The Polling Report [12.8.12]

Filed in National by on December 8, 2012

Jonathan Chait:

“How doomed are conservatives? Pretty doomed, if you look carefully at the Pew Research Survey’s close analysis of the youth vote in the 2012 elections. The Republicans’ long-term dilemma has generally been framed in racial terms, but it’s mainly a generational one. The youngest generation of voters contains a much smaller proportion of white voters than previous generations, and those whites in that generation vote Republican by a much smaller margin than their elders. What’s more, younger voters supported President Obama during the last two election cycles for reasons that seem to go beyond the usual reasons — social issues like gay marriage and feminism, immigration policy, or Obama’s personal appeal — and suggest a deeper attachment to liberalism. The proclivities of younger voters may actually portend a full-scale sea change in American politics.”

NEW JERSEY–GOVERNORPPP: Christie 50, Booker 36

The PPP survey also finds Christie’s approval rate is 67% to 25%.

NEW JERSEY–SENATOR–DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY–PPP: A new Public Policy Polling survey in New Jersey finds that if Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) was to retire — or even if he doesn’t — Newark Mayor Cory Booker (D) has a clear shot at the seat.

Key findings: By a 59% to 22% margin Democrats say they would prefer their candidate in 2014 be Booker than Lautenberg. And Booker emerges as the strong favorite in an open seat situation too. 48% would want Booker as their candidate compared to 17% for Rob Andrews and 13% for Frank Pallone, both Congressmen who have shown an interest in moving up.

GEORGIA–SENATOR–REPUBLICAN PRIMARY–PPP: Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) 57, Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) 14; Chambliss 50, Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) 22; Chambliss 52, former Secretary of State Karen Handel 23.

However, just 38% of Republican primary voters say they want Chambliss to be their nominee, compared to 43% who would prefer someone more conservative.

NATIONAL–POST ELECTION–REPUBLICAN INSANITY–PPP: 49% of Republican voters nationally say they think that ACORN stole the election for President Obama, as compared to 52% that thought ACORN stole the 2008 election, “a modest decline, but perhaps smaller than might have been expected given that ACORN doesn’t exist anymore.”

NATIONAL–PRESIDENTIAL APPROVAL RATING–Associated Press-GfK: Obama’s approval rating stands at 57%, the highest since May 2011, when U.S. Navy SEALs killed Osama bin Laden, and up 5 percentage points from before the election. And 42% say the country is on the right track, up from 35% in January 2009.

NATIONAL–PRESIDENTIAL APPROVAL RATING–Quinnipiac: President Obama’s approval rate at 53% to 40%. Voters also trust Obama and Democrats more than Republicans, by a 53% to 36% margin, to avoid the “fiscal cliff.”

Said pollster Peter Brown: “Nothing like winning an election to boost your job approval. President Obama hasn’t had a score this good since his 52 – 40 percent approval rating May 5, 2011, right after the death of Osama bin Laden. This is only the second time in more than three years that President Obama has broken 50 percent. And voters see Republicans as more likely to be obstructionist, and have less confidence in their ability to come up with the right solution to the nation’s financial woes.”

NATIONAL–APPROVAL RATING–2016–ABC New/Washington Post: 57% of voters would back a presidential bid by Hillary Clinton, with just 37% opposed.

Clinton will leave her post as Secretary of State early next year with a 69% approval rate for the job she’s done. She also has a 67% overall favorability rate — a new high in her long public career as first lady, U.S. Senator, presidential candidate and top U.S. diplomat.

SOUTH CAROLINA–SENATOR–POTENTIAL CANDIDACY: Former South Carolina Governor Mark Sandord (R) told the Wall Street Journal he’d been by bombarded by calls and emails from former donors and allies encouraging him to consider a run in the 2014 election for Sen. Jim DeMint’s (R-SC) seat. And despite the sex scandal that seemingly ended his political career, he’s not dismissing the idea.

ILLINOIS–SENATOR–2016–PPP: First Lady Michelle Obama 51, Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL) 40.

NATIONAL–FISCAL SLOPE–AP-GfK: The poll found that, by 46 percent to 30 percent, more favor cutting government services to raising taxes to tackle budget deficits. That sentiment echoes the view of the GOP, which has emphasized spending cuts during four years of budget battles with Obama. Yet support for trimming government services has dropped in AP-GfK polls. It was 56 percent last February and 62 percent in March 2011. However, when we get specific….

By 48 percent to 40 percent, more oppose proposals to gradually raise the eligibility age for Medicare from 65. Only 3 in 10 support slowing the growth of annual Social Security benefits. And more people oppose than favor cutting military spending.

NATIONAL–FILIBUSTER REFORM–National Journal: A plurality of voters, 49-42, are in support of Senate reform.

NATIONAL–FISCAL SLOPE–National Journal: 79 percent of those surveyed want fiscal-cliff negotiators not to cut Medicare at all. Only 17 percent would be willing to see it cut some, and a minuscule 3 percent would be OK with it being cut a lot.

NATIONAL–FISCAL SLOPE–Democracy Corp: 60% want no cuts at all to Social Security and Medicare, and 47 percent strongly believe that cuts to Social Security and Medicare should be off the table.

“The polling shows the mandate is to protect Medicare and Social Security, not cut them. And Washington will face a TARP-like reaction if they read the election wrong.” The election results give Democrats all the mandate they need to fight for keeping these programs safe. The next election should give them the impetus to do it.

NATIONAL–FISCAL SLOPE BLAME GAME–Quinnipiac: By a 56 – 38 percent margin, voters say that Obama and congressional Democrats will make a good faith effort to cooperate with congressional Republicans on important issues. By 51 – 43 percent, voters say congressional Republicans will not act in good faith.

By a huge 67 – 23 percent margin, voters oppose eliminating the home mortgage interest deduction, but strongly favor, 62 – 28 percent, limiting the deduction to the first $500,000 of mortgage debt. By 56 – 35 percent, voters favor eliminating that deduction for second homes.

Voters 65 – 31 percent support higher taxes on households making more than $250,000 per year, with 84 – 14 percent support from Democrats and 66 – 31 percent support from independent voters. Republicans are opposed 53 – 41 percent.

NATIONAL–FISCAL SLOPE–ABC/Washington Post: Americans support raising taxes on incomes over $250,000 a year, 60%-37%. They oppose generally reducing deductions people can claim on their federal income taxes, 49% to 44%. And they oppose raising the age for Medicare coverage from 65 to 67, 67% to 30%.

About the Author ()

Comments (10)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. pandora says:

    Take a look at that chart on the filibuster reform. The only two groups that support the filibuster, as it stands now, are men and Republicans – most likely Republican white men.

    This makes so much sense. For centuries, white men have had veto power over every other group. They see it as their birthright.

    It’s why they are so threatened by feminism and civil rights. How dare these non-white, non-male groups think they deserve an equal voice. And even though they have to tolerate their vote, for now, they feel they should retain the ultimate veto power through the filibuster.

    Yesterday, I wrote about the Citadel (the 12th century castle that conservatives are building so they can live without liberals) and there’s a reason they’ve chosen their compound to mimic the 12th century rather than the future. They embrace the mindset of this era, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the Citadel eventually adopts a dress code that requires women to wear skirts or dresses.

    White, Republican men romanticize eras that were pretty awful for everyone but white men.

  2. puck says:

    The polling looks great, but now Democrats have about 18 months to deliver a solid jobs recovery, or else Republicans will recoup all the ground they lost and make a comeback in 2014. Public approval is with Obama and Democrats in Congress now, so let’s hope they don’t squander it again like in 2010.

    By rights Obama should have lost the election on economic grounds, but luckily Romney sucked so much, and so did the down-ticket Republican freak show. Obama was both lucky and skillful to talk his way back into office, but Democrats campaigning for 2014 won’t be that smart or lucky unless the economy is on their side.

    Once the goddamned job-killing soul-sucking wage-shrinking Bush tax cuts for the rich finally expire, the jobs recovery can begin. For Democrats up for election in 2014, the economy has about 18 months to drop the unemployment rate to somewhere in the 6% range or below. The next few weeks are critical.

  3. Roland D. Lebay says:


    I think you give WAY too much credit to the people who want to build the Citadel.

    These people have no knowledge of history prior to 1776 and they’re basically just right-wing white trash who don’t want to live or work with anyone other than white people who share their retarded political views.

  4. kavips says:

    Echoing Puck, it would be a dash of cold water in the face to remember the similar polling numbers back before Inauguration Day 2009 and then November 2010 mid-term elections…

    It can happen again.

  5. geezer says:

    It can happen again, but is unlikely to. The effect of the 2008 elections was euphoria at the exit of Bush and the start of a new era. Those high numbers came before the GOP unveiled its “No to Everything” campaign, which took the optimism out of everyone’s sails.

    This time everyone realizes the game the GOP is playing. Nobody is euphoric today; the feeling is one of relief at survival. Today every obstructionist play will drag down the GOP’s numbers at least as much as Obama’s.

  6. puck says:

    it would be a dash of cold water in the face to remember the similar polling numbers back before Inauguration Day 2009 and then November 2010 mid-term elections…

    I’m not talking about Obama’s polling numbers – I’m talking about numbers for Obama’s 2008 campaign promises (public option, and expire the tax cuts). Even as Obama’s 2010 approval numbers started shrinking under unemployment and teabag attacks, Obama and Congress clearly went against public opinion on those policy votes.

    Now I assume public opinion is now heavily against entitlement cuts (depending on how the question is asked, of course). Yet entitlement cuts is now all we hear, with no solid denial from Obama. I hope he is still negotiating and makes Republicans name their cuts, but I also hope he vetoes them anyway.

    I’ll let somebody smarter than me explain it:

    Playing it safe, Warren declines to endorse Obama plan on ‘fiscal cliff’

    [Senator-elect Elizabeth] Warren offered aspects of a deal she had already outlined on the campaign trail — higher taxes on top earners, the elimination of oil and agriculture subsidies and cuts to military spending — but also said she’d support “technocratic” changes to Medicare, which she declined to explain further.

    She’s right. Take the tax increases on the rich, but for entitlements only offer cost savings instead of benefit cuts.

    I only hope by “technocratic changes” she means drug price negotiation, among other things.

    The “playing it safe” line is because Warren won’t be sworn in until January and won’t have to vote this year.

  7. Rustydils says:

    Puck, with the socialist in the white house, you will never see 6 percent. Why work, when you can stay in your pajamas and get money for two years. Incentive to work is to low. Most people dont lije their jobs, but they do them anyway cause they like to eat. President does not get that. Try running your family like Obama is running the country, rewarding laziness. You wont have a family for long. All you need for full employment is to stop all unemployment benifits tomorrow. Everyone would instantly be out looking for any job they could get. The ones that did not get a job, would have to get help from friends and family. The ones that could not get help from either would starve to death. Unempliyment problem solved immediatly without any cost to the givernment. A side benifit would be that a bunch of new employees would get their dignity back

  8. Jason330 says:

    …Says the guy who predicted Romney would take California.

  9. pandora says:

    Starve to death? Talk about doubling down on the 47% comment. Rusty shows how, despite all the Republican surface make over attempts, the party won’t change a thing. To Rusty – someone who cries “death panels” – starvation isn’t a problem, it’s a solution.

  10. socialistic ben says:

    of course they wont change. Pandora, the GOP has decided to go with the “Romney only really lost by 50 votes and those votes were ACORN” argument.