polls

From Gallup:

The percentage of Americans identifying as political independents increased in 2011, as is common in a non-election year, although the 40% who did so is the highest Gallup has measured, by one percentage point. More Americans continue to identify as Democrats than as Republicans, 31% to 27%.

This year will be even more interesting. There's a huge struggle going on in the Republican Party right now, where the establishment seems to be pushing Romney and the rest want anyone but Romney. This infighting could end up pushing more people to the Independent column should Mitt Romney become the nominee.

If all this helps rid us of a two party system that is slanted against true democracy, the better we will all be. It's time to get rid of this system and move to more independence of our elected leaders. So many times we see politicians have to represent their party instead of the people they are elected to represent and that is anything but American.

So what about you? Would you like to see political parties go away? Let me know in the comments.

Apparently a majority of Americans. In 23 polls conducted asking if tax hikes should also be included to help reduce the deficit, a vast majority said "yes". An average of 65 percent of respondents to be exact. That's almost 2/3 of this country. The responses ranged from 56%-76%, with the low number being attributed to a right-wing Rasmussen poll.

And I thought John Boehner was going to listen to the people! Silly me.....

Last night’s State of the Union address by President Obama received some of the highest marks ever. One poll has 91% of the viewers approving of what the President said, while another had the approval at 84%. A vast majority of this country likes the plans the President laid out and that’s a number you just can’t ignore.

Or can you?

Well if you look around at the right wing sites today, you will quickly see them dismissing the speech:

If you were expecting a moderate Obama or a bold Obama, you were disappointed, most likely, by Tuesday's State of the Union Address. In a nutshell: Obama proposed a ton of new domestic spending, promised to freeze discretionary spending (attained by savaging defense), abstained from offering specifics on entitlement reform and largely ignored major foreign policy changes. Moreover, the delivery was so listless that this State of the Union address likely garnered less applause than any address in recent memory.

I didn’t know the “applause-o-meter” was the key to success in SOTU addresses. The last SOTU address that saw poll numbers like this was in 2002, right after 9/11.

President Obama laid out a clear plan for a successful America last night. The Republicans won’t have anything to do with it simply because Obama laid it out. Numerous polls have already shown that the honeymoon is over with the Republican controlled House, and with the support the President saw from his speech, fighting the plans laid out will help keep the newly found Republican power in check. As matter of fact it could lead to a one term win for them.

OK just shoot me now:

Democrats are hoping they've found a new weapon for the November midterm election — the vulnerable appeal of teen pop star Justin Bieber. "Bieber can't vote in our midterms (he's both too young and too Canadian)," runs a get-out-the-vote clip that's being showcased by the liberal outreach group Campus Progress, a college spin-off of the Center for American Progress. The spot argues that Americans over 18 should show up at the polls to look out for Bieber's best interests. "Whomever we elect in the 2010 midterm elections will impact his future and ours," says one of the clip's participants. "So tell your parents, your grandparents, your Facebook friends... If they won't do it for you, ask them to do it for Bieber."

On the other hand, this could be a tool to bring in that Catholic priest vote.

CNN is asking if financial regulation will hurt the Democrats fundraising:

They do well with Wall Street, but Democrats may now risk biting the hand that feeds many of them -- as President Obama and top party leaders press for financial reform.

And a key question arises: will there be a squeeze on the money flowing from New York into Democrats' campaign coffers?

The answer is not so simple.

It’s funny, but the right has been trying to paint the Democrats as being in the pocket of Wall Street. That has been pretty evident for the past few years, but when Republicans held power that wasn’t the case:

Wall Street has been a long-time cash cow for both parties -- with the party in power or assuming power the biggest beneficiary.

An OpenSecrets.org analysis found that in the 2008 election cycle, $89,221,944 was given to Democrats; $68,022,536 for Republicans.

And if you look at the graph supplied by CNN, you quickly see that Wall Street does always follow the party of power

So we really aren’t sure if new regulation will hurt the Democrats. There’s a chance that it could end up hurting the Republicans. It depends on what happens in the polls this year and what our political landscape looks like going into 2012.

I’ve been reading more on that Gallup poll from yesterday that shows more Americans now supporting health care reform than opposing it. For a refresher, here’s the results:

What’s interesting is the headline accompanying this poll:

By Slim Margin, Americans Support Healthcare Bill's Passage

I don’t really remember pollsters considering a 9% margin “slim”. Perhaps all the talk of the “60% majority” of the Senate has confused the people at Gallup.

Then we have those on the right trying to spin this away. For example, here is Allahpundit:

And so it came to be, after a day’s worth of nonstop coverage of History!, that ObamaCare’s gotten a bounce.

What is really interesting here is when you look back at recent history. In the heat of last summer, during those viral townhall meetings, we saw support for health care reform plummet. There was 24/7 news coverage of the yelling and screaming, but if you ask anyone on the right that coverage had nothing to do with the wavering support. Sorry guys but you can’t have it both ways here.

Wow they are dropping like flies today:

Embattled Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd (D) has scheduled a press conference at his home in Connecticut Wednesday at which he is expected to announce he will not seek re-election, according to sources familiar with his plans.

Dodd's retirement comes after months of speculation about his political future, and amid faltering polling numbers and a growing sense among the Democratic establishment that he could not win a sixth term. It also comes less than 24 hours after Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) announced he would not seek re-election.

State Attorney General Richard Blumenthal is widely expected to step into the void filled by Dodd and, at least at first blush, should drastically increase Democrats' chances of holding the seat.

Dodd has been trailing the Republicans in recent polls, so this is actually good news. People are predicting that Blumenthal will have a much better chance.

UPDATE:

This tweet from PPP Polling explains why a Dodd retirement is great news for Democrats:

Our CT polling is confirming a Blumenthal/Dodd swap would make the seat uber safe for Dems

I got a feeling they have talked Blumenthal into running and figured this would be a great way to soften the blow of Dorgan retiring. The timing makes perfect sense.

Once this bill gets out of Congress and President Obama signs it, then I really hope he is ready for a sell job for the rest of his time in office.

Let’s examine the facts. The current polling shows the public very turned off by this bill:

That alone gives the Republicans an excellent platform in 2010 and 2012. Given the fact that the good parts of the health care bill won’t really be felt for 5 years, that spells extremely bad news for Democrats and can turn into trouble at the polls.