The View From Now

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 4

So, the day after President Bush gave his farewell address to the nation, how is the public reacting? Getting a bit mushy to see him limp off the stage, perhaps?

Not a bit of it. According to a new poll reported in the New York Times today, George W. Bush's current approval numbers are as low as they have ever been, with just 22% approving of his performance as president. Contrast this with Reagan and Clinton, who both left office with 68% approval numbers, or Bush's father, who went out with 54%, or even - and this has got to be just killing the neocons - Jimmy Carter, who left office with 44% approving of his performance.

Worse still, it seems that public disapproval of the president isn't limited to his performance in office; folks don't seem to care much for the president personally, either. According to the poll, Bush's negatives are at 60%, while his positives clock in only around the mid 20's.

Little wonder, then, that the president and his staff are pinning their hopes for redemption on the long view of history. Indeed, that's the only hope left them. But the degree to which attempts at shaping the judgment of history have gone more than a little over the top is perhaps the best indication that even the true believers are having a hard time convincing themselves, let alone history. A vivid case in point: a recent article in CQ Politics by Richard Connor postulates that history may one day look upon George W. Bush in the same light as Abraham Lincoln. Er, okay. And Ed Wood may one day be voted the greatest motion picture director of all time. But I wouldn't wait up nights.

Polls: Clinton Erases Obama's National Lead

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 262

Two polls released today show Hillary Clinton has made progress over the last month in narrowing rival Barack Obama's lead in national preference polls.

The polls show Obama leading Clinton by very narrow margins nationally, with results well within the margins of error. In one poll, conducted by the Pew Research Center, Obama leads Clinton 47% - 45%, while in the other, conducted by CNN - Opinion Research Corp., Obama leads Clinton 46% - 45%. These numbers are in line with Real Clear Politics' national averages, showing Obama currently leading Clinton by about 1.6%.

The numbers in these polls do not come as a surprise after what has been a bruising month for the Obama campaign, following a significant loss to Clinton in the Pennsylvania primary and renewed media attention on the Jeremiah Wright non-story. If anything, these numbers re-emphasize the importance of next Tuesday's voting in Indiana and North Carolina in either altering or reinforcing the current narrative of the campaign for both Clinton and Obama.

A Gallup poll taken early last month showed Obama with a 9% lead over Clinton nationally.

Gallup: Obama Leads Clinton by 9% Nationally

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 287

According to the Gallup organization, Barack Obama has opened a "statistically significant" lead of nine percentage points over Hillary Clinton in the latest nation-wide survey of voter preference in the Democratic presidential race.

Obama drew support from 52% of respondents, compared to 43% for Clinton. Obama's 52% ties his high-water mark for the year against Clinton.

Also of interest, the poll indicated that both Clinton and Obama poll at 45% against presumptive Republican nominee John McCain; McCain polls at 45% against Obama, putting the two in a dead tie, while the Arizona Senator leads Clinton by a slight 47% - 45% margin.

The poll of 1,240 voters was taken April 4-6, and has a margin of error of ±3 percentage points. Full results from Gallup can be found here.

New ARG Iowa Poll: Richardson Dropping Like a Stone

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 416

American Research Group is out with a new Iowa poll this morning that vividly illustrates how fluid the Democratic nomination race in Iowa is now that we're heading into the home stretch.

Of particular interest are the numbers for Bill Richardson. In the previous ARG Iowa survey, conducted November 10-14, Richardson was at 12%; in this latest poll, conducted between November 26-29, Richardson now has the support of just 4% of "Likely Democratic Caucus Goers." No, this is not a typo: Richardson's actual poll result is 4%. If accurate, this poll shows a dramatic collapse of Richardson's backing, with two out of three of the New Mexico Governor's supporters deserting him for other candidates.

Predictably, much of Richardson's lost support has accreted to the top tier, judging by the fact that Obama's support jumped 6 points and Edwards increased by 3 points. But the other surprise in these numbers is Joe Biden increasing from 5% to 8%, his first significant move in months. This is what every candidate prays for going into the climactic phase of the campaign in Iowa: a late surge. If Biden can hold these gains, and then build his numbers into double digits, he stands a serious chance of dramatically exceeding expectations on caucus night.

Overall results:

Nov 10-14 Nov 26-29
Biden 5% 8%
Clinton 27% 25%
Dodd 3% 3%
Edwards 20% 23%
Gravel - -
Kucinich 2% 2%
Obama 21% 27%
Richardson 12% 4%
Undecided 10% 8%

Other highlights:

* 33% of likely caucus participants are undecided (8%) or say that they could switch candidates between now and January 3 (25%).
* 80% of those saying they support Clinton say their support is definite.
* 57% of those saying they support Edwards say their support is definite.
* 75% of those saying they support Obama say their support is definite.
* Among men, Clinton is at 22%, Edwards 22%, and Obama 30%.
* Among women, Clinton is at 28%, Edwards 24%, and Obama 25%.

The soft support number shown for John Edwards is further bad news for his campaign, with 43% of his supporters indicating that they may still end up supporting someone else; this is worrying news for Edwards, even with the 3% gain noted above. Look for John Edwards to continue to weaken over the next few weeks.

Some facts about the poll's methodology:

Sample Size: 600 completed telephone interviews among a random sample of likely Democratic caucus goers living in Iowa (536 Democrats and 64 no party (independent) voters).

Sample Dates: November 26-29, 2007

Margin of Error: ± 4 percentage points, 95% of the time, on questions where opinion is evenly split.

Incidence of Likely Democratic Caucus Participation: 10.5% of Democratic and no party voters.

Question Wording:

If the 2008 Democratic presidential caucus were being held today between (names rotated) Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Christopher Dodd, John Edwards, Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich, Barack Obama, and Bill Richardson, for whom would you vote?

Would you say that you definitely plan to participate in the 2008 Democratic presidential caucus, that you might participate in the 2008 Democratic presidential caucus, or that you will probably not participate in the 2008 Democratic presidential caucus?

Some Tiers Must Fall

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 572

I’ve been watching, with interest, the fanfare greeting the news that New Mexico Governor and Presidential candidate Bill Richardson has gotten a bump in the polls of late.

This started a couple of weeks ago with the release of a CNN-WMUR TV poll that showed Bill Richardson had climbed to 10% in New Hampshire, and in so doing moved even with John Edwards there. Governor Richardson’s numbers began to rise after a widely-praised ad campaign built around a “Presidential job interview” theme. Then, earlier this week, Richardson’s campaign announced that its own internal polling now shows their candidate at 13% in Iowa, which, if you disregard the 4.4% margin of error, would put him ahead of Barack Obama here. Finally today, Pollster.com announced that it has added Richardson to its “Top Democrats” ranking, based on its findings that Richardson alone among the candidates is experiencing a substantial upturn in his numbers in both Iowa and New Hampshire.

Richardson’s campaign, of course, has eagerly seized on these developments, today alone sending out not one, but two emails drawing attention to their candidate’s numbers and going so far as to proclaim “Richardson Officially Breaks into Top Teir.”

Let me hasten to say that I don’t question the legitimacy of these latest polls or the use made of them by the Richardson campaign; indeed, I would do the same. What I do question, though, is when and how in the course of this historically dynamic campaign there came to be a top tier of candidates to begin with.

For example, if I were writing on this topic a year ago, any discussion of top tier candidates would have included Tom Vilsack, who, as outgoing Governor of Iowa would at that time have been presumed to exert disproportionate influence upon the campaign in his home state, in very much the same way as Tom Harkin in 1992. Following the accepted wisdom of the time, I would undoubtedly also have written about John Kerry’s generally anticipated second run for the White House, and the impact on the race of his name recognition and 3 million-plus member email subscription list. Vilsack, of course, withdrew his candidacy back on February 23, and Kerry opted not to get into the 2008 race all.

This brings us to today’s “top tier” of Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Barack Obama, and, so as not to quibble, now Bill Richardson. Each candidate has taken a different road to arrive in the “top tier,” but they all, Richardson excepted, since he only today “officially” arrived among them, have three things in common: good poll numbers, good fund raising numbers, and lots and lots of free media. None of these things, of course, measures the actual strength of anyone’s ground game here or in New Hampshire (has anyone else noticed that Dodd just opened 8 new field offices in Iowa?), ignores the outcome of the South Carolina and New Hampshire debates (as I’m sure Joe Biden’s people would hasten to point out), and provides absolutely no guidance as to future trends.

Which is to say that handicapping the candidates into ordinal tiers at this stage in the campaign is meaningless. It is all trying to call the result of a horse race before the track has even opened. If the outcome of presidential campaigns were determined by Vegas odds makers or media pundits, then graduate students in political science today would be laboring over theses on the history of Thomas Dewey’s presidency and the legacy of Lyndon Johnson’s 1968 landslide reelection.

I’m not trying to deny Bill Richardson, or anyone else, their day in the sun. I’m merely pointing out how fast the weather can change.

Debate Poll Results

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 630

Following last week’s debate in South Carolina, I put up a poll to explore whether the event succeeded in changing viewer opinions about whom to support for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination. The short answer is: No.

By an overwhelming ratio of more than seven to one, poll respondents said the debate didn’t change their minds about which candidate to support. Out of 171 responses to the question, “Did the South Carolina Debate Change Your Mind?,” there were 150 “no’s” and only 21 “yes’s,” or about 87.72% No, 12.28% Yes. Further, respondents who said they were uncommitted coming into the debate were outnumbered by respondents who said they already supported one candidate over the others by 77 to 94 (45% to 55%, a 10 point margin of committed over uncommitted), suggesting that changing minds would be an uphill battle in any case.

The results suggest that the top three candidates held their ground, while the others didn't gain much traction.

This poll, of course, isn’t scientific, and, like everything else at this point in the cycle, the results probably come far too early to be conclusive about the direction things might take in the run-up to next year’s electoral contests. Nonetheless, these results do provide an interesting snapshot of where respondents are at the moment, and how effective debates are likely to be in swaying opinions.

Detailed Results

For the “No” side, the numbers break down as follows:

• Out of 150 responses –
  
• 66 (44%) said they were uncommitted before the debate, and remained so afterwards.
• 84 (56%) said they were already committed to a particular candidate before the debate, and remained so afterwards.

For the “Yes” side, the numbers break down as follows:

• Out of 21 responses –
  
• 11 (52.38%) were uncommitted, and ended up picking a candidate based on the debate.
• 8 (38.10%) actually switched their support from one candidate to another based on the debate.
• 2 (9.52%) were committed to a particular candidate, but ended up uncommitted afterwards.
  

Full results are available here.

Debate Poll

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 634

Rather than give my commentary on last night's debate or, worse still, provide a blow-by-blow of a televised event that everyone who would even consider coming to this site has already seen (twice, probably), here's a poll. And, rather than make it a poll where one person gets to say 300 times that their candidate could do no wrong on the night, I've made this a poll aimed at finding out whether last night's debate actually changed anyone's mind about the candidates.

So, here goes!

Did the South Carolina Debate Change Your Mind?

Did the South Carolina Debate Change Your Mind?

No - I was undecided before, and still am Yes - I was undecided before, but now support one of the candidates No - I supported a particular candidate before, and still support that candidate Yes - I've switched allegience from one candidate to another Yes - I supported a candidate before the debate, and am now undecided

View Result

Free Web Polls

duh

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 644

Here's a news flash: according poll results published in today's Washington Post, Americans trust Democrats more than Republicans to deal with the ongoing debacle that is Iraq.

"A Washington Post-ABC News poll of 1,141 adults, conducted April 12-15, found that 58 percent trusted the Democrats in Congress to do a better job handling the situation in Iraq, compared with 33 percent who trusted Bush.

Bush continued yesterday to say that victory in Iraq is pivotal to the larger fight against terrorism, but Americans are increasingly agreeing with the Democratic view that the issues are separate. About 57 percent now say the United States can succeed in the terrorism fight without winning the Iraq war, an increase of 10 percentage points since January, when Americans were almost evenly divided on the question."

Geez, why would that be?

Survey Says...

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 652

From the inbox today, a note from my friends at Gallup:

"Thank you for recently taking part in a Gallup Panel survey. The information you provided will be used to improve commerce and government in this country.

Because you were willing to share your thoughts and opinions with us, we thought you might enjoy reading about some recent findings from Gallup Panel surveys.

--As candidates for the 2008 presidential election continue to emerge, Gallup asked panelists an open-ended question about what quality they deem most important in the next president. One-third of panelists say that honesty or the ability to be straightforward is the most important quality for the next president to possess (emphasis added). This response far outpaced the percentages for any other responses given."

As Letterman would say, I don't really have a joke here. I'm just putting this out there for those not currently in the position to directly shape public opinion. ;->

A Shift in the Landscape

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 669

The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press has published a fascinating look at American political attitudes spanning the years 1987 - 2007. It shows some dramatic changes over time, and, I'm happy to say, mostly away from the political right.

Some highlights:

• In 2002, the country was equally divided along partisan lines: 43% identified with the Republican Party or leaned to the GOP, while an identical proportion said they were Democrats. Today, half of the public (50%) either identifies as a Democrat or says they lean to the Democratic Party, compared with 35% who align with the GOP.


• The study finds a pattern of rising support since the mid-1990s for government action to help disadvantaged Americans. More Americans believe that the government has a responsibility to take care of people who cannot take care of themselves, and that it should help more needy people even if it means going deeper into debt.


• Americans are less disposed than five years ago to favor a strong military as the best way to ensure peace. In 2002, less than a year after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, more than six-in-ten agreed with the statement, "The best way to ensure peace is through military strength." Today, about half express similar confidence in military power.


• In 1995, 58% said they favored affirmative action programs designed to help blacks, women, and other minorities get better jobs. That percentage has risen steadily since, and stands at 70% in the current poll. Gains in support for affirmative action have occurred to almost the same extent among Republicans (+8), Democrats (+10), and Independents (+14).


• Interpersonal racial attitudes continue to moderate. More than eight-in-ten (83%) agree that "it's all right for blacks and whites to date," up six percentage points since 2003 and 13 points from a Pew survey conducted 10 years ago.


But it isn't all rainbows. A few points of worry:


• The Democratic Party's overall standing with the public is no better than it was when President Bush was first inaugurated in 2001. Instead, it is the Republican Party that has rapidly lost public support, particularly among political independents. Faced with an unpopular president who is waging an increasingly unpopular war, the proportion of Americans who hold a favorable view of the Republican Party stands at 41%, down 15 points since January 2001. But during that same period, the proportion expressing a positive view of Democrats has declined by six points, to 54%.


• The public is losing confidence in itself. A dwindling majority (57%) say they have a good deal of confidence in the wisdom of the American people when it comes to making political decisions. Similarly, the proportion who agrees that Americans "can always find a way to solve our problems" has dropped 16 points in the past five years.


• Americans feel increasingly estranged from their government. Barely a third (34%) agree with the statement, "most elected officials care what people like me think," nearly matching the 20-year low of 33% recorded in 1994 and a 10-point drop since 2002.


And finally, one quite simply infuriating point:


• Young people continue to hold a more favorable view of government than do other Americans. At the same time, young adults express the least interest in voting and other forms of political participation.

WTF? Are twenty-somethings saying that government works best when they don't participate? I'm hoping folks will fill up the comment bin on this one, because it makes absolutely no sense to me.

The full report can be found here. Definately worth a read, no matter which side of the political fence you're on!