Widgetized Section

Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone

New polls show Republicans in deep, deep trouble

By
October 10, 2006

Democratic candidates have a big edge on Republicans one month before elections to decide control of Congress, a flurry of new polls said on Monday, with ratings for President George W. Bush and Congress dropping after the Capitol Hill sex scandal.

A USA Today/Gallup poll gave Democrats a 23-point edge on Republicans in the battle for Congress, while a CNN poll gave Democrats a 21-point lead.

A ABC News/Washington Post poll found Democrats held a 54-41 percent lead in the congressional horse race among registered and likely voters, which ABC said was the biggest Democratic lead this close to election day in more than 20 years.

And a new CBS News/New York Times poll showed 79 percent of respondents thought Republican leaders were more concerned with politics than the well-being of the teenage congressional assistants who received lewd messages from former Republican Rep. Mark Foley of Florida.

Republicans, already battered by public doubts about the Iraq war and Bush’s leadership, have been scrambling to contain the fallout from the unfolding sex scandal and keep it from sinking their chances on November 7.

Democrats must pick up 15 House seats and six Senate seats to reclaim control of Congress.

Several recent polls have shown declining approval ratings for Republicans in the last week amid a torrent of questions about how the party’s congressional leaders handled the Foley issue.

The CNN poll found 52 percent believed Republican House of Representatives Speaker Dennis Hastert of Illinois should resign, while the CBS poll found 46 percent favored his resignation.

FOLEY SCANDAL

The CBS poll found two-thirds of voters said the Foley scandal would make little difference in how they cast their ballots, but 21 percent said it would make them more likely to vote Democratic.

The ABC poll said the Foley scandal was a more distant concern than Iraq for voters, who doubted whether Democrats would have handled the scandal any better.

The ABC poll found 63 percent said the Iraq war was not worth fighting, a record for that poll. A new high for the poll of 53 percent of respondents disapproved of Bush’s handling of the broader U.S. campaign against terrorism — a supposed White House strength.

The new USA Today/Gallup poll showed Bush’s public approval rating at 37 percent, down from 44 percent in mid-September. The approval rating for Congress was 24 percent, down 5 percentage points from last month.

The ABC News poll had Bush’s approval rating at 39 percent, down from 42 percent in early September.

Asked which party’s candidate they would support if the election were held today, the USA Today/Gallup poll found Democrats favored by 23 percentage points among all voters questioned, including likely voters, registered voters and adults.

That was the largest lead Democrats have held among registered voters since 1978, and up dramatically from last month’s 48 percent-48 percent tie among likely voters, USA Today said.

The CNN poll found 58 percent of likely voters say they plan to vote for Democrats in November, compared with 37 percent who say they will vote for Republicans. The 21-point gap is 5 points wider that it was in a CNN poll last week.

USA Today said its poll found two-thirds of respondents were following the Foley scandal very or somewhat closely. More than half, 54 percent, said Republican leaders who knew about Foley’s actions did not act against him earlier “for political reasons.”

Government corruption, Iraq and terrorism were the three most important issues listed in the USA Today poll, with respondents saying Democrats would do a better job on all three. Democrats had a 21-point edge on handling corruption and a 17-point advantage on Iraq.

The traditional Republican advantage on handling terrorism vanished, USA Today said, with Democrats holding a 5-point edge.


© 2006 Reuters

18 Responses to New polls show Republicans in deep, deep trouble

  1. keith

    October 10, 2006 at 3:10 pm

    The only poll that matters is when we all go to the REAL polls on Election Day and cast REAL ballots. Anything reported before then is just eyewash.

    For example, noticeably absent in this story is ANY news about polling for third party candidates. That is, there’s absolutely NO mention of any of that polling whatsoever, even to lump those results in with those who are still “undecided”. In fact, I seriously doubt if questions regarding third party candidates were even ASKED. That’s because the “Republicrats” have now hopelessly corrupted even the polling “game” so that those results will ALWAYS favor their entrenched duopoly.

    It is vitally important that we all remember that, despite what we’re continually being told by the media, we DO still have other choices besides voting for one or the other of the “Republicrat’s” totally corrupt political candidates! This Election Day, I urge everyone to do your homework and then exercise your “write in” option to send the entrenched Republicrat duopoly a strong, personal message that you are absolutely FED UP with the hopelessly corrupt antics of BOTH of them!

    As I’ve said, the longest journey always begins with the first few steps.

  2. John Hanks

    October 10, 2006 at 8:58 pm

    The Democrats are simply another corporate party so it cannot address the underlying problems that we have to face with global warming. Mafia Capitalism is on a collision course with any chance we might have at survival.

    We need to start a deliberate depression by eliminating most advertising and abolishing most corporations. As we have less, we must learn how to get more out of what we have, and we must learn the ancient social arts that all third world countries practice. We can always talk, read, and write for instance.

    We must do everything we can to give a nation full of suckers some smarts.

  3. Eric

    October 10, 2006 at 10:33 pm

    I would also like to have a third alternative.

    But to claim that the democrats are no different is just stupid.

    If Gore had triumphed rather than Bush, would we have:

    1) Spent $500 Billion in Iraq?
    2) Chopped interest and dividend taxes
    3) Ignored environmental laws
    4) Tortured prisoners
    5) Engage in illegal wiretaps

    The list goes on.

  4. Jerry Pardue

    October 10, 2006 at 10:59 pm

    Your are right, and the list goes on. If Al Gore was President, would we have doubled the national debt from 4.5 trillion to 9 trillion and counting with two more years to go. Would, by any stretch of the imagination, would there be 2,744 dead American soldiers that succumbed on foreign soil.
    Remember, when called to serve, Bush chose the national guard and then deserted and Al Gore served and obtained an honorable discharge the right way, he “earned it”.

  5. Judy Bodnar

    October 11, 2006 at 12:13 am

    Until a third party with a canidate, that can exibit its ability to do more than merely take enough votes away from an opposing canidate but not win.=, I will not vote for a third party. I want to see money coming from the masses and support like we’ve never before seen..I thought we might have that with Clark..but as always, it didn’t happen…no more even thinking of throwing my votes away.

  6. JP

    October 11, 2006 at 1:15 am

    All we can do is break the one party rule fiasco we have now, then we deal with the Democracks if they don’t stand up to our tyrant in chief. But leave the scumbag majority in place, and we are definately screwed. Sadly we don’t have a third party in place, but we need serious discussion and motivation to create one by 2008.

  7. Jason Shapiro

    October 11, 2006 at 2:05 am

    Third parties do nothing more than act as spoilers in American elections – this is not Europe. Ask Al Gore his opinion about “His Eminence” Ralph Nader’s third party or ask George Bush Sr. his opinion of “His Weirdness” Ross Perot’s third party. All that third parties do is to make a bunch of disaffected people feel good about voting – until they wake up to find their worst nightmares are in power.

  8. Pondering It All

    October 11, 2006 at 12:38 pm

    Absolutely correct! Third party candidates generally take votes away from their supporter’s second choice. For example, most Nader voters would have voted for Gore, most Perot voters would have voted for Bush, if their third party candidate was not running. The end result is that third party voters ALMOST ALWAYS help elect their worst nightmare, in American elections.

    If we had a multiparty at-large representation system like many European countries, then it would make sense: If 5% of the votes were Green, then the Green Party would get 5% of the representatives in Congress. They could form a coalition with other parties and get their interests served.

    But that is not how it works in US elections. We have winner-take-all in each district and state. Until that changes, voting third-party is just idiotic!

  9. Mark

    October 11, 2006 at 2:50 pm

    Let’s fix the two party system before we bring in a third. While the idea of a third party is appealing perhaps it’s better to bring one of the existing parties into line with what we, the people, want out of our elected officials.

  10. keith

    October 10, 2006 at 3:10 pm

  11. John Hanks

    October 10, 2006 at 8:58 pm

  12. Eric

    October 10, 2006 at 10:33 pm

  13. Jerry Pardue

    October 10, 2006 at 10:59 pm

  14. Judy Bodnar

    October 11, 2006 at 12:13 am

  15. JP

    October 11, 2006 at 1:15 am

  16. Jason Shapiro

    October 11, 2006 at 2:05 am

  17. Pondering It All

    October 11, 2006 at 12:38 pm

  18. Mark

    October 11, 2006 at 2:50 pm