Mar 04 2009

Conservatives Losing Ground With America

Published by at 8:23 am under All General Discussions

It’s clear why the administration and media are trying to hoist Rush Limbaugh as the figurehead for the GOP – it seems to be having a negative effect on America’s support for the GOP and conservatism:

Just 26 percent view the Republican Party positively, which is an all-time low for the party. That’s compared with 49 percent who have a favorable view of the Democratic Party.

In addition, a combined 56 percent say the previous Bush administration deserved “almost all” of the blame or a “major part” of the blame for the partisanship in Washington, and a combined 41 percent say the same of congressional Republicans.

By contrast, only 24 percent say that of congressional Democrats and just 11 percent say that of the Obama administration.

When you see a concerted effort out of DC between the Dems and the media you know it is a poll tested tactic to swing public opinion away from the right. And it must be working well. I agree that Rush can be the most elegant and concise communicator of general conservative principles.

But he is also a flame thrower who uses veiled insults against the opposition – which tends to backfire if you want people to admit they may have been mistaken about Obama and the Dems. If you don’t give people some face saving, instead of the mea culpa you get dug in heels and backlash.

Rush egomaniac schtick also doesn’t work well. While many know he is joking, to many he sounds like and arrogant donkey. Again, if you want people to have a change of heart, making them feel (even accidentally) inferior never works.

So after 6 weeks of disastrous economic news and crazy liberal policies the public still supports Obama by huge margins:

In the survey, 68 percent have a favorable opinion of the president, including 47 percent whose opinion is “very positive” — both all-time highs for Obama in the poll. Moreover, 67 percent say they feel more hopeful about his leadership and 60 percent approve of his job in the White House.

All the while Americans have increased their disdain for the right. Now, in anyone’s political score card that result, especially in this economic environment, scores an “F” for the current crop of conservative ‘leaders’ and spokes people. Conservatism needs a drastic restructuring if it is to be effective against the dems.

50 responses so far

50 Responses to “Conservatives Losing Ground With America”

  1. djl130 says:

    I think we have to be patient, AJ. We have to remember that a large percentage of that 60% does not read the constant stream of blogger posts. If they even listen to news, it will be MSM, where, there are no real threats to Obama’s popularity. It has only been 6 or 7 weeks. I think it will take a long time for much of this to sink in. As I watch my 401(k) sink into the quicksand of the economic morass, I am frustrated and angry and emotional. But then I remind myself readers of this blog and other blogs is really a miniscule percentage of the population. There are vast swaths who don’t keep up at the rate we do. But, having said that, like the Princess and the Pea, the bloggers eventually irritate the tender skin of the uninformed and it drifts to their consciousness. So, keep up the good work and eventually, the pea will wake up the ‘Hope and Change’ Sleeping Beauty class…

  2. […] A.J. Strata’s assessment of the poll is spot-on: [I]n anyone’s political score card that result, especially in this economic […]

  3. Neo says:

    Has anybody seen a story about the Fiscal Responsibility Summit ?

    It seems that Obama was saying something like .. Repubs ought to take part .. then a Repub Rep said they would if they could get Pelosi to give them a seat at the table .. Obama responded with some stuff about obstructionism (i.e. “The Won” wasn’t going to tell Pelosi to give them a seat).

    This seems to be the ultimate “Catch-22” when it comes to the Republicans position on the Hill.

  4. kathie says:

    Conservatism as expressed by Goldwater types was popular for a very few until Reagan came and could articulate conservatism in governing principals such as selfreliance, freedom through strength, the value of every life and so on. Rush doesn’t think in policy but in basic principals and how those principals play out, why those principals are as true today as they ever were. I haven’t seen or heard someone who was as good as Reagan yet to lead, well maybe Fred Thompson, but that person will emerge, and we will all know it.

  5. Stephen says:

    I believe you’re missing the point. Just look at Drudge’s blaring headline, and the original piece by Politico. If Rush was having the negative affect on the party, as you argue, there simply would be no need for such a concerted effort to attack and silence him. This is coming from the very top (i.e. Obama WH), with Carville, Begala et al. driving it. They MM has been pounding this for a couple of weeks now. The did the same thing to George Bush for 8 years, and to Sarah Palin throughout the election. Why? Because Rush is the most effective voice opposing this administration, and he must be having success. You don’t hear the White House going after AJ Strata for his blog posts. You don’t hear the White House going after any moderates who just want to go along to get along. This story is huge. The tactics from the WH are scary. Think about it.

  6. WWS says:

    Meanwhile, unemployment keeps going up by 700,000 per month.

  7. kathie says:

    Read this by the ever beautiful VDH, I think it is at PJM

    VICTOR DAVIS HANSON: The Great Divider.

  8. kathie says:

    Read this by the ever beautiful VDH, I think it is at PJM

    VICTOR DAVIS HANSON: The Great Divider.

  9. OLDPUPPYMAX says:

    When will you and other moderates-who-claim-to-be-conservatives understand that the left does not WANT to be bipartisan. And its supporters are not open to reason or talk or fact or truth.

  10. PMII says:

    Rush is right. He’s almost always right.

    But in the end, it not going to be a new message. The masses will vote for Republicans because they are sick of the dewmocrats. Just like the democrats came to power. The only reason power ever changes.

    I would love to see term limits – I’m sick of life time policians that are clueless. I would love to see an end to ear marks. And I would love to see a polician understand that most gov’t contracts go up because the gov’t changes them again & again.

  11. Jeff Z says:

    There’s a critical flaw in this poll’s sampling. On page 22, F b/c, the sample’s voter breakdown is:

    Obama: 54.32%

    McCain: 40.74%

    Other: 4.93%

    (http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/090303_NBC-WSJ_poll.pdf)

    vs. the actual election% #’s:

    Obama: 52.9%

    McCain: 45.7%

    Other: 1.6%

    (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2008)

    (This was 81% of the sample; 14% didn’t vote, 2% weren’t sure (?!), and 3% refused to say or weren’t sure.)

    This is not to deny that the Republicans have a whole lot of thinking to do, but it also shows the Republicans are more than adequately positioned for 2010. It’s strictly up to them.

    To expand (a little) on the results:

    First of all, it’s clear that Obama is in a typical honeymoon period, that is of little applicability to the 2010 congressional elections. (http://www.gallup.com/poll/116026/Assessing-Obama-Job-Approval-One-Month-Mark.aspx)

    Second, the “Other” percentage is an anomaly. Applying the correct percentages to this poll, changes the picture greatly. Moving away from the ephemera of the moment and looking at the 2010 congressional elections, look at another key stat, the respondents’ opinion of the Democratic Party, combining the positive and somewhat positive results:

    02/09: 49%

    Previous:
    12/08: 49%

    Last pre-election poll
    late 10/08: 39%

    Results are listed back to 2000, with the highest being in January of 2000, at 50%, and the lowest being in July of 2006, at 32%. And just to give an idea of how well they predict the future, in 2000 the popular Dems did gain 5 Senate seats, but none at all in the house, while the unpopular Dems of 2006 picked up 6 seats in the Senate and 31 seats in the House.

    This means that the Dem approval is hitting up at its historical high point, but it also means very little about the 2010 elections.

    Anyway, attempting to apply the actual voter percentages to this poll is impossible, because only assumptions can be worked with, such as that the Obama voters would be the only ones who would rate the Dems favorably, or that only Dems would rate the Dem politicians favorably, which brings up another point, party ID:

    Party ID of poll respondents (summary of several variations):

    Dem: 53%

    Rep: 30%

    Independent, etc: 17%

    With these sort of respondent numbers, no wonder that Peter Hart was so constantly “amazed” by his findings.

    If Obama’s economic policies successfully defy economic history and the laws of mathematics, I suppose these percentages may hold in the 2010 election, but otherwise, no.

    The Republicans’ real opportunity is to gain a powerful mandate from the 2010 elections by running on a strong, specific platform, rather than just hanging around as the, “well, they can’t be any worse” alternative.

  12. Redteam says:

    The ONLY reason the election turned out the way it did was many people apparently for some reason I can’t figure out, think Obama is ‘charismatic’ ( he makes me want to barf) and the Republicans ran, well, McCain, who is the opposite of charismatic. There are many charismatic Republicans in the US, why can’t we get just one to run for President. Let’s face it, the Democrats selected McCain to run against their guy for obvious reasons. He was the one they were sure they could beat. The Repubs HAVE GOT to change their primary system so that Repubs select their own candidate. Maybe we could have most of the elections on the same day, I know it was determined long before the people in Louisiana voted, so we had no input into it at all. Obama did not win a mandate, he got elected by default (he had all the news coverage). Maybe the Repubs can find their own “the One” before long and blow them out of the water. It’s not conservatism that’s losing, it’s the brand of Republicanism that we’re seeing. When the only difference you see in a politician is an R or D after their name, what difference does it make which one you vote for. We should require a C after their name. (for Conservative, of course).

  13. crosspatch says:

    So I am reading this article at Politico when what I thought was a brilliant strategic move came to mind.

    What Limbaugh should do is take a week off and go golfing and put Professor Williams on his show as a guest host. That might not be possible with the professor’s work schedule on short notice but here is the line of thinking:

    Apparently the Dems are setting up to portray Limbaugh as the “face of the Republican Party” and begin an all out attack by basically using Rush as a strawman to represent all Republicans and anyone who opposes Obama. Well, if Rush isn’t talking, they don’t have anything to shoot at. It takes the wind right out of their sails. At the same time there IS a person talking in these economic times (Professor Williams) that CAN address the various bailouts and other stuff with a high degree of authority.

    So their primary target disappears and then they start getting inconvenient rhetoric from a completely unforeseen direction. And from someone who absolutely can not be portrayed as an “Angry White Man” because Prof. Williams is black and doesn’t resemble Archie Bunker in the least, besides being *extremely* articulate and able to put complex economic concepts into language people can understand … he is a teacher, after all.

    It would blow their political strategy right out of the water and Rush would get a nice week off. And besides, it would be an awesome public service for us to hear what Prof. Williams has to say right about now.

  14. Frogg says:

    Rush to the President: “Debate Me”
    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/just_11_of_republicans_say_limbaugh_is_their_party_s_leader

    The food fight is on!

    While Obama is declaring war on Rush; Chavez in declaring war on his opposition media also:

    Chavez Declares War on Opposition Media in Venezuela
    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,504466,00.html

    Do Obama and Chavez sit around and have Marxist strategy meetings or something?

    I think Obama’s attack on private citizens (Joe the Plumber, Rick Santelli, Rush Limbaugh, etc) is going to backfire.

  15. Redteam says:

    No, Rush should not cut and run. This is part of the Tricksters game. Divide and conquer.

  16. crosspatch says:

    I didn’t say “cut and run” … I said screw up the opponent’s strategy and “zing” them at the same time. Professor Williams has guest hosted for Rush on several occasions. Now would be the *perfect* time for him to do so again.

  17. lurker9876 says:

    Rush should continue and run while the Republicans form a coalition with Rush. That’s the only way to go. I don’t think Rush should go and play golf at this time.

    And the conservatives will gain it back soon.

  18. GuyFawkes says:

    Actually, that’s not a bad idea (speaking from the opposite side of the political isle). However, Limbaugh’s ego would NEVER allow him to remove himself from the spotlight like this.

    If he was capable of doing something like that, then he would have been capable of simply ignoring even one of the three GOP politicians who said something about him, and wouldn’t have forced them to come crawling back to him with an apology.

    Rush cares about himself first, and everything else next.

  19. GuyFawkes says:

    Oh, yes – *DO* please form a coalition around a guy with a 28% favorable rating. Look how popular he is with Independents! Yup – that’s a sure path back to power!

  20. ivehadit says:

    Now Guy, we have told you to watch out using those polls that have “cooked” numbers, LOL!

    Again, let’s ask the question: WHY is James Carville and the entire democrat party including their leader, wasting his time attacking someone who is “unpopular” and disliked? Are they stupid? Are they insane?

    No comment.