The NY Times, Keeping Hope Alive

The NY Times headlines great news for the Democrats!

Poll Finds Most Americans Displeased With Congress

Dead Tree readers of a liberal persuasion get even more encouragement in this version, (sub heds not on-line):

Only 25% in Poll Approve of the Congress

An Echo of 1994 Findings

Links to Special Interests Are cited - Standing of Bush Also Lags

The Democrats are going to party like its 1994!  Adam Nagourney and Janet Elder return to this in the second paragraph:

The disdain for Congress is as intense as it has been since 1994, when Republicans captured 52 seats to end 40 years of Democratic control of the House and retook the Senate as well.

It is not until paragraph five that Times readers get a whiff of reality:

What is more, it seems highly unlikely Democrats will experience a sweep similar to the one Republicans experienced in 1994. Most analysts judge only about 40 House seats to be in play at the moment, compared with over 100 seats in play at this point 12 years ago, in large part because redistricting has created more safe seats for both parties.

One of the many things we love about the Times is that it has a comprehensive guide to the election, including current projections for Senate, House, and Gubernatorial elections.  However, the Nagourney/Elder on-line story does not include a link to that feature.  Why not?  I can't even guess (but I will!) - maybe the Times only feels comfortable doling out exposure to reality in small doses.  [In that case, Times readers really don't want to see this LA Times story based on a Times/Bloomberg poll: "Bush and GOP Making Gains Among Voters"]

Anyway, per the NY Times election guide, the House races look like this:

Safe Dem, 189; Leaning Dem, 18; Toss-up, 15; Leaning Rep, 22; Safe Rep, 191

When we posted on this on Sept 4, the Times called the races as follows:

Safe Dem, 189; Leaning Dem, 17; Toss-Up, 16; Leaning Rep, 21; Safe Rep, 192

So in roughly two weeks a "Leaning Dem" has become a toss-up and a Safe Rep has migrated to "Leaning Rep".  Tear out the front page.

With today's numbers, to get to a majority of 218 the Dems need to win every safe and leaning seat and pick up 12 of the 16 toss-ups.  Not exactly a shoo-in.

Now, the obvious reason that this will not be 1994 is that the Democrats have not been able to unite behind any strong message other than "We Are Not Bush" (Maybe Hugo Chavez of Venezuela can help them liven that up a bit).  Nagourney and Elder tackle this head on in paragraph, hmm, thirteen:

In the poll, 50 percent said they would support a Democrat in the fall Congressional elections, compared with 35 percent who said they would support a Republican. But the poll found that Democrats continued to struggle to offer a strong case for turning government control over to them; only 38 percent said the Democrats had a clear plan for how they would run the country, compared with 45 percent who said the Republicans had offered a clear plan.

Following their 2002 debacle the Democrats were criticized for trying to beat something with nothing.  I'll reiterate - here we go again.  To win this election the Democrats need to run against George Bush and run away from their base; it's hard to do both.

MORE:  Amongst punters, the prospects for Republican control of the House have moved up to 56% at TradeSports and 55% in the Iowa Electronic Markets.

DID BUSH MOVE THE NEEDLE?  Nagourney and Elder say no:

The Times/CBS News poll also found that President Bush did not improve his own or his party’s standing through the intense campaign of speeches he made and events he attended surrounding the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

McQ at Q&O says yes, but all he has as evidence are the poll results themselves - where are the years of journalistic experience that Nagourney, Elder, and the Times editors bring to the table?  Evidence?  C'mon, we are talking about the reality-based community here.

MEANWHILE, ON THE OTHER COAST:  From the LA Times:

Bush and GOP Making Gains Among Voters

The LA TImes explains that, while the absolue levels are not good for the Reps, the direction of the poll results suggest the tide is now running in the Republican's favor:

WASHINGTON — President Bush's approval rating has reached its highest level since January, helping to boost the Republican Party's image across a range of domestic and national security issues just seven weeks before this year's midterm election, a new Times/Bloomberg poll has found.

The survey spotlights a continuing array of Republican vulnerabilities, but it also offers the first evidence in months that the GOP may be gaining momentum before November's battle for control of Congress.

Democrats hold a lead in the poll, 49% to 39%, when registered voters are asked which party they intend to support for Congress this year. But that advantage may rest on softening ground: On virtually every comparison between the parties measured in the survey, Republicans have improved their position since early summer.

In particular, Republicans have nearly doubled their advantage when voters are asked which party they trust most to protect the nation against terrorism — the thrust of Bush's public relations blitz in recent weeks.

Comments

[sad]

..the next 48 hours.

chronological hours or business hours?

[clarice]

Harkin OTOH embraced Chavez' speech.
http://www.radioiowa.com/gestalt/go.cfm?objectid=020BFC5A-FA7D-42CC-9BA6A4ED9DA063B8

Karl, how do you do it, you evil genius!

[Rick Ballard]

SunnyDay,

I get an error message on that URL. I've got the Walton Order up at Flares in HTML (I've corrected the translation as well as I can.)

[SunnyDay]

Rick, Thanks. OK it's not public then - yours is better anyway. That's a nice site for collaborating, but you have to send email invites.

I thought maybe you had left. :)

[SunnyDay]

That's Paperport 9 - the OCR isn't perfect, but it's not bad.

[Barney Frank]

Vote Democrat and Die...Free

Jeez, I praised this phrase the other day as an excellent distillation of the Dems dillema.

Now it's being taken up as a rallying cry with the addition of 'free' on the end.

I suspect the Democrats will have an easy time selling the 'free' part to voters. The 'die' part may be a little tougher sell.
I suspect most voters would prefer Gen Patton's formulation of "The object of war isn't to die for your country, but to make the other bastards die for theirs"

[cathyf]

Vote Democrat and Die...Free

*snort* Everybody knows that it'll be a lot more expensive for the democrats to kill us. It always is...

[PeterUK]

Freakwit
"Vote Democrat and Die...Free"

Shouldn't that be "Buy one Democrat and get one free"?

[Gary Maxwell]

Vote Democrat and Smother in Taxes like Michigan and Massachusetts

there is a truth in advertising law right? If applied to politics, this would be the only allowed outcome.

[Gary Maxwell]

Hey are the lefties starting to trot out the old A Loss is really a Win meme already? Gosh maybe there is hope for the reality based community after all. Cuz there does not appear to be any Tsunami coming. And if Texas 22 goes their way, it will be for 2 years exactly or Lampson will be lynched by the KOSites for the votes he made to try to keep the seat.

[Syl]

freaknik

"Live with whatever restrictions we deem necessary on personal liberty or die"

What about FREE SPEECH! You don't care about fighting for FREE SPEECH do you.

You think it's okay for you-know-who to get violent on your a** if you say something they don't like?

I thought FREE SPEECH had something to do with personal liberty.

Guess I was wrong. Or you are.

[lurker]

"If the dems wrest control of either house it will be a victory for constitutional government and checks and balances. If the repubs fend off the challenge, expect greater executive power that our founders intended."

Clinton's ECHELON program proved the exact opposite of what the dems hoped to achieve for constitutional government and checks and balances.

Bush's NSA terrorist surveillans program proved the exact opposite of what the republicans hoped to achieve for constitutional government and checks and balances.

[PeterUK]

"This country works better with divided government."

Half Republican and half al Qaeda?

[PeterUK]

"Vote Democrat and Die...Free"

Then again ,they will probably puy a tax on it.

[lurker]

"I will have a hard time voting for McCain as long as one of his trusted advisors is Armitage."

Powell, too.

McCain screwed up one too many times.

"Vote Democrat and Get Free Health Care"

But then, again, that will most definitely run the country down.

[owl]

The Long National Nightmare will not be over even if the stupid-3 let the MSM convince us all that they accepted Bush's compromise (defeat).

Oh no. McCain comes up in January to head the Armed Services Committee, as stup-3 steps down. Just think about that one.

Will there be HELL to pay? Has Rummy found himself a foxhole yet? Just blows the mind..

[owl]

McCain: You say you need something for the war Mr President? Lets do it this (my) way.

[freaknik]

Well I see McCain et al. just capitulated. So there'll be lots of torturer positions opening up in the federal government.

Just show 'em what you do to logic, and you guys are in a shoo-in for the job!

[lurker]

Perfect logically for McCain to agree to what is the right thing to do for the terrorists.

CIA will be able to continue to perform its job.

Brian Ross was interviewed by Rush Limbaugh. Brian says the following:

Techniques McCain Wants to Ban Broke 14 Al-Qaeda Prisoners AND all of those terrorists threats would not have been thwarted. Otherwise, would McCain, Graham, and Warner have finally seen the real picture after the Brookly Bridge was destroyed?

[lurker]

It’s 1938 All Over Again

Bernard Lewis says so.

So does my Mother.

[lurker]

Iraqi Documents Contradict Senate Report that Saddam Regime was “Intensely Secular” (Translation)

"' “Saddam's regime is intensely secular and is wary of Islamic revolutionary movements”. This is a quote from page 77 of the Senate Select Intelligence Committee (SSIC) report on Saddam regime WMD and his ties to terrorism issued on September 8th 2006. The disgraceful and politically motivated SSIC report wanted to mislead the public that Saddam regime was strongly secular and the report wanted to make his relation with AL Qaeda as an impossible one because Al Qaeda is an extreme muslim group despite the fact that documents already have shown a meeting between Saddam Intelligence Service and Bin Laden in Sudan in 1995.

However there are two documents dated September 2002 that totally destroy this notion that Saddam regime was “secular”. Document CMPC-2004-005167.pdf is an Islamic FATWA for JIHAD against the United States and its allies because of the coming war against Iraq. This FATWA for JIHAD was issued by the International Islamic Conference Organization in Iraq and called on all the muslims in the world to use any available means to fight the United States and that it is the duty of each muslim to conduct JIHAD against the US. Another document, CMPC-2004-005285.pdf, contains memos from the writer of the FATWA for JIHAD to Saddam deputy Prime Minister and head of the Iraqi Military Industrialization Ministry informing him that they sent him copies of the FATWA for JIHAD and then a response form Saddam deputy Prime Minister thanking him for the copies."

[lurker]

Ahmadinejad Spells It Out For The CFR

Wonder what Brent Scowcroft is now thinking...

[AST]

I think the Republicans should sponsor a Chaves speaking tour around the country. Maybe we could arrange for the head of Hezbollah to team up with him.

The more we're reminded of the nature of the hatred of us, the less likely people will be to vote for Democrats. Tom Harkin was asked about Chaves' speech and said he didn't hear the speech but could understand why foreign leaders would be offended by Bush's policies.

[JM Hanes]

lurker:

Apparently the folks who insist Saddam was a confirmed secularist missed his mosque building spree too.

[boris]

Brian Ross was interviewed by Rush Limbaugh

Rush played excerpts from the O'Reilly interview. There's video of it at http://hotair.com/archives/2006/09/20/bombshell-abc-independently-confirms-success-of-cia-torture-tactics" target="_blank">HotAir.

[PeterUK]

JM Hanes,
...and the Koran written in Saddam Hussein's own blood.

It would be interesting to know who started this lie/misconception of,seems part of the "outing" school of information.

[richard mcenroe]

Freaknik --

WWI
Korea
Bay of Pigs
Vietnam
Desert One in Iran
USS Cole
Khobar Towers
Somalia

Vote Democrat and Die... for nothing.

[Good Lt]

Here, Dan Dirito sez;

This recent polling data tells me that voters have a clear perspective on the war in Iraq...perhaps more cogent than either Party. They feel it is being handled poorly, they know what a civil war looks like, they believe Congress has failed to do its part in guiding and overseeing the executive branch, and they realize that the notion of exporting democracy to the Middle East is a Bush Doctrine that fails to recognize the realities in the region. Finally, they believe that Middle East stability is important and that a withdrawal that leaves Iraq in chaos may well be detrimental to the United States.

That, my friends, is one spot on analysis and suggests that voters have discerned fact from fiction with an impressive demonstration of acuity. Perhaps both parties will someday learn that the truth is, in the final analysis, the most powerful campaign strategy available. Don't hold your breath.

And at Q& O he says (Control-F the phrase "thoughttheater"):

This recent polling data tells me that voters have a clear perspective on the war in Iraq...perhaps more cogent than either Party. They feel it is being handled poorly, they know what a civil war looks like, they believe Congress has failed to do its part in guiding and overseeing the executive branch, and they realize that the notion of exporting democracy to the Middle East is a Bush Doctrine that fails to recognize the realities in the region. Finally, they believe that Middle East stability is important and that a withdrawal that leaves Iraq in chaos may well be detrimental to the United States.

That, my friends, is one spot on analysis and suggests that voters have discerned fact from fiction with an impressive demonstration of acuity. Perhaps both parties will someday learn that the truth is, in the final analysis, the most powerful campaign strategy available. Don’t hold your breath.
- - -
Nice try, Danny Boy. Knock it off.

[Lug]

I would eat ground glass before I would vote for a Democrat!!!

[heating]

If you have looked into solar energy as a method for heating your home, panels are usually the first things that come up. There are, however, other unique methods.

The Solar Heating Aspect You Have Never Heard of Before

The power of the sun is immense. The energy in one day of sunlight is more than the world needs. The problem, of course, is how does one harness this power. Solar panels represent the obvious solution, but they have their downside. First, they can be expensive depending upon your energy needs. Second, they do not exactly blend in with the rest of your home.

Passive solar heating represents a panel free method of harnessing the inherent energy found in the sun for heating purposes. If you come out from a store and open the door of your car in the summer, you understand the concept of passive solar heating. A wide variety of material absorbs sunlight and radiates the energy back into the air in the form of heat. Passive solar heating for a home works the same way as the process which overheats your car in the parking lot.