. These include vocal critics of the 2024 Democratic message like House members Jared Golden, Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, Ritchie Torres, and Seth Moulton, along with wannabe 2025 New Jersey gubernatorial candidate Josh Gottheimer (his Virginia counterpart, Abigail Spanberger, wasn’t at the No Labels confab but is similarly positioned ideologically).
From a strategic point of view, these militant centrists appear to envision a 2028 presidential campaign that will take back the voters Biden won in 2020 and Harris lost this year.
Cut a few deals to mitigate the damage
We’re beginning to see the emergence of a faction of Democrats that is willing to cut policy or legislative deals with Team Trump in order to protect some vulnerable constituencies from MAGA wrath. This is particularly visible on the immigration front; some congressional Democrats are talking about cutting a deal to support some of Trump’s agenda in exchange for continued protection from deportation of DREAMers. Politico reports:
“The prize that many Democrats would like to secure is protecting Dreamers — Americans who came with their families to the U.S. at a young age and have since been protected by the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program created by President Barack Obama in 2012.
“Trump himself expressed an openness to ‘do something about the Dreamers’ in a recent ‘Meet the Press’ interview. But he would almost certainly want significant policy concessions in return, including border security measures and changes to asylum law that Democrats have historically resisted.”
On a broader front, the New York Times has found significant support among Democratic governors to selectively cooperate with the new administration’s “mass deportation” plans in exchange for concessions:
“In interviews, 11 Democratic governors, governors-elect and candidates for the office often expressed defiance toward Mr. Trump’s expected immigration crackdown — but were also strikingly willing to highlight areas of potential cooperation.
“Several balanced messages of compassion for struggling migrants with a tough-on-crime tone. They said that they were willing to work with the Trump administration to deport people who had been convicted of serious crimes and that they wanted stricter border control, even as they vowed to defend migrant families and those fleeing violence in their home countries, as well as businesses that rely on immigrant labor.”
Hang tough and aim for a Democratic comeback
While the Democrats planning strategic cooperation with Trump are getting a lot of attention, it’s clear the bulk of elected officials and activists are more quietly waiting for the initial fallout from the new regime to develop while planning ahead for a Democratic comeback. This is particularly true among the House Democratic leadership, which hopes to exploit the extremely narrow Republican majority in the chamber (which will be exacerbated by vacancies for several months until Trump appointees can be replaced in special elections) on must-pass House votes going forward, while looking ahead with a plan to aggressively contest marginal Republican-held seats in the 2026 midterms. Historical precedents indicate very high odds that Democrats can flip the House in 2026, bringing a relatively quick end to any Republican legislative steamrolling on Trump’s behalf and signaling good vibes for 2028.
ok, eventhough i believe Nader will be no factor, few if any kerry or bush supporters are going to go to Nader, its going to be hippies and kids that wouldn’t vote otherwise. Also problem is that Nader is in only 32 states and may be in less than those. Polls are nationwide. Regardless looking at 3 way polls Bush is ahead by 5%. Averaing out both since many polls do both 2 and 3 way its at best a 4% race, hardly anything to be concerned about. there were several times in Sept and Oct 2000 where both Bush and Gore were 4% ahead or behind. The WP/ABC has equal number of D/R and the AP is heaily toward R.
Regardless a 3-5% gap in late Sept against a sitting president in a time of war is not that bad at all. if bush were not 5% behind Kerry would you say he might as well resign since the election is lost?
Nice try rambdan, but I have 2 points:
You cannot just look at the 2 way; Nader is in 32 states including some of the key states (ie PA & FLA) where the race is close. To just leave Nader off completely misrepresents a key dynamic in this race…Secondly, you left out 2 polls, WP/ABC & AP/IPSOS, which show GWB with a 8-9 point lead.
Kerry’s statements on Allawi were correct and needed to be said. Kerry cant be faulted if there are not enough intelligent people in the market capable of handing and digesting solid truth.
If the American people prefer to swallow chocolate coated crap, then Kerry cant be expected to take the wrap for that.
Bush has been proven over and over to be grossly incompetent, some have labelled him a blatant liar, he himself has questioned his own intelligence. If the people of America prefer this kinda person in the white house, then please dont blame Kerry for people’s lack of intelligence. People usually get the government they deserve.
Personally, I am in that crowd who says that Kerry is doing fine. He is doing, mostly, the right things and has said, for the most part, the right things.
I think Kerry has had a pretty good 14 days and I think this will be reflected in the poll stats from the coming 10 – 14 days.
Look, its the people’s choice. They decide if they want intelligence, integrity, level headed decision making, expert foreign policy decisions, rock solid domestic policies, a strong army, a quelling of terrorism as would be given by Kerry, or if they want to continue to live in fear of another 9/11, have a deficit that cant be counted on a regular scale, have insurance for a select few, continued mass murders on Iraq and plenty shadowy forms of truth, as would be continued by Bush and his cohorts.
Kerry has done enough and is doing a fine job and as such I cant think of any reason why he should beg the electorate to exercise intelligent judgment if its not there. There is really nothing that Kerry can do to make people intelligent and smart. Nothing.
I see a strong consistent figure in Bush all right — a man who said clearly that the war on terror can be won, then changed his mind, then changed it again, saying it could be won.
And what about that trip to Mars anyway ?
One word: outlier. Majority of polls all show the race is a dead heat. If Pew’s numbers are consistently all over the place, and they are known to eschew weiting by party ID, well, I think it’s pretty obvious what’s happening with their data.
I was going to point out to LL Smooth J that a busy candidate in the midst of a heated campaign can indeed by VERY tired at noon on any given day. I was going to do this until I realized that the whole point of Smooth Jazz, et al., posting here is to bog down yet another progressive site in the mud of distortion and non sequitur — an accurate description of not only George W. Bush’s campaign, but his entire presidency as well.
Hey, I have no doubt that Bush will win, even though the Gallup numbers are clearly dreck. Best of luck to all of you, even Smooth J and company, over the next miserable four years. You ain’t seen nothing yet.
Four more years!
“Kerry was caught in another Whopper today: When interviewed by Dianne Sawyer, he said the “I voted for it before I voted against it” quote resulted because it was late at night and he was tired.
It turns out when he gave that speech in Huntington, WV, it was 12:00NOON.”
That’s not a whopper; if you want to see a whopper, revisit George Dubya Custer on WMD’s in Iraq (by way of Salon Magazine’s article on Bradley’s 60 Minute expose that wasn’t).
WMD’s in Iraq, now that’s a whopper!
> Kerry made a fool of himself dissing the Iraqi PM
> who came here to, among other things, thank us
> for our sacrifice.
Some Americans don’t appreciate sacrificing our own country’s national security in an attempt to liberate others.
Seems like a conservative stance to me.
I find the Pew results somewhat disappointing, but can’t dismiss them out of hand. I do wonder why they’ve been bouncing around so much, though. Three weeks ago they had Bush up by 16 (?!) then a tie and then by three and then by eight at a time when most other surveys show Kerry either gaining or the race remaining essentially static. I don’t think that the Allawi comments had much of an effect, at least a lasting one, and their young voter results noted by a previous poster are at variance with Newsweek’s extensive poll of that age group. (But such voters are volatile and unpredictable, so maybe Pew’s right.) But maybe Pew’s onto something; the race might be more fluid and changing more frequently then most analysts think. Maybe. I don’t know.
But since I don’t know Pew’s methodology, I won’t write them off as wrong, though I don’t think they’re uniquely right, either. They’re just one more ingredient to be tossed into the stew pot of polls and analysis.
‘Kerry made a fool of himself dissing the Iraqi PM who came here to, among other things, thank us for our sacrifice’
I think you miswrote — a man who cannot control his own country, his own capital city or even his own compound,. whose every moment is guarded by American troops, whose tenure is temporary till January came to America posing as an indepdent leader.
‘But ask yourself how many swing voters appeciated the assault against a foreign leader expressing his gratitude to us. And could this have helped to swing Pew and almost all the other most recent polls against Kerry.’
I don’t think Kerry’s comments on Allawi had any impact at all except among people who believe Allawi is Thomas Jefferson, reborn. Most people recognize he’s not a true leader and most of us also recognize brown-nosing when we see it.
And other polls haven’t shown a move away from Kerry this week either.
If I had to guess, I would put the real difference midway between these 2 numbers, which amoungs to a difference of 5 or so points. Still a lead for Bush, but not an insurmountable lead.
Btw,
Kerry was caught in another Whopper today: When interviewed by Dianne Sawyer, he said the “I voted for it before I voted against it” quote resulted because it was late at night and he was tired.
It turns out when he gave that speech in Huntington, WV, it was 12:00NOON. Some may consider this trivial, like his Christmas in Cambodia lie; But when fair minded undecided consider the ALL of Kerry’s misquotes and prevarications, they don’t see a consistent, strong, honest figure.
I can’t see how he can get any traction in polls with these kinds of misstatements.
Until we see what percent of the Pew sample was R’s, D’s, and I’s, we should reserve judgment. Andrew Kohut, a leading figure with the Pew organization, is an outspoken opponent of sample weighting on Party ID. This could just be Gallup all over again. In fact, we now know that Pew’s poll was done by Princeton Survey Research Associates, the same firm that does Newsweek’s polls (which have included disproportionate numbers of Republicans relative to turnout in the ’92, ’96, and 2000 elections).
Indeed, another poll released yesterday, by Investor’s Business Daily and the Christian Science Monitor (polling agency TIPP) showed Kerry leading 46-45 among likely voters.
http://pollingreport.com/wh04gen.htm
Man, the trolls are out today. Must be a special, “build up to the debates” campaign going on. I’m fairly happy where JK is right now. About 5 points down or so, with the debates coming. All that’s happened in the past month is Republicans and Republican leaners have “come home” before Democrats. Happens every four years. If you recall, Bush was much more than this far ahead four years ago, but then, predictably, those last 5-6% worth of marginal Democratic voters came home, and it ended up a tie. Kerry is in better position now than Gore was about three weeks out, after the 2000 debates. He’s fine.
Kerry does have some work to do. The cumulative impact of these polls, for all their biases, should tell us that people need to feel more secure about the idea of President Kerry. He still has this opportunity and ability to do so, but it’s not getting any earlier in the race. Depending upon any number of issues (real news, debate gaffes or strokes of genius, which pile of hay the debate pundits choose to eat from), things could go in any number of directions.
As for hanging the poll swings on the Allawi-Kerry news thread, I can’t agree or disagree. I just haven’t seen it come up in the places I usually visit for news. True, Dick Cheney made the claim, but I have yet to count his as an Everyman sort of figure.
Coming back to Smooth’s much-less-than-smooth characterization of Kerry, this race in some ways does boil down to the idea of putting lipstick on a pig. Bush has done a deft job of convincing the public that Kerry needs the makeup. To the extent that no candidate is perfect, Kerry has some reframing to do.
The amazing part to me, however, is that people are seriously considering voting for Bush on the rationale that although makeup could never conceal his own piglike qualities (Smooth chose the metaphor…I can only work with it), at least he’s consistently a pig. It’s not rational, but it’s the game.
On a humorous note, this all calls to mind the old Adlai Stevenson line where he was told that he could count on the vote of every thinking person in America. Stevenson replied (paraphrasing from memory) “That is good to hear, but I need a majority to win.”
put a fork in kerry, he is done.people just do not like him and unless bush makes a major flub in the debates kerry is toast. the media is working real hard to re-elect bush so the debate spin will be all pro bush unless he messes up so badly they can`t spin it.it will tighten at the end ,but the reality is this election is not tied and that bush has a solid lead.
Plenty of talk about party I.D. But in this poll, 15% of the democrats support President Bush, while only 7% of the republicans support Senator Kerry? Independents back the president by 8 points. All in all, it’s hard to rationalize these results based on faulty weighting.
The president leads among women by 3, while Vice-President Gore won their support by 11 points in 2000. Young people back the president 48-42 (Rock the Vote indeed). Clearly, Senator Kerry is having trouble holding the support of people that have traditionally backed democrats.
Wrong candidate, or wrong campaign. Either way, when you have to “reintroduce” (McCurry’s term) your candidate on September 30th, you’ve got serious problems.
Can you explain the internals of the new Pew Poll, especially their samplin of republicans and democrats. The result is worrisome, unless it has the same flawed sampling techniques exhibited by Gallup.
When I went to the Pew site, I saw no information on the realative Republican Democratic sample size.
Wow,
You guys do a good job in pasting lipstick on a pig, but only the typical cocooners will buy your spin IMO: That the 3 point GWB lead last week is comparable to an 8 point lead in the same poll TODAY. You post the 2 polls side by side, matter of factly, and without perspective, as if nothing happened between the 1 week period between survey coverage.
I have news for you, if you’re willing to listen. Kerry made a fool of himself dissing the Iraqi PM who came here to, among other things, thank us for our sacrifice. Even Kerry flack, Joe Biden, cringed on TV while acknowledging he sought to assure PM Allawi after Kerry stepped in it.
To be sure, I know that the typical Michael “FahrenHype 911″ Moore and Whoopi ” Kiss My ___” Bush-Hating types, including many on this forum, loved Kerry’s offensive against Allawi; But ask yourself how many swing voters appeciated the assault against a foreign leader expressing his gratitude to us. And could this have helped to swing Pew and almost all the other most recent polls against Kerry.