The day that Oklahoma is a democratic lean will be very frosty in hell. They just passed a resolution in their legislature to throw illegals in jail. A liberal paradise, let me tell you. That map is a joke.
not sure, i believe any of that. Ohio and Arkansas is solid democrat, but Texas is competive?! I could by a chart that at least says Ohio and Arkansas lean democrat if they had put Texas in the lean Republican box. I thought both the right and left have determined Gallop is a pretty crappy polling service, or am i remembering this wrong?
Maybe Democrats were more willing to participate in a poll right now. Hard to believe they find Texas competitive, but we'll see in the next election.
Useless poll ... SOP for Gallop. Now if this was a likely voter political affiliation it would be news worthy, not a poll of people who won't get off their fat asses and vote---voters change things.
About 5 years ago, I asked on this very website whether or not George W. Bush's potential re-election would mean the death of the Republican party and was roundly scorned for it.
The poll is more about identification, and tradtionally the Republicans turn out in higher percentages, thus the desire for voter supression legislation like voter ID when they are in power. If EVERYONE voted it would be a wipeout of the GOP, but as has been already said leaning one way or the other does not transfer to a vote actually being cast. For example I would bet that probably 90 to 95% of the looney "birthers" that make up appoximately 1/3 of the GOP voting block will show up at the polls. The poll is more a snapshot of American sentiment, than a prediciton of election results, because "if the election were held today," is not the same as likely voters. Still interesting to see where the GOP has steered it's ship from a sentiment standpoint.
This is about how people currently self-identify, not how they vote. __________________________________________________ so basically they asked the jay-walking all stars who they prefer without taking into account whether they are registered to vote and the idiots picked obama because its the only name they knew....the map makes sense now.
Once again, I point out that that stupid ******* map has Okla-*******-homa as a Democratic lean... despite the fact that both senators are Republican, despite the fact both houses of the legislature are Republican and that Obama only drew 34% of the vote in 2008 (McCain got 65%). Brad Henry is a democratic governor (has been since 2002).. but he is a gifted politician who has transcended party lines. The state is one of the most republican in the country and that makes this map ******* stupid. There are alot of states, Texas included, that are listed as neutral, when the GOP holds all executive offices and both legislative houses. That is stupid. If you use that map as any indicator of electoral trends for 2010, I have some bitchin' bridges I can sell you.
All it really shows is that even in tradtionally red states theer are a lot of folks who are for whatever reason not identifying themselves as Republican. Most interesting is that apparently the Dems are gaining in 2009, in comparison to 2008.
I did see over the weekend where every single congressional district in California has registered more Democrats than Republicans since the Obama election.
Obama had LONG coat tails in 2008. Something that wildly popular guys like Reagan and Clinton didnt have. In 1984 Reagan carried 49 states and lost seats in both houses of Congress. In 1996 the people made it clear that they wanted Bill to lead the Bridge to the 21st century. They just didnt want Ted Kennedy driving.
Is it the new Left position on this board to throw up a bunch of **** and see what sticks on the wall? I mean it worked for the republicans vs Kerry in 2004.
I did see over the weekend where every single congressional district in California has registered more Democrats than Republicans since the Obama election. __________________________________________________ must be that bi-partisan group Acorn and all the illegals and disney characters....
Maduro- yes. Right now the GOP is simply the less popular party to be identified with, thus the clear respults of the poll. Does anyone here believe that the GOP is growing at this point in time? If so then you believe the GOP hit bottom and is on the way back up?
This thread is like a car wreck. I am pissed at all the people in front of me slowing down but when it is my turn, I can't help but look. Thanks for the comedy. I will say this, when you start patting yourself on the back thinking your opponent is whipped, that is when he comes back and bites you in the *** and walks all over you, with that being said..... Gee, I don't know what us Republicans are going to do, with the entire country turning democrat, we should just fold our tents now and join em, cause we can't beat em!!!!! Keep believing the Republican party is dead, someone pointed out Reagan and Clinton and how they lost seats. As long as you have Pelosi and Reid, it would buck all trends in history if Obama was able to overcome those two in 2010, or even 2012 and 2014 if so fortunate....... Time to make some Ivory cause the Elephant is dead!!!!
This map isn't surprising and its consistent with the last 70 years of American political history. Republicans have never outnumbered Democrats in party identification since at least the 1930s -- if ever. But political scientists have recognized for decades that party identification is not only in decline but it's also a weak signifier of how people will actually vote in elections -- especially for president. There are life-long Democrats in Oklahoma approaching the century mark who haven't voted for a Democratic presidential candidate since Johnson....or Kennedy....or Truman. The "Reagan Democrat" phenomenon preceded Reagan. And that's a trend that's not unique to Oklahoma. And Obama had long coat tails in 2008 precisely because a ton of those people (white, elderly voters...many of them registered Dems) stayed home rather than voting for Bush's third term or the MTV savior. For all the hype about massive participation last year at the polls, voter turnout in 2008 was actually down from 2004.. As far as the map goes....it's nothing astounding. If the Democratic Party could have convinced all their own party members to vote for its national candidates throughout the 20th century, America's last GOP president would have been Hoover.
I agree with Nexsmax that older white voter participation was lower in 2008. The dems that had underlying fears of "black men" certainly stayed home, and those older white voters in the GOP that saw the 8 year Titanic-like course Bush and the GOP put our ocuntry on could not support a McCain/Palin ticket. As I have said numerous times it's not a prediction of actual voting just about party affiliation. The most intersting thing about it is that apparently the Independents are not making a shift back to the party of the "birthers" and "Sir Taxalot..." "leadership."
