President Obama's approval among Democrats is

[ProSense]

81 percent

Seven points higher than Clinton and Johnson for the same period.

FYI

[ibegurpard]

1. ok

[MannyGoldstein]

2. But there are far fewer Democrats.

Even in my bluest state of Massachusetts, Dems are a small minority.

[ProSense]

4. Dems swept MA.

Dems swept CA.

Even in Nevada, Democratic ranks grew. There aren't fewer Democrats. Don't be fooled by the mid-terms.

[MannyGoldstein]

36. Let's take MA as an example

I couldn't find national figures (perhaps your Google-fu is better than mine), but here's what I found for Mass:

According to this: http://www.sec.state.ma.us/ele/ele10/enrollment_count_regdt_10132010.pdf

36.48% of Mass voters were enrolled as Democrats as of last month. This is down from 36.95% just two years ago:

http://www.sec.state.ma.us/ele/elepdf/st_county_town_enroll_breakdown_08.pdf

Going back further: http://www.sec.state.ma.us/ele/eleenr/enridx.htm

In 1994, 40.16% of voters were Democrats

In 1966, 41.52% of voters were Democrats

And this is in reliably-blue Mass. I imagine that the changes are much greater in less-blue states.

[merbex]

39. Yea, and if Jeff Perry hadn't had MAJOR skeletons in his closet

the 10th would be sending a Republican to Congress.

I cannot believe how far we have fallen in just 24 months.....and Scott Brown didn't win just because MC was awful as a candidate either....that was a message...let's just say that MA voters~ enough MA voters will go just so far into tea bag territory before they instinctively know what a crazy world that is.

All that being said, I believe the opportunity does exit for a challenge to Obama....some brave folk from NH, MA, and ME need to lay the ground work for a draft movement for the NH primary....I'd be willing to put mileage on my car for Dean but would he accept, or be Shermanesque?

[onenote]

66. of course, you neglect to mention that the number of repubs is falling off as much or more

Today, there are 3.2 times as many Democrats as repubs in Mass. Two years ago, it was 3.18 times as many. In 1996, it was only 2.8 times as many.

The number of independents is growing. The number of Democrats AND the number of repubs is declining. But the group that is the "small minority" in Mass are repubs, with less than 11.5 percent and dropping.

[MannyGoldstein]

73. That's true, but not pertinent to the OP's post

Which is why I didn't mention it.

[onenote]

75. nice attempt at a dodge

First, relative numbers of Democrats and Republicans are pertinent when someone claims that the Democrats are a "small" minority without mentioning that there are three times as many Democrats as repubs.

Second, if you don't want to look at relative numbers, look at absolute numbers. The total number of Democrats in October 2008 was larger than it was in any of the other years for which you cited data, except 2008. In 2008, there were around 20,000 more registered Democrats, which isn't surprising because registration in a presidential election year tends to be higher than in non presidential election years as is shown by the fact that the total number of registered repubs was down by around 16,000 (a much larger percentage drop). Or compare the total number of registered voters in October 2002 to the number in Oct 2000 and Oct 2004.

[Grinchie]

74. Change That's Meaningless

I certainly won't be fooled by you or the Polls.

[pnwmom]

10. "A small minority"? Maybe in your house.

Not in the state.

[pnwmom]

12. The Dem group that had the greatest drop in voting in 2010?

African Americans. And you can bet they'll be back voting in 2012.

[saracat]

24. Really? So it isn't about issues, it is just about Obama? Why wouldn't they care about Congress if

they were Democrats? Why would they sit out the midterms? Wasn't it important for a Democratic President to have a majority? Or didn't it matter? Is that what you are saying?

[pnwmom]

31. Your questions are ironic considering so many DUers were

threatening not to vote for DINO's or blue dogs or others who weren't sufficiently progressive -- even though those Dems, as flawed as they were, still were of more use to Obama's agenda than Rethugs would have been. (And some here even applauded the losses of those candidates to Rethugs.)

I agree with you that it is important that the President have a majority, and it is very frustrating that we didn't have enough votes to hold the House in the 2010 election. But unless we also criticize white DUers for not voting for Dems who weren't sufficiently progressive, why should we criticize African Americans?

As to your questions . . . All I'm saying is that African Americans, as a group, were significantly less likely to vote in 2010 than they had been in 2008. And that other groups, including Hispanic voters, didn't show that drop. Maybe African Americans heard all the people complaining about Congress and concluded they were all jerks and it didn't matter. Or maybe they were just more motivated to vote for Obama than some white candidate they couldn't identify with. Who knows? But I bet anything they'll be back in 2012.

[saracat]

41. And no matter what their race, if they don't vote down ticket it doesn't matter.

[RichGirl]

38. Exactly....

They will be back, the college kids will be back...most all democrats will be back.

It is hard enough to get people out to vote when it's a presidential election. It's near impossible when it's a mid-term and there is very little effort made to get out the vote. You never, EVER get a big turn out for midterms. Many people don't even know who's running and some don't even know there's an election at all.

People here simply don't understand that the real minority are those of us on DU. People are not on top of the news the way were are. We read discontent here, the media loves it and expands it. But, most people aren't watching cable news. Most people aren't interested and don't even want to discuss politics.

All this constant blathering on the midterms, referendum on Obama, blah, blah, blah....waste of time.

[politicasista]

71. +1 n/t

[obxhead]

13. Yes, see post 7 below. nt

[secondwind]

34. we have 20 million more dems nationwide than republicans. And growing.

[saracat]

43. So what? They do not VOTE. And the largest growing voter universe is the Indie.

We have been losing registration to the Indie registration.

[ProSense]

44. They voted in the last Presidential election

There is no reason to believe they're going to sit the next one out.

Seriously, do you think there are that many Democrats willing to risk the return of a Republican President?

[saracat]

49. I still can't believe they let the Rethugs take back Congress because they wouldn't get off their

assess and vote.Some kept saying how few would stay home, how if all the Dems voted we would win. Obama asked them to vote. Nada. I have no idea what they will do.But if they don't vote down ticket, I don't care.People should be gearing up for those house and Senate races NOW.

[sudopod]

81. No one likes being held hostage. nt

[dionysus]

46. "Dems are a small minority." in MASS? ROFL

:rofl:

[nevergiveup]

3. That is 70% higher than DU

What am I missing?

[Starbucks Anarchist]

5. Perspective.

[ProSense]

9. It's sort of

hilarious that this is not welcomed news.

[CakeGrrl]

16. When a post that calls the President "small" and "pathetic" gets almost 260 net positive recs,

it's not at all surprising, though.

That's the prevailing attitude of this forum.

[Bobbie Jo]

67. What remains of this forum, that is. nt

[politicasista]

69. +2 n/t

for both post and reply.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Kaleva]

17. You are missing nothing. DU isn't a good representation of the views of the...

rank and file Dems.

[katandmoon]

6. But only Clinton got reelected.

[ProSense]

8. You're right,

President Obama hasn't been re-elected. When was the election?

[CakeGrrl]

14. I know, right?

It's bizarre how people are so anxious to write Obama's presidential epitaph they can't contain themselves.

What will this place be like if (WHEN) no Primary challenger materializes?

[Aramchek]

56. I guess the Haters will have to go hang out at the tree they like so much

and bitch about another 4 years of Obama.

;)

[pnwmom]

11. What does that mean? He's not the only Democrat

who was ever reelected. And Obama has only been in office for two years. And that drop in the House? Same thing happened to Clinton.

[obxhead]

7. Bush's approval rating among Republicans

stayed very high throughout his term as well. it was still at 60% in 2008, his lowest point.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/107128/bush-approval-rating-down-60-among-republicans.aspx

As I recall he was put in office by the courts in 2000, and put in office by a caving Kerry in 2004.

My point is that it will take more than Democrats to reelect Obama to office. Looking at only Dem polling gives you a very narrow picture.

[UrbScotty]

19. I think the point ProSense is trying to make

is that most Democrats still support him, despite what one may find on DU or elsewhere.

[obxhead]

29. That very well may be the case.

The problem with that is it will take more than the hardcore base to put any Democrat in the White House in 2012. Many seem to not understand the value of moderate voters and will casually toss them to the side.

I have watched Prosense over the last few months and get the feeling at times that as long as the hardcore base is good then Obama is just fine.



Polls can mean different things to different people.

Edit to add:
Du is made up of more than the Dem base as well. While some thoughts and statements may rise to the top more often I think the general mood of DU is a good indicator of where liberal to moderate Dem/Ind feel on Obama's job performance so far. Many are pissed off and it will take more work to get them back than an honest fight to keep them would have been.

[Cosmocat]

37. He's our guy, bottom line ...

People can get all indignant about how they refuse to "not question" him while getting in line with the Rs who are trying take him down ...

[Kaleva]

21. Twice as many moderates then liberals voted for Presdient Obama in 2008

If McCain and Obama had split the moderate vote 50/50, then McCain would have won the election. Moderates are the largest voting group, followed by conservatives and liberals are the smallest group.

[politicasista]

68. Yep. A "caving" candidate without Dem support,

but let's keep letting them and McAuliffe off the hook and blaming ONLY Kerry.


Thank goodness the Senator is one of the few decent ones left, but people will always find fault. Just like they find fault everyday with Obama. ProSense's post is spot on.

[obxhead]

79. It was not my intention to blame only Kerry.

My intention is to point out relying on the Dem base alone will not bring results in 2012 that all of us on this site seek, even if we are at each others throats now.

[politicasista]

80. ok n/t

[UrbScotty]

18. Really? Huh.

Well, I'm still an 81-percenter!

[jeanpalmer]

20. Independent 42%

That probably going to be the most important number.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[discopants]

23. great link

thanks for posting

[saracat]

25. What does it matter who Democrats approve of if they don't vote?

They sure didn't vote in 2010 and if they don't vote downticket in 2012 but just vote for president, they are worthless.JMHO.

[BzaDem]

27. Midterm elections never have much over 40% turnout. Turnout was actually slightly higher in 2010

than in past midterms. Voters have been dropping off in Midterms for decades -- it isn't a new phenomenon.

[saracat]

28. Actually turnout wasn't good for Dems. The GOP and Indies got out and voted.

and the Indies no longer break Dem, so it wasn't a good thing for us.I stand by the fact Dem's don't vote.We should be working on ensuring we have downticket voters in 3013 or nothing matters.

[pnwmom]

33. The only group of the Dem base that voted in significantly

lower numbers were black people. It doesn't surprise me that they could get more enthused about voting for Obama than members of the Congress that EVERYBODY loves to hate.

[EFerrari]

30. No, turnout was lower in 2010 than in 2006.

[Bluenorthwest]

52. The 2010 midterm got 69% turnout here in my State of Oregon

The highest for a midterm since 1990, in fact. We retained all our Democratic seats in Congress, and our new Governor is a Democrat, like the last one.
What State are you in?

[pnwmom]

32. Actually, the turnout was higher than a typical off year election.

[ProSense]

42. Why are you assuming that they're not going to vote? n/t

[saracat]

60. Because, in general, Democrats do NOT vote. Indies had a lot to do with the

2008 election and many of those Dems and Indies who voted for Obama only vote the top of the ticket. That is not helpful.

Anyone who has contributed in any meaningful way to Democratic politics knows this. There is a democratic turnout problem.That is a reason we worry about the weather on election day. bad weather? Dems don't vote. Youth vote? Please, don't make me laugh. Even now that most states have vote by mail, Dems are too lazy to mail in the ballots.

[Trajan]

26. What do you mean by 'approve' ?

I 'approve' of him ... He is the presumed Democratic President ...

On the other hand, shit is flying out of hand like I have never seen before ....

When does the pudding become the proof of the cook ?

I tell you what: This Social Security 'problem' has got me seriously unnerved ...

As if the removal of almost the entire manufacturing base wasn't enough: Now I have to consider my eventual retirement through the lens of absolute fear ...

Sheesh .... yeah ... I'm so fucking happy !

Here's to seven fucking points higher .... x(

[ProSense]

40. "shit is flying out of hand like I have never seen before "

Nothing is flying out of hand. The Republicans are doing what they always do. Do you think shutting down the government in the 90s was less chaotic.

The one difference now is that there is a lot more noise. There are too many people with ulterior motives and agendas, and they're all focused on one man, the President.

[Trajan]

47. Really ?

We are in the midst of a depression and deprivation the likes of which we have never seen in our own lives, and which the US hasnt seen in 80 years ...

And you feel this is like this every day of the week ? ... Nothing to see here ?

Bullshit ... It isnt about just 'noise' ... These are material facts .... There is measurable despair that goes beyond what I have ever seen in my entire life ...

I call bullshit on your assertions ... This situation is extraordinary ...

[ProSense]

51. "We are in the midst of a depression "

No, we're not in a depression. And if you check the news, things are improving.

[TheWraith]

35. Kicked and recommended.

People here need the reality check. I actually got told yesterday that DU and FireDogLake are representative of the Democratic base. :eyes:

[impik]

45. He's also 85% among Liberals. But 300 people here thinks they are the base

[WI_DEM]

48. They are part of the base but the base also includes blacks, hispanics, labor members, jews

women--any group that votes consistently democratic in elections. Many at DU think the left is the only part of the democratic base but just a part--and infact, many on the far left are not necessarily democrats but greens and other left leaning independents--which is actually what many of the people here are. In fact, Moderates could be described as part of the dem base too. Dems even won moderate voters in the midterm elections and usually win them in the presidential races too.

[Beetwasher]

61. No, They Are Not Part Of The Base And Never Were

They like to pretend they are part of the base, but Obama's base actually still supports him and will be voting for him and do not abandon him because he has not fulfilled every single promise he made....yet. Obama's base can be disappointed in some of his decisions and disagree with some of them and constructively criticize him, but they also realize and recognize that Obama is President during one of the most challenging political times in our Nations history and has still managed to accomplish quite a bit in a very short period of time.

[Aramchek]

57. I guess in every crowd you can find 300 complete idiots.

[Vinca]

50. The 81% must have given up following the news.

[frylock]

53. great! that should mean he will be re-elected..

freeing up people who have grown disillusioned to vote their conscience.

[Milo_Bloom]

54. OUCH! Carter had higher approval at this point in his presidency.

[ProSense]

58. True, but

his support among Democrats was 19 points lower than Obama's. On the other hand, Carter's support among Republicans was 21 points higher that this President's.

[Milo_Bloom]

59. "Support among democrats" is a BS spin number.

[ProSense]

63. OK

but lack of support among Democrats is never a good sign for a Democratic President.

Agree?

[Milo_Bloom]

65. It is a meaningless spin number either way.

[Aramchek]

55. I'm willing to bet that most of the Trashtalkers here on DU aren't even Democrats.

Repuke trolls and Naderites enjoy frolicking here.

[saracat]

62. And I am willing to assume most of the WH Apologia did NOTHING to elect

Democrats in the midterm(some have admitted as much) and think voting for Obama alone without considering the down ticket or any of the issues is enough to consider themselves a staunch Democrat.
A political party is not made up of supporters of a single candidate but workers and activists on all levels.Those who merely "vote" in a presidential GE do nothing to move any agenda forward.

[ProSense]

64. Wait,

you're arguing that Democrats will stay home in 2012 while claiming that the people who stayed home in 2010 were the Democrats who will likely show up in 2012?

Here's the deal on 2010: A lot of blue dogs turned Democrats off, some others decided to sit the election out and others typically don't vote in mid-terms.

Presidential elections and mid-terms are not the same thing.

[saracat]

72. Funny, most of your posting indicates it was the "moderates" who stayed home.

I do not necessarily agree with that.I am saying that if someone wants to say those who are not WH Apologia are "trolls and repukes", I can assume those that are WH apologia did nothing to advance the cause of the Democratic Party which is made up of far more than just candidate driven presidential voters.In my opinion, those folks aren't even Democrats. They are just casual voters.And most aren't even full voters brcause the majority don't even vote the full ballot.

I still say that in general, Democrats do not vote, and that has been the precedent and I am well aware of the difference between the general and a midterm.The GOP have a lot more 4 by 4's than we do. They consistently vote and they vote downticket.

I have no idea what will hsappen in 2012. The Indies did a lot to elect Obama, and many dems are now Indies and we have lost a lot of those votes.We might get them back. But using the argument that the alternayive is so much worse certainly hasn't worked so far. But the time to start working on the 2012 elections for the House and Senate is NOW. Without control of those the presidency means squat.
And we need a full out downticket GOTV push.

[Phx_Dem]

70. And, of course, that news deserves an unrec on DU.

:sarcasm:

:puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke:

[Name removed]

77. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bvar22]

76. bvar22's Approval Rate among those who Approve of bvar22....

...is 100%.

[Phx_Dem]

78. That's what usually gets rec'd on DU. n/t

[Hello_Kitty]

82. WTF difference does approval make since they didn't come out to vote?

In Arizona 65% of Republican voters turned out, compared with 55% of Dems. We got destroyed. Lost every statewide race and 2 Congressional seats.

And don't blame the Professional Left or the blogosphere. The average voter has no idea who Jane Hamsher is.