NYT/CBS poll offers good news for the Democratic agenda

I suppose this landscape could be worse for Republicans, but I don’t see how.

Americans are more dissatisfied with the country’s direction than at any time since the New York Times/CBS News poll began asking about the subject in the early 1990s, according to the latest poll.

In the poll, 81 percent of respondents said they believed “things have pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track,” up from 69 percent a year ago and 35 percent in early 2002.

Although the public mood has been darkening since the early days of the war in Iraq, it has taken a new turn for the worse in the last few months, as the economy has seemed to slip into recession. There is now nearly a national consensus that the country faces significant problems.

A majority of nearly every demographic and political group — Democrats and Republicans, men and women, residents of cities and rural areas, college graduates and those who finished only high school — say the United States is headed in the wrong direction. Seventy-eight percent of respondents said the country was worse off than five years ago; just 4 percent said it was better off.

It’s probably not the ideal time for John McCain to run on a more-of-the-same presidential platform.

In terms of the presidential campaign, Barack Obama still holds a narrow edge over Hillary Clinton among Dems nationwide, 46% to 43%. In general-election match-ups, both Clinton and Obama lead McCain by five percentage points.

A closer look at the numbers points to additional good news for Obama, but I was even more impressed by the public support for the Democratic agenda in general.

On Obama, the controversy surrounding his former pastor, Jeremiah Wright, still hasn’t done much to undermine his campaign, and nearly three-in-five white voters said the story has had no effect on their opinions of the senator. Perhaps more importantly, Obama is seen by Dems as a stronger general-election candidate than Clinton, 56% to 32%.

The numbers weren’t all good for Obama. His favorability rating is lower than it was in February, and his lead among men has also shrunk. That said, the Obama campaign still has to be thrilled with results like these.

On favorable vs. unfavorable ratings, Obama has the biggest net positive of all three candidates — 19%. Clinton has a net negative 1%.

On “shares the values of Americans”, it’s Obama (70%-21%), McCain (66%-27%), Clinton (60%-34%). But the numbers are fairly close.

But the really important part of the poll was how Americans perceive the liberal policy agenda in general. Jonathan Cohn explained:

If you think that the solutions to most of these problems necessarily involve creating new government programs or strengthening existing ones–in other words, if you’re a liberal like me — probably the most encouraging finding is the response to this question: “Would you rather have a smaller government providing fewer services, or a bigger government providing more services?” Forty-three percent say “bigger” — the exact same percentage that says “smaller.” Not since late 1991 — when, apparently, the Times first began asking the question — did the public express such favorable attitudes towards government. […]

So what’s the political lesson here? On the merits, the case for more aggressive regulation and a stronger safety net — not just in health care, but also banking, pensions, and other areas — has never been stronger. And the insecurity evident in this poll suggests people are becoming more open to these sorts of initiatives — more, certainly, than they have been in a long time.

Quite right. I’d just add that 58% of Americans (pdf) said they would also support raising taxes on households making more than $250,000 — just as Clinton and Obama have proposed.

Obviously, the election is seven months away, and public opinion can and will change. But it appears that Americans are desperate for change, believe the country is on the wrong track, prefer Democratic ideas, and prefer Democratic candidates.

“more-of-the-same”, I guess I had kind of misunderestimated McCain’s campaign. I kind of saw it more of a “I don’t know what on God’s green earth I’m talking about” sort of campaign. The Obama/McCain debates will be merciless, I’m talking Ken Jennings vs. Lindsay Lohan on “Jeopardy!” kind of merciless.

  • I can’t help but think that the reason McCain does as well as he does in these meaningless polls is that they provide a cost free way for Hillary and Obama’s most ardent supporters to show that they wouldn’t support the other. If I were McCain, I wouldn’t count too strongly on their support in an actual election. I suspect most would either change their minds, vote for Nader or stay home.

  • This almost lends credence to Nader supporters and others who said we needed to hit bottom before we could start heading up again. On the other hand, it may mean we are just drowning.

  • With the dawning of this recession, we close the books on the first period of economic expansion where the ordinary household lost ground.
    And just a short while ago all of the talking heads were all asking why George W. “Master Tool of the Oligarchy” Bush was not getting any credit for the great economy.
    No suprises here.

  • I’m an Obama supporter and I have to say, I look forward to McCain/Obama debates for the same sort of reason people watch NASCAR: To see John McCain flame out and leave bits of himself strewn down the asphalt while smoke and fire pour from his chassis. Obama will eat him alive.

    But I also have to say, so would Clinton. The Republicans have nothing to offer this cycle, and they picked the right guy to offer it. Obviously, I’m hoping it’s my guy who gets to carve up the strawmen of John McCain’s candidacy, but I could just as well enjoy Senator Clinton doing the honors there.

  • At the moment things are truly looking up. On top of that some of Hillary’s superdelegates– Murtha, Corzine– are making it clear that there will be no overturning popular votes or any lead in general. I’m glad they’re putting it out there so that others can follow them if they end up switching their support.

    I think Obama will positively stomp McCain in the debates– also keep in mind that Obama is 6’1″ and McCain is a pretty frail looking 5’7″.

  • National polls are a great indicator of general election standings, if the election were to happen today, but this is not the case.

    They also do little to accurately portray the demographics of the upcoming primary elections. If Clinton can win big in PA, and with momentum win the majority of the remaining contests (not unlikely considering the demographics), then people will start to see that she was right to stay in the race, and once again believe in her ability to win the general election.

    What an exciting time for democrats! I’m very happy to see how the public is responding to the democratic agenda, this makes me hopeful that either candidate can win in the general election, and yes that includes Obama if the Wright issue doesn’t bury him in November.. and yes, I’ll vote for the nominee no matter who it is.

  • On “shares the values of Americans”, it’s Obama (70%-21%), McCain (66%-27%), Clinton (60%-34%). But the numbers are fairly close.

    Only 1 in 5 think Obama doesn’t share their values, but 1 in 3 think Clinton doesn’t, that is a big difference. You can cut someone a lot of slack if you think they come from the same place. But the 7 in 10 who think Obama does share their values, pushes way across the line to include those who will not vote for him. This seems like very good news for Obama, his general election run will not stir as much resistance in times of uncertainty, and it greatly diminishes the usefulness of character attacks.

  • In response to Zoe’s side-note on height at #6, I have to say, I don’t think candidates’ height matters much in this media age. Kerry was significantly taller than Bush, yet during their debates, the network would split the screen and show them being of equal height. I don’t doubt that they’ll do that again, especially since the media is so gaga over McCain (I wouldn’t put it past them to feel sorry for the old codger and make him look taller!)

  • Why do Republicans fear Obama? Exerts below. An interesting read here to be sure.

    Some Republican strategists have become apoplectic at the rise of Barack Obama. Sagacious Republicans now see Obama as the most dangerous threat their party has faced since the Great Depression, when FDR relieved them of power for the next twenty years.

    Republicans have never been as motivated to maintain their weakening grasp on power as they are today. The new era of Republican ruthlessness launched in 2000, when James Baker and his cronies, John Roberts and John Bolton, engineered the legal coup d’etat to rescue their lost election and place the Bush-Cheney junta in power.

    The Republicans are more than well aware of the shape of the Democratic nomination. They were hoping and praying and manipulating to the best of their abilities for their chance to destroy Hillary Clinton. Now that Clinton’s viability has been eroded by the Democratic base itself, the Republicans are moving swiftly to Plan B – an insidious plot to shock and awe the body politic with a double blow to the psyche of America.

    For several years, Seymour Hersh has elucidated the ominous plans of the Bush-Cheney junta to complete their conquest of the Middle East by attacking Iran. Iran is now in the grip of an enormous and extremely uncomfortable American vise. The US occupies both Afghanistan to Iran’s east and Iraq to her west. The rich oilfields of Iran are arrayed in a belt near her south-western coast just over the border from Basra on the west. And, there is an enormous US flotilla now stationed just off the coast of Iran in the Persian Gulf.

    While the story of Bush and Cheney’s designs on Iran are well known to international audiences, most of America remains oblivious to the impending expansion of the unpopular war. Fewer still are aware of the political motivations now calculating the moves in the global game of chess. The players are not really Bush and Cheney on the one hand and Ahmadinejad and his mullahs on the other. The opposing forces are now the Republicans against the Democrats, for the stakes are quite simple: the presidency of America and the key factor in its bristling portfolio of power – Commander-in-Chief of America’s vast arsenal.

    And if we, as a country, are lucky, they Republicans will be relieved of power for good; finite, done, gone, buh bye, don’t let the door hit ya, and all that.

    These neocon’s are the biggest threat to the world, not just America.

  • Greg (post #8):

    Check out E.J. Dionne’s piece in today’s post. It’s a very eloquent call for liberalism to be re-invigorated. I think you’ll enjoy reading it.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/03/AR2008040303118.html?hpid%3Dopinionsbox1&sub=new

    I’m very optimistic about migration of former Bush supporters to Obama’s message. Younger Bush supporters never really did their homework on who they were backing. They bought into the platitudes of the Bush campaign, then into the fear sown by Cheney/Wolfowitz/Bush/Rummy after 9/11 without putting much thought into it. But they also were the people who actually went off to war, or know someone who did. Now, from that crucible or war, they are emerging as adults who understand the stakes. And many are starting to look around at other parts of the ‘conservative movement’ and they’re questioning the validity of that as well.

    I’m unapologetic for my support of Obama because I see the connection he has established with this future generation of leadership in America. I don’t agree with everything he says, or some of his positions, but I absolutely love the inspiration he is providing for American youth.

    If Hillary were to somehow get the nomination, I certainly would support her candidacy. I wouldn’t be happy about it, but McCain has the ability to finish the job of destroying America’s ability to act as a beacon of hope for other people that Bush started on September 12th, 2001. That cannot be allowed to happen, and Dems across the spectrum would be well served to start realizing that.

  • Lest we forget, Bush & The Neocons are just a natural step in the evolution of the US towards fascism. What Goldwater really meant, but didn’t dare say in 64 because the electorate was not yet sufficiently softened up by prosperity and propaganda, was that extremism in the defense of property is no vice. Power & property will aggregate to the extreme when that process is not regulated and to a certain extent impeded. Lofty theoretical postulations to the contrary, government is not the enemy. It is a tool that must and will be used, for better or worse. If, in a democracy or republic, government becomes handmaiden to corporate and plutocratic interests, aggregation will proceed to the point where, barring a revolution, the people have no serious voice.

    What scares the establishment about Obama’s populist, outside the box movement, is what might happen if he really does try to reverse the suicidal course we are on and the people realize that they are already in chains.

  • If you ask me, a five-point lead over McCain when 81% of the country is allegedly dissatisfied with the way the country is being run is piss-poor. And take note that McCain still appears to be pulling in healthy crowds, is not being booed like Bush, and has the luxury of time to groom his approach to independents. Never underestimate the short-sightedness and stubbornness of the American voter.

  • I think Obama will positively stomp McCain in the debates– also keep in mind that Obama is 6′1″ and McCain is a pretty frail looking 5′7″

    The young, tall, cool-as-a-cucumber Obama standing next to a cranky, white-haired, confused old man – it’ll be Kennedy v. Nixon all over again.

    Except that Nixon was intelligent, articulate and much younger. Paranoid, petty and criminal, yes, but those personas had yet to emerge. He lost the “debates”* because of his five o’clock shadow and his grey suits.

    *They weren’t called “debates” back then. The networks took care not to use that word:

    Howard K. Smith, CBS News, opening “debate”: “In this, the first discussion in a series of four uh – joint appearances…”

    Bill Shadel, ABC News, third “debate”: “It’s my privilege this evening to preside at this, the third in the series of meetings on radio and television of the two major presidential candidates.”

    Quincy Howe, ABC News, fourth “debate”: …good evening from New York where the two major candidates for president of the United States are about to engage in their fourth radio-television discussion of the present campaign.”

    The media were smart enough back then to know the difference between a debate and a joint press conference.

  • from swimming freestyle:

    Two disappointing and, undoubtedly, related statistics. And stinging indictments of a Bush Administration that is so ideologically bent on deregulation, they’ve given up any stewardship of the American economy. As a consequence, we continue to drift towards an economic downturn European analysts refer to as depression-like while Mr. Bernanke dances nervously in Congressional hearings afraid to say the “R” word and President Bush goes AWOL to a NATO conference. It will require some real Houdini like moves on the part of the Administration and their minions to squirm out of accountability for this gigantic mess.

    Democrats need to loudly remind voters the consequences of leaders allowing outdated and disproven ideological considerations to interfere with the business of managing the government and the, now obvious, implications for the American people.

    Loudly. Very loudly.

    http://swimmingfreestyle.typepad.com

  • i’m with mark [comment 16]. if this dissatisfaction number really meant something to potential voters then obama and hillary’s leads over mccain would be much larger. as much as i agree with the 81%, the numbers don’t provide much comfort when looking towards the general election.

  • First Off, Obama and Clinton are both Communnist. Obama is a racist and continues to praise pastor wright, who gave the life time achievement award to louis fairakan (RACIST). Im sorry but I don’t want four years of African Pride all day everyday, the world will laugh at us. VOTE MCCAIN. MODERATE REPUBLICAN = GOOD PRESIDENT

  • Under the Obama bus you will find women, Jews, new born babies, latinos, his grandmother, and most “typical” white people.

    Obama dismisses those that don’t embrace “the great Obama light” as laughable and ignorant. He relishes “a following” that includes college kids that don’t pay taxes, liberals consumed by guilt, the party dedicated that want change for change’s sake, and everyone else with a chip on their shoulder that portray America as an evil country … while wrapping themselves in the free speech and liberty that allows them condemn us.

  • Hey, Tim; you could have left off the “conservative” prefix; your spelling and grammar make it redundant. And Ernie, you forgot “everybody with more than a room-temperature IQ and reasonably good short-term memory” when you were enumerating Obama’s “following”.

  • Comments are closed.