Will Dem Blogs Only Write About Polls Favorable To Dems?

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Media
Posted on Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 09:49:01 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Arkansas Democratic Representative Vic Snyder announced he will not seek re-election. Coincidentally, Firedoglake published a SUSA poll it sponsored showing Snyder in deep trouble the same day. Strangely enough, some bloggers are accusing FDL of having driven Snyder out of the race. This is sheer stupidity. But it is also something more troubling - an apparent willingness to be dishonest to forward the Party.

Daily Kos will be polling any number of races in the upcoming cycle. I know Markos and he will not pull his punches. Will he be attacked by these purveyors of know nothingism? Is this the first shot of a campaign to blame Democratic troubles on disgruntled progressives? If it is, the campaign needs some sharpening, as this attack on FDL because of Snyder's announcement is really dumb.

Speaking for me only

< NFL Weekend | Show Your Work >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Will Dem Blogs Only Write About Polls Favorable To Dems? | 23 comments (23 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Blame game will fail (none / 0) (#1)
by NealB on Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 10:00:07 AM EST

Even at dailyKos, the ratio of commentary seems to be shifting in favor of more outspokenness against the (obvious) shortcomings of the Democratic leadership in Congress, and even Obama. There's still a concerted effort by many commenters to say 'pay no attention to the man behind the curtain,' of course, but it looks to me like more and more are challenging it. I hope the discussion there gets more contentious; it's been pretty stale all year.

: Agreed. (none / 0) (#21)
by Jackson Hunter on Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 02:02:23 PM EST

I finally signed up pending this self correction back to be a policy blog instead of an Obama 527.
Jackson

Even worse (none / 0) (#2)
by andgarden on Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 10:12:25 AM EST

Chabot destroys Driehaus in a rematch.

Dems are in deep doo doo (none / 0) (#3)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 10:15:18 AM EST

And whining about Jane Hamsher ain't gonna change that.


Yup (none / 0) (#4)
by andgarden on Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 10:16:35 AM EST

Obama owns this too.


: absolutely (5.00 / 3) (#12)
by kempis on Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 11:44:12 AM EST

From the FDL link:

While 49% of voters in the district think it is a good idea to require everyone to carry health insurance, 46% think it is a bad idea. But when asked about the fine of up to 2% of their income for failure to comply, the vast majority of voters (70%) considered it unfair while 22% thought it was fair and 8% were undecided.
How on earth are Democrats going to sell this version of health care reform once people realize that the burden largely falls on them and not on insurers? Mandated private insurance, no public option, fines, insufficient subsidies--all at a time when economic hardship is higher than it's been in decades. This plays completely into the hands of the right.
The Democrats would have been much better off to stand their ground and fight for reforms that benefited people over insurers. They may have lost the battle, with insurers fighting them all the way, but they would have won with a public that was grateful to at last have a party act as its advocate. Instead, this administration was too timid, too interested to pass anything at all to put a check in the "done" column. And now the Dems may be "stick a fork in 'em" done as the middle and working class become irate at mandates, fines, and still ridiculously expensive insurance. I hope I'm wrong, but I think the Obama administration screwed up HCR so badly that the Dems will pay a price for a long time.

"apparent willingness to be dishonest" (none / 0) (#5)
by jtaylorr on Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 10:39:34 AM EST

I would have a word with FDL about that...

you find that post convincing (none / 0) (#6)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 10:46:17 AM EST

It seems to me that Silver wanted the questions in the poll to be biased for what he favors, as opposed to really critiquing the poll.

Silver knows stats, but he in no expert on market research.

His critique is laughable.

that said, all polls stink, and the FDL poll is no different. It had an agenda, but the topline numbers are what they are.

And Snyder quit - not because of this poll.


: Yes (none / 0) (#7)
by jbindc on Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 10:47:52 AM EST

I don't think a Congressman quit because of a poll posted on a blog, since most people in the country (or I bet, even in his district)do not read blogs.

Nate: (none / 0) (#15)
by NealB on Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 12:13:38 PM EST

Nate says the question about the fine needs context: "Why is there a fine? Well, because otherwise people will game the system and cause everyone else's premiums to go up by 30 or 40 percent. What's fair about that?"

I can't afford health insurance (and won't qualify for a subsidy) but, in fairness, I must purchase health insurance so everyone else's premiums don't go up.

Context we can believe in.


: Nate wants an explanation (none / 0) (#19)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 01:41:27 PM EST

favorable to his view.
that is not a complaint about polling technique.

Judging by Reid's tracking #s released ... (none / 0) (#8)
by magster on Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 11:11:54 AM EST

... yesterday (-9 in net approval/disapproval over 1 week period) Kos has no problem releasing unfavorable numbers.

-9!! Ouch!

: Why oh why! (none / 0) (#10)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 11:17:11 AM EST

Pres. sd. he gets 40,000 letters/day, (none / 0) (#9)
by oculus on Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 11:16:35 AM EST

reads some every night, and occasionally even looks at a blog!

I think (none / 0) (#11)
by Emma on Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 11:21:40 AM EST

Mark Schauer in MI's 7th is going to have a tough re-election campaign. Being a freshman Rep., all he has to run on is Obama's record and his support of it. I think he might run into some fundraising issues, too.

Disgruntled progressives (none / 0) (#13)
by Manuel on Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 11:46:26 AM EST

Disgruntled progressives do bear some responsibility. Many of them mistakenly thought that supporting Obama would automatically result in progressive policy. Now, many of them mistakenly think that not supporting Obama will automatically lead to an improvement. The right approach is to criticize the policies and avoid getting personal. Democrats need to master constructive criticism.

Constructive criticism = praise (none / 0) (#16)
by NealB on Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 12:21:08 PM EST

For a lot of politicians, any kind of criticism from the general public is like money in the bank. The more they're criticized by voters, the more they take in corporate contributions.

The responsibility progressives bear, disgruntled or not, is that they've been trying too hard to be constructive this past year. When we speak to them like children, they don't listen.


: Constructive = ideas not personalities (none / 0) (#18)
by Manuel on Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 12:47:02 PM EST

A lot of the anti Obama writing I am seeing here and elsewhere has been over the top as was a lot of the pro Obama writing that brought me to Talk Left in the first place. Now as then, I am seeing a lot of heat and no light. Something is wrong when I can't tell the difference between a Talk Left post and a tea party statement. I know that people are frustrated and disappointed but we need to take a step back.

But the Key Takeaway (none / 0) (#14)
by The Maven on Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 11:58:56 AM EST

is that, yes, inevitably, there will be a "campaign to blame Democratic troubles on disgruntled progressives," painting them (us?) as fair-weather friends ready to abandon their party. These folks -- Emanuel, Axelrod, et al. -- will then read exactly the wrong lesson from this: that grumpy progressives should be further marginalized and ignored, rather than viewed as likely canaries in the coal mine.

Shooting the messenger is never an effective strategy in the long run, and only serves to create a bubble mentality which becomes harder and harder to pierce.

Bill Clinton recently blamed gays... (none / 0) (#17)
by NealB on Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 12:22:50 PM EST

...for his failures to make progress with gay rights. We didn't get his back enough, he said, IIRC.


: Do you have a link for that? (none / 0) (#22)
by mexboy on Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 03:56:35 PM EST

I think you might be talking about Clinton responding to a heckler over DADT. If that is the case, Clinton was not blaming gays, he was holding Democrats responsible, which is way different. But I'll be happy to read the link you have, where he blamed gays.

Heh. (none / 0) (#20)
by Jackson Hunter on Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 02:00:39 PM EST

BTD, you're a FIREBAGGER! I see Jane has already co-opted you with her super secret twitter warriors. Such a shame, you coulda been a contender BTD!

(This is snark btw.)

Jackson

Another fun poll! (none / 0) (#23)
by jbindc on Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 04:01:37 PM EST

Steve Kornacki of Time reported yesterday that Coakley's internal polls, which showed her ahead of Brown (barely) 46-44 on Wednesday night, and are now showing her trailing 47-44.