Free Markets, Free People

Poll trends, the Democrats dilemma and the GOP’s chance

Trying to analyze polling results is indeed a tricky business.  To be worth anything a poll must be carefully crafted to remove obvious and hidden biases from questions.   And, for the most part, a single poll really demonstrates only a “snap shot” of opinion for that moment.

Where polls have some value is in the trends they track.   And, with the number of polls out there, similar findings from other polls lend credibility to the trend being tracked.  History also make is clear whether or polling trends have any credibility. Poll watchers take all of that in when they consider a poll’s worth. A small number of polls have emerged as doing a good job of credibly tracking how various issues are trending. They’re certainly not fool-proof indicators, but taken with other polls one can begin to build an emerging picture.

Take this recent Gallup poll on party identification. Political junkies know that self-identification with a party indicates the strength of that party electorally. Self-identification ebbs and flows with the fortunes of the party and history proves that for us. In mid 2004, identification with a party was tied between Democrats and the GOP. But in 2006, for the mid-term elections, a 5 point gap opened favoring Democrats. And, Democrats benefited by picking up seats in Congress (and a majority in the House). In 2008, that gap had gone to double digits, and the Democrats swept the Republicans out of power.

Well, the double digit advantage for the Democrats has disappeared according to Gallup. Democrats hold a slight 1 point lead in those who identify with or lean toward one of the two parties.

Two points to be made – one, Democrats are hemorrhaging independents much more than the GOP is doing things right to bring these numbers together. There’s a lot of “buyer’s remorse” in the ranks of independents than any flocking to the Republicans because of what they stand for. As Gallup points out, only 28% of the country identifies themselves as “Republican”. That hasn’t changed a single percentage point since the beginning of 2009. What has shrunk is the number of self-identified Democrats. The percentage has dropped 3 points from 35% to 32%. So on party identification alone, Democrats still hold a 4 point lead on those who identify themselves as Republicans. What closes that gap to 1 point in favor of Democrats are the independents now leaning toward the GOP. From 13 point lead in 2008 to a 1 point lead in 2010 points to some pretty disillusioned indies.

Two – Republicans still have a lot of selling (and proving themselves) to do. What isn’t apparent with this trend is how solid the independent leaners are for the GOP. The fact that self-identified Republicans haven’t increased a single percentage point in over a year says a lot about how the voting public still perceives Republicans. The fact that a large number of independents have declared they “lean” toward Republicans now doesn’t really mean a hill of beans. Unfortunately in the system with which we’re stuck, you have to pick a side or stay home. I think the only reason that indies tend to lean more Republican than Democrat is they don’t like what they see going on with Democrats in power and figure they may have to hold their nose and vote GOP just to change the mix and stop, or at least slow down the runaway train of government.

Two other polls help firm up that conclusion – one in which the President’s approval rating keeps trending down (an indicator the public isn’t seeing its priorities acted upon) and the second which shows generic Congressional Republicans holding a 4 point lead over the generic Congressional Democrat, which history tells us spells trouble for Democrats.

Can all of this change? Sure – but it is unlikely. Why? Because Democrats are caught in a very difficult spot. All the political stars aligned for them last November except one – the economy. It went tango uniform. And, as it turns out, it didn’t just hit a bump in the road, it went over the proverbial cliff. They were able to get away with blaming the previous administration for a while, but that excuse has pretty much been used up. So here they sit, with the legislative and executive power they’ve sought for decades in order to pass an agenda they’ve wanted to pass for centuries, and the top priorities for the voters are the economy, jobs and the ballooning deficit. What’s an activist to do?

Well they’ve chosen – spending a year dithering, scheming and manipulating the process with health care reform while the economy tanked further, proposed trillion dollar budget deficits were forecast for years to come and unemployment briefly hit double digits. Now they’re trying to force a financial regulation regime through while arguing over introducing cap-and-trade or immigration as their next priorities in Congress.

It seems the Democrats have chosen – the window is closing on their agenda and, throwing the priorities of the voters under the bus, they’re going with the agenda.

It is that, I think, as much as anything, which has driven the independents to lean Republican. That sort of “party before people” attitude isn’t very popular nor is it usually rewarded. Right now the polls indicate that voters are ready to give the GOP another chance, but the support for doing so isn’t particularly solid nor will it grant them much slack should they too decide not address the public’s priorities.

There’s a lesson to be learned here -whether or not either party will heed it- and that is that those in Congress are there to do the people’s business, not their party’s business. Of course having said that, it is obvious that undoing what this bunch has done is no easy matter, and, in the end, may be less popular than the GOP thinks it might be right now. However, if Republicans run on a particular plan and that plan ends up being endorsed by voters putting them in power (House and Senate), if I were them I’d interpret that as the people’s priority and, as Larry the Cable Guy would say “get ‘er done” (sponsor and pass legislation and make the President veto it). Anything short of that will find the GOP back at a double digit disadvantage again when we hit the 2012.



Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

36 Responses to Poll trends, the Democrats dilemma and the GOP’s chance

  • McQThe fact that self-identified Republicans haven’t increased a single percentage point in over a year says a lot about how the voting public still perceives Republicans.

    And rightly so, I’m sorry to say.  I am a Republican, and I can say that there’s only one reason to vote for the GOP: they aren’t the democrats.  That’s pretty thin gruel.

    That spendthrift idiot Michael Steele has said that the GOP isn’t ready to lead.  I object to the fact that the party leader said this publicly, but I must admit that I think he’s right.  What a mess: we’ve got a choice between being led by a pack of idiot thieves, or a pack of thieving idiots.

  • The public perceived the GOP as “The Party of No and the guys who got us here.”  Menawhile the public’s perception of the Democrats is “They will do anything in order to foster their own agenda and yet stay in power.”  Neither one is worth a hoot – but for one difference, it is the Democrats who are running things and they are the ones who get the majority of the blame.

    I would normally say that translates to a draw but for one thing –  the appearance of arrogance practiced by the Democrats.  This is eveidenced by the:
         The lack of Transparency, even after it was promised
         The corruption, after promising to be the most ethical congress in history
         The treatment of constituents in the August Town Hall Meetings
         The general treatment of the Tea Party attendees by the Democratic Leadership and Pundits
    And now a “call to arms” by the Dem leadership and what I would anticipate to be a generalized Mea Culpa soon to follow trying to mend some fences broken by the list above.

    I think 3 things will become evident as a result:
    1)  The excitement the Democrats generated in 2008 will be lacking for the midterms, and the excitement level has to be ratched up to motivate voters to the polls.
    2) The “kick the bums out” attitude is aimed at all the Congress-critters but since the Dems own the majorities, it will be shotgunned more in their general direction than the GOP.
    3) The Tea Party has been partially co-opted by the GOP and therein lies the excitement, and the votes.  For every Tea Partier, there are 10 or more equally angered but not in attendance.  There are very few motivators greater than anger to get people to the polls.

    If only the GOP had a better record to run on and the landslide would be complete.  Instead we will probably see the house swing back to the GOP and a gain of about 6 in the Senate.  The next two questions will really set the stage for 2012:
         “Can the so-called Blue Dogs ever trust Obama again?”
         “How does Obama govern in a hostile environment?”

  • Sounds about right.

    The GOP has a lot to prove. And if they fail to prove it, they’ll get voted out just as easily.  There’s an actual chance here for a major sea-change to alter things going forward, but they’ll blow it somehow.  I’ll settle for stopping the Baracky agenda for now

  • As Time magazine notes, Obama will have a lot to brag about in the campaign.  A lot of Democrats didn’t like Reagan, and thus underestimated him via wishful thinking.    Republicans may be doing the same thing.   Anyway, here’s an interesting analysis to answer the person who keeps asking what Obama has accomplished:,8599,1984460,00.html#ixzz0mCkYsu86
    I’m sure the right will accuse Time of being too smitten with Obama, but right now the right seems as over-confident as the left did back in January 2009.

    • And none of this means diddly so long as the general public perceives Obama as Ruling rather than Governing.

      Voting is intrinsically tied to motivation.  The general public were motivated in 2008 by the general weariness of the war and the GOP failings compared to the upbeat, new deal, new kid on the block Obama.  There was that sense of hope and many bought into the “change” idiom Obama preached.

      But now the bloom is off the rose.  Change has become a four letter word along with hope.  Too many times we heard Obama tout the benefits of the health care bill only to find out it was all smoke and mirrors.  Deficit Neutral – Forget about it.  If you like your provider nonoe is going to take that away from you – even the CBO estimated 9 million will lose their provider whether thay want to or not.  Too many times we heard about the touted Transparency of the Obama administration only to find deals brokered behind closed doors and even the contents of the bill was unknown, Pelosi’ “We will find out what is in the bill once it passes.”

      And his accomplishments are those that he himself touts.  But to what end?  He might claim his TARP as the savior of the Western Economies but it was Bush’s Treasury Secratary that was its author and Bush that signed it into law.  Stimulus did not stimulate.  You still have 9.7% unemployment when Obama promised no more than 6.8% if the Stimuluas Bill passed.  Bailouts continue but only to the advantage of a select few – the Unions.

      And as far as foreign policy is concerned – now we are laughed at by our allies along with our enemies.  And unless he can get sanctions passed, his successes against North Korea and Iran are just wishful thinking.

      Yeah, you keep on touting your Messiah’s accomplishments – we’ll see where it gets you in November!

      • You’re obsessed with Obama — this bit about ‘ruling over governing’ is just strange, where do you get that from?   In any event, the NYT says that the recovery is picking up steam.  Obama does have a list of accomplishments, and his approval rating is above the lows Clinton and Reagan hit — and he’s staying pretty steady.   I suspect the future will disappoint you.

        • “In any event, the NYT says that the recovery is picking up steam”

          Oh, well then, lets pop the champagne! The New York By God! Times says so!!!!!!!!!


        • First:  As usual when you cannot answer points made against you, you ignore them.

               Ruling:  Exercizing Power or Authority
               Governing: Responsible for making and enforcing rules and laws
          Now do you get it, Putz?

          Third:  It is interesting how your definition of “staying pretty steady” differs from the real world.  Check the polls again – they are still declining.  Steadily!

          Fourth:  I don’t have a dog in this hunt – it matters little to me whether Obama lives or dies – politically.  You, on the other hand are the self-proclaimed poli-sci expert.  I would wager it will be you who will be disappointed – but I would never bet with you because your track record with wagering on this blog is SHIT. 

        • “You’re obsessed with Obama…”

          And you weren’t obsessed with George W. Bush for eight years? Aw, come on, Erb – that will never pass the laugh test.

          ” In any event, the NYT says that the recovery is picking up steam.”

          Wow! The New York Times! The same paper that is used for wrapping fish? The same paper that is near bankruptcy? The same paper that has as its chief economist a known Marxist – Paul Slugman? (Yes, I know The Slug won a Nobel Prize, which was also given to Al Gore and Jimmy Carter. End of argument.)

          “Obama does have a list of accomplishments, and his approval rating is above the lows Clinton and Reagan hit — and he’s staying pretty steady.   I suspect the future will disappoint you.”

          Wanna bet? Wanna bet that Pelosi will not be the Speaker of the House next January? Wanna bet that Harry Reid goes down to defeat? Wanna bet that the GOP takes control of the House and comes within 2-3-4 seats of winning control of the US Senate?

          If I were you, Erb, I would make sure to stock a ton of tissues for this election day. Because for a majority of the country, there is only one “N” word that we are concerned with…


          Be prepared for a huge wake-up call.

          • I never attacked Bush in the way people here attacked Obama.   I was respectful when writing about him, and praised his ability to change direction in his second term.  I never had BDS, though here a lot of people are writhing with ODS.
            Pelosi will be Speaker in November.  The GOP will pick up probably about 25 seats.  You were dead wrong on health care reform because you are too partisan to see reality clearly.  You were so sure on health care reform failing…heh-heh…

          • Pelosi will be Speaker in November.

            Of course she will be speaker in November.  It is in January that she will have to give up her gavel.  What’s wrong with you – are you Calendar Challenged?  heh-heh…

            What a Dunce!

          • I never had BDS, though here a lot of people are writhing with ODS.

            You have a real problem with this don’t you.  ODS versus BDS.  Since it has been years since the clue bird shit on you, let me give you a little clue.  A Derangement Syndrome is claiming the individual is respoinsible for anything that goes wrong – whether it be his fault or not.  There may be some ODS out there but not on these pages – or very rarely.  BDS still exists on the far left – see any post on Kos or DU or Huff regarding Bush – and even from some Dems who continue to blame Bush for todays woes.

            And to put it more simply for you, You can hardly call it ODS when:

            He promised Transparency – His Administration Isn’t
            He promised Bi-Partisonship – His Administration Isn’t
            He promised to be Post Racial – His Administration Isn’t
            He promised to secure relations with Iran – His Administration Hasn’t
            He promised to secure relations with NoKo – His Administration Hasn’t
            He promised to eliminate Lobbyists from Government – His Administration Hasn’t
            He promised to bring science to the forefront – His adminitration hasn’t 
            He promised to secure the rule of law – His adminitration hasn’t 

            I can go on and on but I won’t bore you with what you already know.  It is not ODS when Obama is criticized for something he promised to do or accomplish – and then has not or turned his back on the promise.   Got it now?

          • ODS is a device used to stifle debate. Its just another form of political correctness. Considering the source, this shouldn’t come as a surprise.

          • Sort of like how you used BDS, eh?
            Like I said, the two are very similar, you act towards Obama like the far left acted towards Bush.   Now you feel the same kind of anger about policy and politics as they did.   The pendulum will swing again don’t worry…but then it will swing yet again…

          • My apologies McQ but I am going to repeat a comment I posted earlier.

            “I never had BDS, though here a lot of people are writhing with ODS.”

            You have a real problem with this don’t you.  ODS versus BDS.  Since it has been years since the clue bird shit on you, let me give you a little clue.  A Derangement Syndrome is claiming the individual is respoinsible for anything that goes wrong – whether it be his fault or not.  There may be some ODS out there but not on these pages – or very rarely.  BDS still exists on the far left – see any post on Kos or DU or Huff regarding Bush and watch it fly – and even from some Dems who continue to blame Bush for todays woes.
            But to put it more simply for you, i.e. allow the clue bird to shit on you for once, here goes – You can hardly call it ODS when:
            Obama promised Transparency – His Administration Isn’t
            Obama promised Bi-Partisonship – He Isn’t
            Obama promised to be Post Racial – He Isn’t
            Obama promised to secure relations with Iran – He Hasn’t
            Obama promised to secure relations with NoKo – He Hasn’t
            Obama promised to eliminate Lobbyists from Government – He Hasn’t
            Obama promised to bring science to the forefront – He hasn’t�
            Obama promised to secure the rule of law – He hasn’t 
            Obama promised to bring ethics, prudence and fiscal restraint to the White House – He Lied.

            I can go on and on but I won’t bore you with what you already know.  It is not ODS when Obama is criticized for something he promised to do or accomplish – and then has not or turned his back on the promise. 

            Got it now?

        • “In any event, the NYT says that the recovery is picking up steam.”

          My, you are funny. 
          So what? 

    • “As Time magazine notes, Obama will have a lot to brag about in the campaign.”

      Uh, yeah, Erb. And that’s why his numbers continue to hover right around 43%-45% in the polls. That must be because of all the great things The Clown™ is doing, like blowing a hole in the debt, spending billions on porkulus plans that did zilch for the economy, trying to take over every part of the economy, expanding government to extreme proportions, and shoving a deathcare bill down the throats of people – which, I might add, is more unpopular now than it was when The Clown™ and his Minions paid off Congress to pass it.

      Yep, Erb, he has a lot to brag about. I think his only worry is that the only thanks he will be getting is a one-way ticket to retirement back to Chicago and his pal Tony Rezko in 2012.

      BTW, how is that hopey-changey thing coming along for you Demmies? Do you think soon-to-be Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi will be happy about her new job come January? How about Majority Leader Dick Durbin, who will be running the Senate with 52 or 53 Dems next January?

      • You’re as wrong about this as you were about health care reform.   Obama’s polls are at about 48-49 on the RCP average…the fact you need to drop them down by five points shows that you’re in the realm of wishful thinking.  As far as your wild predictions — as with health care, you let what you want to see happen color what you predict will happen.

        • “Obama’s polls are at about 48-49 on the RCP average…”

          Do I have to Krunk-slap you with your last quote about how polls are so useless and we should ignore them? You’re too stupid to even keep your narrative straight.

        • “Obama’s polls are at about 48-49 on the RCP average.”

          Average means that they include the Research 2000 poll, which is from The Daily Kos and has President Trouser Snake at 53%. That skews the polls in their entirety.

          Gallup has him at 43%. Rasmussen has him at 44%.

          I bet that by Thanksgiving he is at or below 40%.

          See? I am right and you are wrong, Erb. As usual.

    • OMG!  You figured out how to link!  Amazing!  You get brownie points for THAT alone!  Well done!  Well done!
      “Obama will have soundly achieved many of his chief campaign promises while running a highly competent, scandal-free government.” 

      Really!  – and I gather Time has chosen to ignore the broken promises – like transparency, bills posted on line for review.  And the best part is the magazine that has carefully chosen to IGNORE a large number of scandals trumpeting the lack of scandal is….well, you figure it out.
      Some other entertaining high spots –
      choosing people who are excellent at what they do, but also requiring that they play nicely with others” –
      Van Jones, for starters, Tim Geithner, playing nice – Rahm Emmanuel?
      “national security”  – “The system worked” – a dutch passenger subdued the crotch bomber, well done.
      “and economic policy,” – BWAAAHAHAHAHAHA yeah, swell – spend our way out of debt!  Good Lord, who wrote this Time article, Robert Gibbs?  Barack Obama?
      Of course none of the bad things are reported, Time sees to THAT.


  • The Republican Party is not going to have a chance when websites (such as this one) that allegedly support the GOP, or at least attempt to, spend their time making up sh!t about certain immigration laws in certain western states that are situated between California and New Mexico, trying to demonize those who want to crack down on illegal immigration without the bullcrap we hear on the lamestream media.
    Get your facts straight, and don’t listen to the bull-oney of the left.

    • Who demonized whom, James?

      I don’t “allegedly” support the GOP. Nor does this blog. They are not my party. Right now, they’re a group I’d rather see in power only because they supposedly support some of the same principles I do. Getting them to actually act on them, however, is a whole ‘nother problem.

      As for Arizona – just because I nominally support this or that contingent some of the time doesn’t mean I’m not going to call them on something when I think they’re wrong. I owe the GOP nothing. And when they had the power and the opportunity to do something about immigration, they didn’t.

      If you expect this blog to shill for them, you’re at the wrong place.

      I certainly understand the frustration of AZ, I appreciate the depth of the problem, but I’m also intimately acquainted with human nature and how vague laws can be and are routinely abused. And AZ will be no exception (if you doubt me, you ought to read Warren Meyers “Coyote blog”). If you have a problem with us making that point I’d suggest it is you who need to reconsider, not us.

      • “Who demonized whom, James?”

        You demonized the Arizona law, Mr. McQuain – and you mimicked much of the thoughtless and reckless speculation that I see amongst the dimwitted Left. I would expect the comments you made to be attributed to Al Sharpton, not someone like you. At least I would hope that you don’t want to sound like that racist, anti-Semitic sc*mbag Sharpton.

        “As for Arizona – just because I nominally support this or that contingent some of the time doesn’t mean I’m not going to call them on something when I think they’re wrong.”

        You don’t live here (yes, I know you are in San Diego), so don’t try to get into our minds about what is wrong and what is right. You plainly have no clue about the horrific crime wave we are experiencing here and down towards the border. Cops are being killed, people are dying in car accidents involving vans loaded with illegals, we have gone broke housing, feeding, and educating these people, and finally we have had enough and did something about it. And you mimicked the same petty and ridiculous talking points that the loons on the Left parroted on CNN and MSDNC – all without any basis in fact.

        If you want to go off on a rant about something you don’t know anything about, feel free to ask those who do. I wouldn’t condemn something happening in San Diego before listening to THE FACTS or the opinions of those who live there. Don’t presume to do the same for us when you don’t experience this. Don’t condemn those on the Titanic unless you were on the ship. Don’t condemn those in Arizona unless you come here, live here, and experience what is going on here. It is a disaster. It is the reason why 70% of the people in this state support this new law, and perhaps why even 60% of people nationwide also support it.

        • Show me where I did so, Mr. Marsden.

          Quotes, please.

          And before you make a fool of yourself, check the author of the post. Hint: no, I don’t live in San Diego.

          For someone so damned concerned with “facts”, how about getting a few straight before you go accusing people of things they never said and going off half-cocked.


          Last, you don’t own the exclusive knowledge to what Arizonan’s believe or feel. You certainly don’t own the right to speak for them. Quit trying to do so.

  • “As Time magazine notes“…“the NYT says”
    Professor Erb finally has had an undergrad train him how to make a citation.  Hurray!  So, what does he do?  He comes here to cite Time and the NYT.  Jeez.
    Oh well.  Baby steps.  I wonder if he exhibits this great empathy with his students?

  • Right now, voters are ready to throw as much of the Congress as they can over to Republicans. I don’t think that much will happen between now and November that will help Democrats. People are too pissed to be satisfied with statistical economic recovery, and they know that this recession has already lasted longer in its effect on employment because of things Obama and the Democrats have done.

    But, how much worse it gets for Democrats going forward will depend on all of the usual things that can happen over the course of a summer in America.

    Obama doesn’t have a terrible overall approval number but the number is soft. He’s not a terribly likeable person and he’s grossly overexposed. I think a lot of people wouldn’t mind if they never saw or heard him again. But he can’t shut up. His overall disapproval is a lot harder than his approval. Almost all who disapprove of him disapprove strongly. And that’s totally understandable. He’s easy to dislike.

    Democrats in Congress fare even worse and the generic preference among likely voters is heavily favoring Republicans and I think that people are just getting used to the idea that November will come, whereas last year the anxiety was so great because the midterms were so far away.

    The behavior on the Left has been revolting. I don’t expect that to change. But the variables between now and November will determine whether the midterm election is a tropical storm or a hurricane or a category 5 hurricane. But I do think that people are anxious to pull the plug on this regime ASAP.

    The other question is how much damage the regime does between now and the election, and then how principled Republicans are when they get back into at least half of the driver’s seat in Congress.

    At the end of the day, the best the election does is stop some of the bleeding, maybe help the private sector feel better about the future, knowing that the socialists can’t push one thing after another. But there’s tremendous damage done already to America and the free market.

    • “Obama doesn’t have a terrible overall approval number but the number is soft.”

      Obama’s support is a tenth of a mile wide and 1 or 2 inches in depth. It is softer than warm vaseline in the middle of the summer heat. What no one wants to talk about is that about 20%-30% of his support, which came mostly from Independents who threw caution to the wind and voted for Obama, is gone now. Those people have not only left the building, but they are down the block and headed for the freeway. They don’t like what Obama and the Demmies have done, from the porkulus to deathcare to Crap ‘N’ Trade. It is a huge anchor that Obama has wrapped around his own skinny neck.

      Despite what Mr. Erb thinks in his delusional moments (which is most of the day and night), Demmies will either lose control of the House or be so split that they have no control over anything. They will lost 6-7-8 seats in the US Senate, but not control. But the filibuster will live on, and Majority Leader Dick Durbin will have to deal with a neatly-split Senate.

      Want to p!ss off Erb? Have him read this story – even his vaunted NY Times is warning Demmies that seats long held by their party are in danger of going Republican.

      When The NY Times says stuff like this, one can only imagine what is happening inside DNC HQ.

  • You know, after making my above comment, I just couldn’t keep the situation out of my thoughts.  A man swears that the LN does not exist and that he is not a purveyor of  it.  Then he openly cites Time magazine and the NYT  in support of the LN and clearly indicates that we should read and believe.
    Yes, it could be chutzpah.   Is there perhaps another explanation that I am not aware of?  Could the Professor actually be incognizant of the existence of the LN?  Could he believe it so strongly that he perceives it to be reality?  He obviously has contacts outside the liberal bubble.  Most unknowing consumers of the LN are in the bubble and don’t know anyone who did not vote for President Obama.  They support it and pass it on in ignorance.
    I mean, folks, he could have said the Washington Post or the Associated Press.  No, he says Time and the NYT.
    Well, it’s obviously a joke and I just am not hip enough to get it.  Yes, he seems perfectly serious – that is how gotcha humor works;  like on April 1.  You gotta sell it.
    OK.  Now I get it.

    • I don’t get what you’re saying.  You’re saying main press outlets are all part of this nefarious “narrative” you envision?    The pundits on MSNBC might have a liberal story or narrative, and clearly Fox pundits have a ‘conservative’ narrative.  In the post modern world where narratives are at war, that’s all that matters.  Some of us still believe in truth, however, and logic.  And logic says you can’t dismiss information just by labeling it a narrative and not contending with its content.   But your “narrative world” denies the existence of truth and logic, doesn’t it?

      • This is one of your more effective approaches to lying, Scott. Here you pretend that you haven’t repeatedly professed that reality is a social construct and now suggest that there is an independent  and transcendent reality from which truth can be derived.

        “Some of us still believe in truth.”

        You cannot be serious, as John McEnroe would say.

        This is the aspect of your character that I’ve described in the past as being mildly psychopathic.

  • Either way, Baracky isn’t running in this election, though some can make the case the election is somewhat a referendum on his policies (I personally believe it’s a referendum on Pelosi, Reid and the way congress has conducted themselves). Keep our eyes on the ball now, Obama has given us plenty of fodder in 2012 to show the public what a lying sack he is.


    “You’re saying main press outlets are all part of this nefarious “narrative” you envision?”

    Good one!  I howled.  This is like a listener saying to Rush Limbaugh after several weeks of steady listening to his program:  “You’re saying that there might be some question as to whether or not being a liberal is a good thing?”   The serious answer is yes, I am saying that.
    And yes, I agree that Fox pundits have a narrative as well.  How would I differentiate them?  The Fox narrative cannot be shredded by the truth.  In fact, its purveyors are ecstatic when challenged to “prove” something they have said.  Their conclusions may turn out not to be correct, but they can never be shot down by actual facts.  Well, better make that “seldom” because, being pundits with deadline and all that, they may be a little hasty from time to time.  You will get a correction when you catch them, however.
    Now, let’s look at the LN.  First of all, all of its purveyors strenuously  deny its existence.  Next, they will never refer to it in toto (when one tries to put all the pieces together, they contain major inconsistencies).  When challenged on a particular point, they are usually reluctant to provide facts to back up their claim.  When they offer facts, one can usually shoot a hole in the “facts” offered.  Think Climate Change.  At that point one is met with “Well, in this case that may be the case, but you cannot argue with our good intentions.”
    The main factor in the difference is that one narrative features the truth and facts and the other features intentions, feelings, hopes, opinions, diversions and a blatant refusal to admit fault when caught in the lie (think Tawana Brawley).
    These differences are very clear to the unbiased observer and, no, I will not (having learned my lesson the hard way) even consider getting into a detailed discussion with a liberal on this difference.  Now, on the other hand, a liberal who says:  “You know, I have wondered about some things and you may be right.  What should I do?”  Then I say, go to the website “” and read her explanation of how she ceased being a liberal and became a neocon.  If you can invest that much time, there may be hope for you.  Otherwise, just keep getting your brains from the NYT –  They make it easy, consistent and clear, just what you want, with no effort required.  It’s not true, but truth is not important to you.
    “But your “narrative world” denies the existence of truth and logic, doesn’t it?”
    Another howler.  Let’s see…the equivalent of our Limbaugh listener then saying:  “But your Conservative philosophy denies the existence of truth and logic, doesn’t it?”
    As you can see from the above, the narrative that I believe in features truth as well as logic.  Of course the LN is logical.  And simple.  And good.  If one is free to disregard the truth, one can write a beautiful, loveable, impressive…(fill in the blank;  what do you need?)  narrative.  If it were only about narratives, we would be fine.  Unfortunately, applying a beautiful narrative that disregards the truth to Reality will lead to disaster.  It will however, get one elected. And it did.