NYT/CBS poll offers good news for the Democratic agenda
By Steve Benen Friday Apr 04, 2008 7:11amThere are some encouraging numbers for Dems in the new NYT/CBS poll, 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.
Login or Register to post comments.
We must thank the Blogosphere and the New Media outlets for "priming the pump" so to speak. People are beginning to get the idea that they don't have to be tools all their lives.
More work, more time, more writing...and for me this morning, my first highway blog....a test for Monday morning rush hour!
I have a question, and I know some of you out there reading this know it!!! When was the last time the bureaucratic conservative Christian groups supported a Democrat for President??? I saw a clip on here mentioning something bout the 'religious right' making claims that McCain wasn't trying to pander to them enough to their liking... not to mention, I'm wondering if this has anything to do with the left seeking gay rights. Is that really how Dems and 'the left' are perceived by Republicans??
A better question for the poll- Would you rather have a smaller governmment providing more services? It's time for the electorate to hold our incompetent politicians accountable. We don't need a bigger government to have better services, we need less greed.
marko @ 1:
hopefully using the hands free kit that came with your laptop, or maybe connect the hands free to the power steering , left left right shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit
I'm shocked the percentage is that low considering very few families overall make that kind of money even with both spouses working.
The poll question I would ask is:
Would you ever vote for an incompetent person who shares your religious beliefs over a competent person who does not?
Anyone answering yes would be stripped of their citizenship, placed on a raft with their belongings and gently pushed out to sea.
Justin @ 2:
conservative christians prefer more manchurian candidates along the lines of dumb republicans easily molded and controllable
All the pro-Dem polls in the world is not going to stop the rightwing from heavy-duty swiftboating once our nominee is selected. The candidate, DNC and progressive blogs must be ready willing and able to attack back quickly and forcefully. We cannot let what happened to John Kerry happen again!
ferrofluid @ 7:
Can you remember the last manchurian Democratic candidate they supported???
Perhaps even better news is the March fundraising numbers--not just the cash--but the 281,000 new donors for Democrat Obama who will all be pulling Democratic voting levers in November. Tim Russert, Brian Williams, Chuck Todd, and Chris Matthews will all need to get their crayons out and repaint their old, Reagan-era "blue and red state maps" they so cherish. And you thought it was tough being a Republican in 2006.
Justin @ 9:
yes
Justin @ 9:
what I found weird and strange about the picture of Bundy is the same vacant look into space that a certain other person we know does. The eyes and look are the same !
Poll says we may be in a recession. Fantastic news for Democrats!!! Hooray!
If things get a lot worse it should be just awesome.
The question seems to perpetuate the myth about republicans being for smaller government.
Howzabout status quo, i.e. a bigger government providing fewer services.
ferrofluid @ 12:
Okay I'm lost!!! lol... I've been infatuated with learning about politics and the system; and you're telling me Ted Bundy ran for president (as a Dem), and was supported by the religious right because they believed he could be molded by them?
CBS is NOT WHERE THE NEWS COMES FIRST, IT'S WHERE THE OLDS COME LAST.
er FIRST . Crap!
Where the OLDS come first, the NEWS comes last.
alright I guess I am discredited for this thread for hopping on too fast.
ConcernedCanuck @ 5:
That is shocking, CC. And I agree with you. My guess, and it's just a guess because I don't have scientific polling data like this one that oversamples Dems to Reps by 60% to 40%, but I would think close to 100% of those not paying taxes would support raising taxes on those who do.
Where does restoring the Constitution & rule of law rank in the "important issues" list? Lemme guess: that wasn't one of the choices you could pick from the pre-made list of issues presented to the respondents.
Maybe when we get the results of the new poll dealing with impeachment...
...what's that? you telling me no one is conducting one of those?
dennis @ 19:
Guess it depends on how the question was worded. When asked, an overwhelming majority describe themselves as "liberal" and about 1/3 describe themselves as Dem, and the same Repub. Kind of tells me BOTH federal parties are SO FAR out of touch with the reality of their electorate, that they have no friggin' clue what anyone that votes for them wants. Either that or anyone/everyone that runs for political office is a complete and utter retard.
Question I would ask:
Don't you think that the Democrat party shows more of what America is all about with Clinton and Obama still fighting it out for the nomination? To me this is the meaning of a democracy and I am proud that the party just didn't trot out their favorite as the repubs did in 2000 with Bush. People shouldn't be mad shes still in it; they should be proud!
The framing of the question does not allow for smaller government and more services.
The question accepts the conservative agenda.
It seems to me that we could eliminate much of the waste and spend the savings on more services.
Of course, ending the war in Iraq would be a help, but it doesn't look like the Dems or Repubs are eager to do so.
On one hand, I believe in small, limited government, especially at the federal level--thus, I'm conservative. But I expect that small government to serve the needs of the PEOPLE, not the needs of big business--thus, I'm a liberal.
What do we actually have? A huge, sprawling, out-of-control federal government that serves only the needs of big businesses and foreign allies such as Israel. Meanwhile, our local and state governments are facing increasingly dire budget crises, and "the People" are facing an economy that is pro-oil-tycoon and anti-working-class in every aspect.
The size of the government is just part of the problem; their purpose is the main problem, and it is clear that the Bush administration and this Democratic Congress have one purpose--to serve the rich, the oil tycoons, and foreign allies, while ignoring the daily troubles of the American people and while trampling on our Constitution.
Time to impeach them all! Impeach Washington D.C.!!!
Time to impeach them all! Impeach Washington D.C.!!!
Forget impeachment - it's time to go right to War Crimes Tribunals.
A huge, sprawling, out-of-control federal government that serves only the needs of big businesses and foreign allies such as Israel.
Don't leave out the politicians in Washington.
One simple fix would be to campaign against all sitting congressmen. Every time they come up for re-election you have Donald Trump declare them "fired."
I know that a limited few are trying to do good but as a whole our congress is completely useless. Sifting through the good ones is too complicated for most Americans. Could a fire them all campaign work?
maybe we liberals need to change the debate language from "big gov't" to words that address these issues, bad spinach, failing banks, no pensions.
One of the first things that needs to be done is to take the cap off social security payroll taxes. Everyone pays up to $89K but once you reach that number you pay no more. That is just stupid. Everyone should continue to pay on every dollar they earn. There have been many years when I've made over that amount and it just seems crazy that those making over that amount are given that break.
Corporate Welfare needs to be stopped dead in it's tracks. Why are any of us giving money to oil companies and to banks? Our whole system is geared to screw the poor and pamper the wealthy with the earnings of the poor.
The Democrats won back Congress 2 years ago, right? Well to be honest, I haven't seen a significant shift in policy or agenda for the last 2 years. Sure, they stopped rubber stamping the rampant Bush administration's insanity, but otherwise all I have seen is a lot of heat and light and smoke, some investigations, and some reshuffling of faces on committees. Oh, and there seemed to be a massive shift in political donations from Republicans to Democrats. I suppose there are plenty of Democrats out there that will disagree with me. I would like to hear it.
Just don't paint me as a troll because I am not one. I have always been very liberal and progressive in my thinking. I am certainly not a Republican! But I'm not a Democrat, either. I think Chomsky is right on the money when he asserts that they are two different faces of one Pro-Business party.
I think that this country has been led into a very dangerous position by the Republicans, with the Democrats enabling it by being meek and complicit at nearly every turn. We are facing multiple crises and most Democrats seem to be keeping their heads down and playing it safe politically until the election. All this time they should have been trying to do everything in their power to end the war in Iraq and methodically impeach the Bush administration. The war is wrong and evil and it should stop. I don't think Bush should be impeached simply because I have contempt for him, or even for his crimes themselves. I am worried that Bush has set precedent for near absolute power for the Presidency, and it will come back to haunt us if it is not addressed Constitutionally through impeachment.
I hope I'm not ruffling too many feathers here with my frustration with the Democratic Agenda. Let me just put it this way. I think everyone here will probably agree with me that it is better the judge the Republicans by their actions and deeds rather than simply by their words. All I am saying is that "The Democratic Agenda" is just words. Where are the deeds?
sammy @ 29:
I'm a democrat and I couldn't agree with you more. That a democrat controlled congress can't stand up to the most unpopular president in our history and expose the failed repuglican policy is beyond obsurd. It shows complicity.
Why are conservatives the only ones angry about taxes? The conservatives have given us a big expensive government that provides us with nothing in return for our taxes. Why are we paying taxes for the idiotic Iraq War? For the interest on the totally irresponsible Reagan / W. debt? For money outright disappearing into the coffers of Haliburton, KBR, Blackwater, etc? Why aren't we outraged for all the years paying for a congress that provided no oversight? For regulatory bodies (the FAA, SEC, etc.) that do not regulate. Tax breaks for Big Oil? A tax break for buying an SUV? Why aren't people outraged that Warren Buffet pays a higher tax rate than his secretary making 60,000 a year? Warren, to his credit, is. We need a genuine liberal tax revolt in this country. We need to make the powers that be scared.
That's a really poorly worded question.
How about keep the govt size as is and just refocus our priorities? Didn't bushie already increase the size of the govt. but keeps wasting all of our money on handouts to the rich and military?
The Democrats were given a majority of one. In November we have an opportunity to expand that majority greatly. We should all work very hard to give Democrats a veto-proof majority in the house and senate and then we will be able to control the agenda and maybe do some good for the American people. If we get those majorities and nothing changes - then it's time for the pitchforks.
I also fear that the msm will rekindle their long-standing love affair with McCrazy and we could wind up with this man as prez. That's when large majorities in Congress will be essential. We will need to make sure that McCrazy can do nothing but warm the chair for four years. I think this is very likely especially if Obama is the nominee.
Well, its a start. But I hope any approach to realizing these goals is more nuanced and cautious than the binary approach to measuring public opinion. The lessons of inadequate government service and more importantly, regulation, are fresh in our minds, as they dominate our current experience in many ways. But we must not loose site of the law of unforseen circumstances, nor our fundamental commitment to liberty when we start building and expanding federal infrastructure. The awesome power of federal involvement in any industry will alter that industry's nature by it very presence. As a physician, I can tell you that practicing medicine at gunpoint - the essence of a simplistic approach to solving problems by using government power to force compliance - results in outcomes that are often the reverse of what is desired. Even more critical is to realize that benevolent programs under honest regimes are often converted into weapons of hostile control when passed to a subsequent and less honorable administration. That lesson should also be fresh in our minds.
Unfortunately, balancing these two competing forces requires more thought and imagination than most lawmakers or citizens are capable of marshaling.
Bluesage@34
"then we will be able to...maybe do some good for the American people"
Veto-proof majorities should not be required to do some good for the American people.
"Maybe" is not a confidence-inspiring qualifier.
It's not a pitchfork, it's a laptop. I wish I could actually shake it over my head in a mob and yell but it doesn't work that way anymore, except metaphorically.
I couldn't agree with you more that the idea of President McCain is a nightmare, but preparing obstructionist plans against his Presidency before the election has even been held sounds defeatist, especially when the political winds are strongly in the Democrats favor right now.
#1 Tax the corporations. No tax-break for corporations incorporated off-shore. If they do business in or with the US they pay taxes.
#2 No corporate welfare.
#3 No more foreign wars for the benefit of the corporations.
#4 Pursuant to #3, reduce "defense" spending by (perhaps) 95%.
#5 Spend our tax dollars INSTEAD on Health Care, Education, Civilian Infrastructure.
ConcernedCanuck @ 5:
Sadly, I have come to the same conclusion. I think that 42% of the people in this country are so clueless, they wouldn't realize if their hair was on fire.
And how 49% could still buy into the GOP "small government" cynical hypocrite-bullshit slogan, without realizing just how monitored and scutinized every facet of the "little guys" life has become under the current fascist regime is stupefying.
If you can't figure out by now, that when the GOP says "small government," what they really mean is - let the uber-rich devour everyone else without interference - then you are a certifiable imbecile.
As far as taxes go, the dumb-asses still haven't connected the dots between a million dollar tax-cut for the aristocracy (while the average Joe gets a couple of stinking bucks (crumbs) thrown at him), has been the main ingredient that has led to the pathetic state we find ourselves in. The same state that the above mentioned idiots detest! Un-F-ingbelievable!
Hmmmm .... What do the years 1991 and 2008 have in common that would cause people to express a desire for increased government social services? Participants in '91 were responding to the devastating effects of 11 years of Reaganism filling the streets with homeless people, filling the jails with non-violent offenders, cutting education budgets, ballooning the military, ruining the economy with unregulated debt, and unabashedly destroying the environment. Poll-takers in '08 are still living with that, since most of it was never reversed, but they're also responding to the effects of 7 years of a sort of hyper-Reaganism under Bush II. After a while, even the normally apolitical US poll respondent finds it hard to ignore the destruction caused by Reagan-obsessed Republicans. I just wish they wouldn't forget between Republican administrations.
hey, speaking of true democrats, does anyone have the e-mail address of hillary's poloitical guru, mark penn? i wanted to congratulate penn and his firm on blackwater's renewed contract.
you hillary supporters all know penn's firm works for not only john mccain, but blackwater as well, right?
Justin @ 9:
Bill Clinton
The higher cost of living is pushing $250,000'ers back down to the $40,000'er status just like it's pushing $40,000'ers down to the poverty status. So Obillary should make the billionaires pay first, since they're just wasting that money on worthless mergers instead of actually competing.
Khaaaaaaaaaan!!!!
Err... Cohn?
Unfortunately, I take little comfort in this. Almost everyone without a vested interest in the status quo supports liberal policies on paper...until they see the next GOP ad spot attacking the same policies with Pavlovian buzzwords like "socialist", and then their sense of economic self-interest is overwhelmed by a wave of classically conditioned hatred, fear, and selfishness.
The problem isn't the liberal policies themselves. The problem is the Dem candidates who espouse them can't or don't sell them well enough to a gullible, irrational public that has been too well trained to hate and mistrust anyone not wearing a flag lapel pin or has a foreign-sounding name.
Until the Dems learn to sell their candidates, the policies will never stand a chance of being enacted, and the country will just go further down the drain.
It occured to me that this is the logical result of the neocon use of fear as a weapon against the New Deal. The people have seen what happens when banks are unregulated and they are now afraid of banks. They are seeing what happens when the FAA fails to regulate airlines, and are becoming afraid of flying. They have seen what happens when the FDA fails to regulate the food and drug industries and are becoming afraid of the food they buy and the drugs they have to take. They are seeing what happens when US foreign policy fails to take a diplomatic tact and opts for beliigerency. The politicians themselves have certainly given us plenty to fear from them. It's the "fear" policy percolating down to where it actually touches our lives and it turns out that we care about the very things the neocons are trying to destroy.
The tide is turning because so many of those who were so adamantly opposed to any kind of government assistance for the poor are finding themselves becoming part of that group. Families who wish to remain together are forced to separate when one gets sick in order for that person to receive health care assistance. Those who were so adamantly opposed to government regulation of any kind are finding themselves in the middle of the controversy over contaminated toys, contaminated food, flammable children's clothing, dead pets. They are not the high and mighty, above it alls they used to be. And more are joining the ranks every day. It's all well and good to talk about re-training those whose jobs have gone to China or India or to illegals right here in their own neighborhoods. But exactly what jobs are they being re-trained to do and where are they coming from? Take all these guys who were making $20 or $30 dollars an hour in their factory jobs and re-train them to flip hamburgers at McDonalds, fill tacos at Taco Bell, or fry chicken at Kentucky Fried and HOPE they will all cooperate on hours so you can work all three in order to get enough hours to actually pay your bills. And, while you're at it, can you squeeze another 20 hrs a week out to pay for the gas to get there? Well, whatever's good for "the bottom line".
Login or Register to post comments.