In his May 18 ‘Public Opinion Snapshot’ at the Center for American Progress (CAP) website, Ruy Teixeira expounds on an extremely encouraging development for progressive Democrats, the dawning of the “millennial generation” — those born between 1978 and 2000 — as a political force. As Teixeira explains:

Between now and 2018, the number of Millennials of voting age will be increasing by about 4 and a half million a year and Millennial eligible voters by about 4 million a year. And in 2020, the first presidential election where all Millennials will have reached voting age, this generation will be 103 million strong, of which about 90 million will be eligible voters. Those 90 million Millennial eligible voters will represent just under 40 percent of America’s eligible voters.
Last November’s election was the first in which the 18- to 29-year-old age group was drawn exclusively from the Millennial generation, and they gave Obama a whopping 34-point margin, 66 percent to 32 percent. This compares to only a 9-point margin for Kerry in 2004. Behind this striking result is a deeper story of a generation with progressive views in all areas and big expectations for change that will fundamentally reshape our electorate.

Teixeira references another new CAP study “The Political Ideology of the Millennial Generation,” by John Halpin and Karl Agne, which indicates

Overall, Millennials expressed far more agreement with the progressive than conservative arguments. Indeed, of the 21 values and beliefs garnering majority support in the survey, only four can be classified as conservative. Moreover, six of the top seven statements in terms of level of agreement were progressive statements. These statements included such items as the need for government investment in education, infrastructure, and science; the need for a transition to clean energy; the need for America to play a leading role in addressing climate change; the need to improve America’s image around the world; and the need for universal health coverage..,.When asked in the 2008 National Election Study whether we need a strong government to handle today’s complex economic problems or whether the free market can handle these problems without government being involved, Millennials, by a margin of 78 to 22 percent, demonstrated an overwhelming preference for strong government.

On May 13th, David Madland and Teixeira had a more in-depth post, “New Progressive America: The Millennial Generation,” on the political attitudes of this important demographic group. First, the demographic explosion:

We can start with the sheer size of this generation. Between now and 2018, the number of Millennials of voting age will increase by about four and a half million a year, and Millennial eligible voters will increase by about 4 million a year. In 2020—the first presidential election where all Millennials will have reached voting age—this generation will be 103 million strong, of which about 90 million will be eligible voters. Those 90 million Millennial eligible voters will represent just under 40 percent of America’s eligible voters.
The diversity of this generation is as impressive as its size. Right now, Millennial adults are 60 percent white and 40 percent minority (18 percent Hispanic, 14 percent black, 5 percent Asian, and 3 percent other). And the proportion of minority Millennial adults will rise to 41 percent in 2012, 43 percent in 2016, and 44 percent in 2020 (21 percent Hispanic, 14 percent black, 6 percent Asian, and 3 percent other). This shift should make the Millennial generation even more firmly progressive as it fully enters the electorate, since minorities are the most strongly progressive segment among Millennials.

Most encouraging, the progressive attitudes among the Millennial Generation are not confined to young people of color:

…White Millennials are far more progressive than the population as a whole in every area, on cultural, economic, domestic policy issues, and more. In 2008, they supported Obama by 54-44, a 21-point shift toward the progressive candidate compared to 2004. Not only did Obama win white Millennials overall, but he also won both white Millennial college graduate and noncollege voters (by 16 and 6 points respectively). The latter result includes a 12-point (54-42) margin for Obama among the overwhelmingly working-class 25- to 29-year-old white noncollege group, a stunning 40-point swing relative to Kerry’s 35-63 drubbing among the same group in 2004. This suggests that as relatively progressive white working-class Millennials replace older white working-class voters in the electorate, the white working class as a whole could become less conservative and more open to progressive ideas and candidates.

Teixeira and Madland go on to outline the progressive views of Millennials on key issues, like health care, abortion, same sex marriage, foreign policy and Iraq, unions, government’s role in the economy and clean energy. The authors conclude that the Millennial Generation “will fundamentally reshape our electorate…We are on course for a new progressive America, and the rise of the Millennial generation is one main force behind this transformation.”

For those interested in the role of the pollster in developing political strategy, Mark Blumenthal of Pollster.com has some video clip interviews from the annual gathering of the American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR), the world’s largest association of polling professionals. The first of three installments has four video clips. For a good overview, scroll down and start with his interview of the conference Chair Michael Link, Chief Methodologist/VP for Methodological Research at The Nielsen Company, who describes some of the hot buzz topics being discussed at the meeting.
Blumenthal also provides two clips with one of the most experienced living pollsters, Lou Harris, who describes his work with JFK and how JFK responded to polling (He was amazed when Harris accurately predicted the exact percentage of his 1958 U.S. Senate re-election win, 71 percent of the vote). Harris, the first presidential pollster who “served on a super-straegy committee,” also discusses his concerns about the polling profession and the moral responsibility of pollsters, among other topics.
Blumenthal interviews Temple University Proff Christopher Wlezien about the comparative accuracy of polls and political prediction markets. He also links to a new paper by Wlezien and Robert Erikson “Markets vs. Polls as Predictors: An Historical Assessment of US Presidential Elections,” presented at the meeting. (hint: don’t bet the ranch on markets just yet).

In his latest “Public Opinion Snapshot” at the Center for American Progress web pages, Ruy Teixeira has good news for President Obama and his agenda:

There’s no doubt about it: President Barack Obama is quite popular with the American public. As a recent report from Gallup notes: “Nearly all major demographic categories of Americans are pleased with his job performance.” As just one example of this broad support, Obama receives 76 percent approval among those in households with less than $24,000 in income, 62 percent approval in households from $24,000 to $59,999, 57 percent approval in households from $60,000 to $89,999 and 61 percent approval in household with over $90,000 in income.

Teixeira goes on to note that a new NBC News/Wall St. Journal poll finds high approval ratings for a range of the President’s policies addressing education, diplomacy, health insurance and energy.

Evidence continues to mount that the American public is becoming more tolerant of same-sex marriage and immigration — two of the hot button ‘cultural’ issues the Republicans hoped to exploit in upcoming elections. As Ruy Teixeira reports in a recent edition of his “Public Opinion Snapshot” at the Center for American Progress web pages,

…Consider these data on gay marriage—perhaps the most contentious of all cultural issues—from the most recent Washington Post/ABC News poll. In that poll for the first time a plurality of Americans (49-46) endorsed the idea that it should be legal for gay and lesbian couples to get married. And support for legalizing gay marriage was even higher among 18- to 29-year-olds (66 percent). This suggests that we will see even stronger public support for gay marriage as more members of the rising Millennial generation enter adulthood in years to come.

And,

…In the same poll, 61 percent supported a program to allow illegal immigrants now living in the United States to live here legally if they pay a fine and meet other requirements, compared to 35 percent who opposed such a program. That’s up from a narrow 49-46 split in favor back in December of 2007. And, as with gay marriage, support for immigration reform is even stronger among young Americans at 73 percent.

Absent the myriad distractions presented by cultural classhes of earlier years, Teixeira notes, the GOP will be forced to persuade voters that their policies “actually work and will solve people’s problems….Given that they have little to offer except retreads from the disastrous Bush administration, it could be a tough sell.”

Kris Kromm of the Institute for Southern Stuidies Facing South web page takes on the “GOP is a regional party of the south” meme being parroted in the msm and blogosphere, and he makes a persuasive case that it is overstated, if not a facile generalization.
Kromm points out that 56 percent of House of Reps Republicans come from non-south states and “the three states where Obama did the worst weren’t in the South; they were Idaho, Utah and Wyoming.” Kromm adds that, in terms of political party self-i.d., the South has about 5 percent more Republicans than does the N.E., 1 percent more than the midwest and 3 percent more than the far west — hardly an overwhelming gap, especially considering both margins of error and the fact that the South is becomming more demographically-diverse every day. Kromm also provides a list of the “Top Ten Republican States” in terms of party self-i.d. (based on Gallup’s 2008 data) indicating only 2 of the top nine GOP states are in the South, AL and SC, with a three-way tie for the #10 spot between MS, SD and ND.
He could have also added that Democratic senators, governors, mayors and state legislators are competitive and holding offices in healthy numbers across the region. In an era when an African American progressive Democrat can win the electoral votes of two of the South’s largest states, the meme seems a bit outdated. Other than political campaign TV and radio ad-buys, what’s the practical use of making broad, regional generalizations about political opinion anyway?

Just in case progressive Dems needed one more reason to urge Joe Sestak to run in PA’s Democratic Senate primary and tear Arlen Specter a big, new one, TPM‘s Eric Kleefeld has a post quoting Specter in a New York Times Magazine interview: “There’s still time for the Minnesota courts to do justice and declare Norm Coleman the winner.”
Apparently Specter sees himself as a sort of Trojan Horse Democrat, entering as a gift, then doing as much damage on the inside as he can. As Kleefeld asks, “So what exactly are the Dems getting out of this whole deal?”
You couldn’t blame Sestak for balking at taking on Tom Ridge, but if ever he needed a “that does it” clincher to run, here it is.

Date: May 4, 2009
To: Ed Gillespie Founder, Resurgent Republic
From: Stan Greenberg Greenberg Quinlan Rosner
RE: RESURGENT REPUBLIC
Dear Ed,
Congratulations on forming Resurgent Republic with the goal of replicating “on the right the success Democracy Corps has enjoyed on the left.” Like Democracy Corps, you are promising to become a resource for groups and leaders, enhanced by the public release of credible surveys and focus groups and, indeed, your first survey has been widely discussed and already used by Republican leaders. Well done.
You would probably be surprised if I didn’t have some reactions and advice to offer, as you explicitly state, you are “modeled on Democracy Corps.” Given your goal, I am perplexed that your first poll would be so outside the mainstream on partisanship. Your poll gives the Democrats just a 2-point party identification advantage in the country, but other public polls in this period fell between +7 and +16 points – giving the Democrats an average advantage of 11 points. Virtually all your issue debates in the survey would have tilted quite differently had the poll been 9 points more Democratic.
One thing Democracy Corps has tried to do is be very “conservative” – watching very closely to make sure all our choices in survey design are well grounded or tilted against the Democrats, including the choice of “likely voters” that normally favors the Republicans. You have probably noticed that our job approval ratings for George Bush were almost always higher than the average of polls, just as our job approval ratings for Barack Obama are now somewhat lower.
If the Resurgent Republic poll is to be an outlier on partisanship, then I urge you to explain what about your methodology produces it – or simply to note the difference in your public release.
The problem of partisanship pales before the problem of self-deluding bias in question wording that might well contribute to Republicans digging themselves deeper and deeper into a hole.
Your most important finding was the strong opposition to Barack Obama’s budget when you describe it for voters. Ed, from your platform on Meet the Press, you told Republican leaders they can confidently oppose this budget and expect independents to side with them.
Your Republican leaders would have been well served had you asked first whether voters favor or oppose the budget, without describing it – as Democracy Corps does routinely. That would have shown a majority or large plurality in favor of the budget, as in all other polls. Instead, your survey begins with this stunningly biased description: “President Obama has proposed a budget for next year that would spend three point six trillion dollars and have a deficit of one point four trillion dollars.” That would be okay if you think that is all voters will learn from the media and Democrats about the budget. I suspect they are already hearing about inherited deficits from Bush, the funding for the jobs recovery plan, health care reform, education and energy independence, and about deficits cut in half – all aspects of the budget. Don’t you think the leaders and groups you are advising deserve to know how this might really play out?
It is a shame because you didn’t need to construct this biased exercise to show that voters are concerned about spending and deficits and that is indeed the strongest critique Republicans can offer. In our own recent polls, we have flagged this concern for progressives and urged them to continue to underscore accountability, long-term deficit reduction, and middle class tax cuts.
For years, James Carville and I pushed Democrats and liberal groups to examine inherited positions in new times, but you are at risk of doing the opposite – urging Republicans to stay the course on key arguments with self-deluding results. In some cases, you prove competitive or you win the argument by presenting the Democratic argument as flat but the Republican, full of emotive terms. In Democracy Corps, we always try to use the language actually used by our opponents.
Nothing is more self-defeating than attributing to the Democratic argument the language and themes Republicans use to attack Democrats rather than the language Democrats use themselves. In effect, your survey has you winning an argument with yourself. Indeed, that is where you start your analysis of the first poll – telling readers in bold and underlined type that you are winning the big ideological debate by two-to-one, which “verifies America remains a center-right country.” In this seminal debate, one side says:
Government policies should promote opportunity by fostering job growth, encouraging entrepreneurs, and allowing people to keep more of what they earn.
The other, pathetically out-of-touch side says:
Government policies should promote fairness by narrowing the gap between rich and poor, spreading the wealth, and making sure that economic outcomes are more equal.
With that demand for equality rejected two-to-one in the survey, Resurgent Republic can tell conservatives to be confident: you are on the winning side of this historic argument about government and the economy.
The problem is that this is the language Republicans use to characterize the Democratic argument, not what Democrats use themselves. Yes, it is true that candidate Obama made the off-hand comment on “spreading the wealth” in an exchange with “Joe the Plumber.” The Republicans tried to use that in the last two and a half weeks of the campaign and Obama’s lead on handling taxes and the economy went up steadily, ending with a double-digit lead on both.
While campaigns may succeed on “gotcha,” you will not win a big argument if you do not respect the other side’s argument and you do not learn from experience. We tested in a different context this philosophic choice, using Obama’s words and ideas – “government policies should rebalance the tax code so the middle class pays less and the wealthiest pay their fair share.” In our work, it is the strongest argument for the budget. (See Democracy Corps national survey of 1,000 2008 voters (830 likely 2010 voters) conducted March 4-8, 2009, Democracy Corps national survey of 1,000 2008 voters (863 likely 2010 voters) conducted March 25-29, 2009 and Democracy Corps survey of 1,500 likely 2010 voters in the congressional battleground conducted April 16-21, 2009.)
The section on energy and cap-and-trade is a parody of the real debate. The implication is that Democrats believe climate change is so serious that it must be addressed, regardless of cost to the economy, with higher taxes. Unmentioned on the Democratic side of the debate is the conviction that investment in energy independence creates new jobs and a new economy and energy costs have to be offset with middle class tax cuts. Failing to construct real debate must leave Republicans puzzled about why the Democrats’ advantage on handling the energy issue has risen to nearly 30 points among likely voters. (See Democracy Corps national survey of 1,000 2008 voters (830 likely 2010 voters) conducted March 4-8, 2009.)
I recognize that in focusing on economic, not cultural issues, Resurgent Republic is making a statement about a new direction for the party and its coalition. But it does not help a party renew itself with survey results so removed from the real debates taking place around it.
I do wish you luck with Resurgent Republic. I’m fully aware that our first public survey a decade ago might well have been critiqued on similar issues and that getting it right under these pressures requires constant vigilance. I look forward to the debate.
All the best,
Stan