Terror Scare Apparently Works as Hoped for GOP According to Gallup Polls

[Time for change]

A couple of weeks ago, following 24 arrests for a suspected bomb plot involving planes flying from Britain to the United States, several DUers commented upon how terror is good for the fortunes of the GOP. Plaid Adder noted that the fortunes of the GOP are tied to terrorism. Earl G discussed the use of the terrorism card by the GOP as part of their Grand Strategy, noting that following Joe Lieberman’s primary defeat Ken Mehlman gave a speech referring to Democrats as “Defeat-O-Crats” and Tony Snow said “There seems to be two approaches, and in the Connecticut race, one of the approaches is ignore the difficulties and walk away.” BobcatJH discussed a similar theme, quoting Ken Mehlman’s commentary on the Lieberman loss. And a couple of days before that, I had posted on the same subject, quoting John Dean and Al Gore on “The Politics of Fear”.

And now we have some Gallup poll results that seem to confirm that, if indeed all these people correctly understand the GOP strategy, that strategy appears to be working. Since it is important that we understand this phenomenon as well as possible, let’s take a look at some of the details:


Timeline for the recent terror scare

August 8 – Joe Lieberman is defeated in Connecticut primary.

August 9 – Ken Mehlman speaking in Cleveland about Lieberman’s loss (and knowing that the alleged foiled bomb plot will be revealed the following day): “It reflects an unfortunate embrace of isolationism, defeatism, and a ‘blame America first’ attitude by national Democratic leaders at a time when retreating from the world is particularly dangerous.”

August 9 – Dick Cheney speech (knowing that the alleged foiled bomb plot will be revealed the following day): “The al-Qaeda types, they clearly are betting on the proposition that ultimately they can break the will of the American people in terms of our ability to stay in the fight and complete the task.”

August 10 – Twenty-four suspects arrested on suspicion of plotting to blow up planes flying from Britain to the United States.

August 10 (within hours of the arrests): GOP initiates a fundraising drive emphasizing the “War on Terror”.


Subsequent developments

August 14 – NBC News reveals that the United States pressured Britain to make the arrests sooner than they thought was desirable. As explained here, the U.S. threatened that if Britain didn’t arrest the suspected ringleader, Rashid Rauf, immediately, they would either render him or pressure the Pakistani government to arrest him. But British security was concerned that an immediate arrest would violate due process and hamper the ability of British courts to try Rauf. But he was arrested anyhow, apparently due to U.S. pressure. But the NBC News article did not explain who arrested him, nor how he was arrested.

August 19 – Pakistanis say that they can find no evidence against Rauf.


Gallup Poll results following the 1-2-3 terror scare punch

Now we come to some Gallup Poll results, obtained August 18-20, on the heels of the big terror scare, which very much surprised and disturbed me. There are three salient aspects to these poll results:

1) The worst finding is that the generic Congressional poll (Who would you vote for in your Congressional District?) showed a narrowing of the Democratic lead from 9 points in the last poll to 2 points. The last ten polls prior to this one, dating back to March of this year, had shown a consistent and wide Democratic lead, averaging 12 points and never dipping below 9 points during that period.

2) Bush’s approval rating is up to 42% in a poll taken during the same time period – the highest it’s been since March of this year.

3) Looking at approval by issue, the only issue on which Bush has improved since the last poll, in July, is…. You guessed it – Terrorism. On terrorism he skyrocketed 8 points, from 47% to 55%. He didn’t improve on any other issue.


Assessment of poll results and connection with recent events

I find the results of these polls very disappointing because, if accurate, they mean that it’s highly unlikely that the Democrats would take back the House if the elections were held today – following several months where that possibility seemed reasonably likely.

It is undoubtedly no coincidence that the narrowing of the Democratic lead in the generic Congressional poll to its lowest level in over a year has occurred simultaneously with a rise in Bush’s approval ratings to their highest level in several months. And it is also obvious from the issue specific poll results that Bush’s rising approval ratings are solely due to how Americans view his job performance on terror.

So the only remaining question is why are Americans suddenly giving him higher marks for his performance on terrorism? Maybe I’m missing something, but it certainly seems to me that the big terror scare of the last couple of weeks is the cause of all this.

Wow – What a perfectly choreographed “Grand Strategy”, as Earl G would say.

Hopefully this will be just a blip, and things will shortly return to where they were just a few weeks ago (Or better yet, maybe they already have). But I think that Democrats ought to expect and be prepared for a lot more of this kind of stuff from now until the November elections.


Some final thoughts on the politics of fear

“Defeatism”. “Isolationism”. “Blame America first”. “Lack of will”. “Cut and run”. These are the things that Republicans are accusing Democrats of. On what basis? On the basis that most Democrats feel that we need to disengage from a war that is costing tens of thousands of lives, running up our national debt to a level that we will be paying for generations to come, and just as important, is IMPEDING, not helping in our war against terrorism.

War is not a game, Mr. Cheney and Mr. Bush. Nor is it something that is ok to be used for political purposes, as you have done over the past five years. It is damn serious business for those who fight it, and for those of us who will have to pay the consequences for the rest of our lives.

Planning to disengage from an irresponsible war that has no purpose other than the enrichment of your friends in the private sector does NOT constitute defeatism, isolationism, lack of will, quitting, cutting and running, or any of those other things that you try so mightily to tag Democrats with. Nor are we blaming America first. We are blaming YOU first, as well as all of your minions who have justified this war through a pack of lies.

The attacks of September 11th, 2001, did not happen on Bill Clinton’s watch – they happened on YOUR watch. It wasn’t Bill Clinton who did nothing to prepare for those attacks – it was YOU. It wasn’t Bill Clinton or any other Democrat who first tried to obstruct the creation of an independent commission to investigate how the terror attacks on our country occurred, and then failed to institute the recommendations of that Commission, as demonstrated by the five Fs and twelve Ds that your administration received on its 2005 year-end report card. That was YOU also. And it wasn’t a Democrat who tried to sell our ports to a country that sponsors terrorism.


Alas, it is not easy to get your message out when the national news media is aligned against you. But the Democrats better find a way to do that prior to this November’s elections, or else our country will be well on its way to deterioration.

[yellerpup]

1. Good work Time for change

Hopefully their Grand Strategy won't work this time.

[Alacrat]

4. What are the chances of something big, between now and Nov?

They must have a few big ones they are holding on to, to boost the numbers before the mid-terms. I also bet we will catch Osama between now and the elections in 08. I think they have a few cards up their sleeves, and will use them as needed.

[yellerpup]

7. They are tricky but not really effective IMHO

Whatever they have up their sleeves will probably add up to no more than the usual diversionary tactics. A judge rules NSA wiretapping unconstitutional (or torture at Gitmo or abroad is uncovered) and all of a sudden 7 guys in Miami will blow us all to hell if only somebody will send them boots, or a pedophile who wants a free ride back to the states and the MSM treats him like a firstborn child. (He ate so-and-so and his poop was the consistence of ______ and the color of______) Too many people are wise for these LAME-O DIVERSIONS to work the way they used to. (I HOPE, I HOPE, I HOPE!!!) :banghead:

[Time for change]

11. Thank you yellerpup - I hope it won't work next time

But I think that the Dems need to figure out a way to counteract it, because this one certainly seems to have worked.

Of course we don't know for how long. But I just don't know how many tricks they have up their sleeves waiting for us.

[xchrom]

2. lol -- all i can think of are those people who chide, whisper, yell, scold

and waste precious breath that there are no conspiracies.

would they say the same -- or have they said the same after an objective reading of european political history?

[Time for change]

29. I doubt it - not if they understood what they were reading

Or American history either -- at least if it was an objective, rather than a sanitized acount.

Here's something I wrote on that earlier this week:
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Time%20for%20change/76

[jackbourassa]

3. I appreciate the hard work, but disagree with your assessment...

This recent poll was terrible for the Republicans. Who gives a shit if Bush is at 42%. In fact, many other polls out this week have him between 36% and 39%. But either way it really doesn't matter.

You know this is a common mistake made by people about polls. They treat them like they are a hockey game or football game. Oh we're ahead by 12 points...oh! oh! the Republicans must have scored because now we're up by 8 points.

But that's not how it works.

The Republican base in America is about 38%. That's how many people IDENTIFY themselves as Republicans.

There are another 6% or so that are independents, but are CONSERVATIVE independents. They might as well be Republicans, because they mostly think like them.

Which means that it is not inconcievable, or even remotely extraordinary, for the Republicans to poll between 38% to 44%. Why? Because that is their base.

By contrast, the Democrats make up about 42% of the population. With another 6% or so of LIBERAL independents supporting them. Giving us a base of 48%.

48% to 44%. Does that number sound familiar? That was the average of the polls favoring Kerry between the spring and summer of 2004.

What's left are about 6% MODERATE INDEPENDENTS and about 2% FRINGE (both conservative and liberal).

The reason our "lead" was so high in the generic ballot was because Republicans were polling at about 30% to 33% or so. Democrats polling between 48% to 51% in those same polls. The fact is the number of Republicans who are frustrated with their candidates or party in general. So by virtue of that alone, the number of "undecided" MUST be Republicans or CONSERVATIVE leaning independents.

But also, just as was the case in 2004 and the whole of the 1990s, those 6% in the middle are turning away from the GOP. But Democrats in the past have been slow to win them over (they supported Perot in the 1990s and reluctuntly supported Bush in 2004). But what this poll shows (along with some others) is that they are beginning to break for, and for the first time ever, say they will support the Democratic candidate.

THAT'S WHY WE ARE NOW AT 53% in that poll.

We're not going to win the election by 15% to 20%. It's not going to happen. Don't use this as a measurement of success or failure in this race. This is not a hockey or a football game. The window exists that we will win this election by between 8% to 12%.

There is nothing in this poll which contradicts anything I just wrote.

[AX10]

5. We could get 55% of the vote. A 10-12% victory will give us plenty of...

seats and is a mandate to govern. I understand that any poll that shows the GOP under 40% in the Congressional ballot is not accurate because many Repubs are reluctant to support their party because they are disappointed with what they have done. That does NOT mean that they will support the Democrats (which they won't).

[Time for change]

9. I don't see your point

First of all, what poll are you reading? Because it certainly doesn't sound like the one I discuss in my OP. If there is another one out there that says what you are describing, then great. Please tell me what it is.

I said in my OP that the most current Gallup poll, taken several days after the big terror scare, showed the Dems up by 2% in the generic ballot. The precise count was 47% to 45%. You say that we are at 53%. Where do you get that from?

You also say that we will win the election by between 8% to 12%. I hope to God we do, but if the election occurred at the time of the poll I refer to, that would be highly doubtful.

You also say that they're beginning to break for us. I don't see how you can say that. We've been running ahead by between 9% and 16% for several months, and now all of a sudden, after all that terror crap, we're down to 2%. How is that "breaking for us"?

Anyhow, my point is not that we're going to lose. My point is that the Democrats suffered a big setback as a result of the recent terror scares orchestrated by the Republicans. My point in posting this is that Democrats need to be aware that their scare tactics apparently worked very well this time, and Democrats need to find a way to fight back effectively to counter this type of thing, or else they're likely to lose this November.

[jackbourassa]

41. What poll are you talking about?

I've checked the polls regularly and don't remember ANY that showed us ahead by only 2%. The latest Gallup poll (the one where Bush was at 42%) had Democrats ahead 53% to 43%.

I think you read it wrong. Maybe you were looking at another poll from a specific district. Or maybe it was a specific question related to terrorism (in which case it's still good that we are consistently polling ahead of Republicans now on that issue - and that at best Republicans only get 45%, or one point above their base total, on this issue which saved them in the past).

Provide the link please. Because this would have been a big story if true and it definitely has not been. I think you're wrong here.

[Time for change]

45. Please see post # 44, below

Here is the link:

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/08/republicans_surge_in_generic_poll/

[elehhhhna]

6. POLL FRAUD MUST PRECEDE VOTE FRAUD.

Guess I'd better start saying repeatedly, again.

[Time for change]

10. Perhaps, but I don't believe that this was poll fraud

Not that I particularly trust these people. And I do believe that Gallup has a habit of spinning its polls in a direction favorable to a conservative point of view, as I've discussed in other posts:

The Gallup "Proud to be an American Poll"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=1612128

Gallup underestimates American disapproval of human rights abuses at Gitmo:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=1598506

However, there's a big difference between spinning and outright fraud. The Gallup organization makes its money from its reputation as an accurate polling organization. There are several other polling organizations as well, and they are certainly not all conservative. If one organization is going to commit fraud alone, then they will be an outlier. Otherwise they would have to conspire with several others. I have not seen patterns that look like that (for example, where liberal organizations consistently show markedly different results that conservative organizations).

In any event, if they were going to commit outright fraud, it would be much closer to an election I would think. Why now, following the big terror scare? Gallup has consistently reported wide leads for the Democrats in the generic Congressional poll over the past several months, and moderate to wide leads for the Democrats for more than a year. Now we suddenly have a big change, and we have an obvious explanation for it as well, and that explanation is consistent with Gallup's other polling results (i.e., on Bush approval).

Is it possible that this is fraud? Sure. But I think it's much more likely that this represents a response to events that we're all aware of.

[high density]

8. Good news is that every red-alert "bounce" seems to be less significant

and they evaporate very quickly these days. Bush is already back to the mid-high 30s.

[FogerRox]

12. great compilation, KNR

[Supersedeas]

33. second that all the way round

[marmar]

13. If this level of violence continues in Iraq this week...

He'll be back in the toilet. We need to pull the lever!

[Harper_is_Bush]

14. Natch. It doesn't surprise me anymore.

It's the norm, and maybe that was their goal all along.

[DianaForRussFeingold]

15. You should be a campaign manager or speech writer 'Great Post

The terror Manipulators are starting to become pretty obvious! Here is a documentary that really opened my eyes. "Alex Jones' latest film covers in detail the proven history of government sponsored terrorism, and focuses on the 7/7 London bombings" Terror-Storm (Alex Jones)821 5 star ratings; http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5948263607579389947&q=Alex+Jones+Terror+Storm There are some people who don't know that three buildings came down in New York on 911.
Hmmm...:grr:

[Time for change]

28. Thanks - That looks like a great video

I'll have to watch the whole thing when I have more time. I'll bet you're right that most people don't know that 3 buildings came down.

Worse, a sizable minority (in the 30s) of our population still think that Saddam Hussein had something to do with the 9-11 attacks -- thanks to the most irresponsible national news media that we've had in my memory, and perhaps ever in the history of this country.

[Ignacio Upton]

16. The Gallup poll is the worst case scenario

While I'm not doubting the accuracy of their 42% rating, on the issue of the generic ballot, their poll is an outlier. The CNN poll (CNN now does polls independently from Gallup) that was released the same day and also had Bush up at 42%, showed Democrats with a nine point advantage:
http://www.pollingreport.com/2006.htm

Gallup has a history of leaning towards the Republicans, and while they are not like Strategic Vision (a partisan GOP polling company) on occasion they slant towards the GOP. I still look at their polls, but I take the ones that appear as outliers with a grain of salt.

[Time for change]

18. That's great to see

My Google search missed that.

I looked at the four polls (from you link) that were taken during the same time frame, in comparison with the previous poll:

Gallup: -7
Diego/Hotline: -9
CNN: -4
CBS/NY Times: +5

That's still an overall decline from the previous poll of about 4 percentage points, averaged over 4 polls. So it seems to me that overall there is still some support for my theory - but this does weaken it quite a bit. Also, it's hard to dismiss it completely when all the different components fit together so perfectly, and when we don't have a lot of trend information on the other polls.

And then there is the Newsweek poll a week later, which shows no change from the previous poll - which would suggest that if there was a decline for the Dems due to the terror scare, they very well may have recovered from it already. And also, it's good to see that even though the baseline for the Gallup poll had been favoring the Dems quite a bit, the other polls had been favoring them even more so.

This does seem quite bizzare though, that we have somewhat substantial declines in the three polls while the CBS/NY Times poll is showing a 5 point improvement. That seems way beyond the range of statistical probability.

[Erika]

17. Kerry, rightly, said the war on terrorism should be

a law enforcement action. That is how the Britons stopped the most recent terror activity.

W can keep on sending our kids to their deaths until hell freezes over, and it will do nothing for our safety.

W got a bump for nothing he did.

[Harry Monroe]

24. Bill Maher said exactly that

Last night on "Larry King Live". Bush had ABSOULTELY NOTHING to do with this. Good investigative police work by the Brits stopped this one.

[Time for change]

26. In fact, it appears that we may have screwed the case up badly --

by the Bush administration's eagerness to make the arrests according to their political timing, rather than according to the needs of the British law enforcement officials who had been deeply involved in the case for some time.

[karynnj]

39. If they agree with this view, EVERY Democrat should say Kerry was right

and claim it as the Democratic position. It was the 2004 position because Kerry was the standard bearer. (If they don't want to say Kerry, they can say the Democrats were right in 2004.) Kerry has referred to Gore as visionary on global warming. Kerry was the one who was a decade ahead of other politicians on terror. (See the New War)

[Justice]

19. Good Analysis - One Additional Thought

I wonder if this flurry of plane diversions that turn out to be nothing, following on the heels of the UK plot evidence issues will lessen anxiety, more like a boy who cries wolf mentality.

[Time for change]

31. Yes, I believe that is right to some extent -- good point

Still, I'm very worried about what they have up their sleeve between now and November.

[treestar]

20. Voters this narrow minded and stupid

would be scary indeed.

Is it really true? Are we as a nation really this stupid and easily swayed. A word or a label is all it takes?

[Time for change]

21. Consider this

Bush's approval ratings were tanking right before 9-11, and the attacks of that day caused his approval ratings to skyrocket about 40 points, to around 90%. And for what? For sitting around reading "My Pet Goat" to third graders for several minutes after he received the news? For having done nothing to prepare for the attacks?

Then, his approval ratings were tanking again just prior to the Iraq war, and as soon as the war started they shot way up again - though not to 90%.

And consider these statistics from the last Gallup poll on this issue:

39% of respondents think that “Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the September 11 terrorist attacks” (March 10-12);
44% “consider the war in Iraq to be part of the war on terrorism which began on September 11, 2001” (March 10-12); and
40% believe that “the war on terrorism” is “better off (29% believe it is worse off) as a result of the war with Iraq” (June 9-11).

People believe all these things despite no evidence to support them except for the propaganda coming out of the White House -- AND the fact that our corporate news media does nothing to dispell these ideas, and even encourages them. So the people aren't fully to blame for this -- our national news media has handled all this in a most irresponsible manor.

[oc2002]

22. well said and documented. I must agree, that we are close to a point of

Deterioration. Its the last stop to Authoritarianism.

The public is poorly informed, or at the least you have a media more interested in ratings and following a ten year old murder story of a dead child that turns out to be completely false, in short sensationalism.

I think we as a country deserve Bush for not standing up to his style of government, which is based on deceptions and lies steeped deeper by the year.

[Time for change]

34. But as you say, the public is very poorly informed

Due of course to the fact that we have a national news media that not only is more concerned about sensationalism than real news, but works actively to block any success for the Democratic Party, or democracy in general:

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Time%20for%20change/62

[warrens]

23. Gallup is an outlier on this one

None of the other polls, including Fox, showed any major improvement.

[Time for change]

25. Please see post #s 16 and 18

It's not quite accurate to say that none of the other polls showed major improvement, but it's true that Gallup was somewhat of an outlier. On the other hand, the Diageo/Hotline poll showed a 9 point loss for the Democrats. Actually, based on the data in , it looks like the biggest outlier is the NBC/NY Times poll, which actually showed a 5 point improvement for the Dems. But I agree that the information in PollingrReport.com does make my conclusions look weaker than I had originally felt to be the case, before Ignacio Upton provided me with that link.

But you mention FOX, and I don't see a post terror scare poll from FOX in the PollingReport.com. Can you give us the results and dates of the poll you refer to?

[ArmchairMeme]

27. Rise above the fear

The first word from the first respondent has a clue for us; "Hopefully their Grand Strategy won't work this time." See - HOPE

When will we as Americans look at our strengths and recognize that with that hope we can overcome the fearmongering despite the odds.

There have been many times in the history of America where times have brought difficult situations but Americans have come together to rise above those difficulties.

I am hopeful that we can do the same in this time. We can have faith in ourselves to rise above the fears that the media drums on and on about.

I particularly like the graphic about Building 7 which was not struck by a plane shown imploding. That is a fact that should scream - question what is being presented to the public.

Draw on our strengths to rise above the fears.

[Time for change]

35. Yes, Americans need to rise above the fear

I'm afraid that the only way that is going to happen is if the Democrats find a way to make their voices rise above the voices of our corporate media.

[Spiffarino]

30. Here's the deal: Attack their STRENGTH

Since the Republicans poll strongly on the terrorism issue, this is where the Dems must go on the offensive. Dems have backed off when it comes to where the Repubs are strongest in opinion polls, effectively conceding the issue. This must not continue or the Democratic party will land in history's dustbin.

Fact: Republicans are NOT strong on terrorism, they are strong on anti-terrorism rhetoric.
Fact: Republicans will NOT protect you. The post-Katrina disaster is only the most obvious proof. There are plenty more examples.
Fact: Waging war in Iraq makes us weaker, and Bush's folly has made more terrorists and terrorist sympathizers.

The Democratic talking heads must not run away from this issue. Instead, we all must hammer it home as loudly and as often as possible.

[Time for change]

36. Absolutely - Dems must do that

But I don't think that they can afford to rely on the so-called "Democratic talking heads". They aren't going to get any break from the corporate media, and those who work for the corporate media are very constrained in what they can say while still being able to feel secure about their jobs.

Our Democratic leaders themselves have to put this message out as aggressively as they can, whenever they appear on camera, and they need to aggressively promote opportunities to do so.

[Spiffarino]

47. You are absolutely correct

I should have thought about it more fully. The phrase "talking heads" implies pundits. What I really wanted to say was that the Democrats should lead on the issue, meaning the candidates, officeholders and party spokespeople.

I'm glad you caught that.

[chill_wind]

38. Three great points and effectively stated ones.

They are the absolute truth and there is is plenty to elaborate on under each one.

[liberal N proud]

32. Great work

Thanks for putting this together

[McCamy Taylor]

37. Latest W. polls show him dropping again. I think the poll change was minor

The real pay off was probably in fundraising. Terra is a RNC product and when the donors see it selling they figure they can invest.

The real contest is going to be how much election fraud the RNC thinks it can get away with.

[Time for change]

49. Thank God for that - maybe it is becoming apparent how this thing was

choreographed.

Good point about the fundraising. That would explain why the fundraising letter went out so soon after the arrests. Just think what might have happened if they had responded that quickly to the 9-11 attacks.

Yes, the real question is how much election fraud they can get away with. I wish that the Dems showed more signs of taking this issue real seriously.

[chill_wind]

40. Another very good piece of work and analysis. Thank you TFC

You have such a keen talent for capturing and organizing facts and making a strong case as supported by them. I too am concerned at these kinds of recurrant trends.

The truth of so many of these frenzied false, distorted and otherwise overblown alarms never seems to fully emerge with the anywhere the same degree of interest or intensity by the media in the aftermath. Our media constantly does a piss-poor job of correcting perception and reality. Their desultory policies are very much an integral and responsible part of these dark political times, and in my fantasies of real court-case accountability of the criminalality of this government someday, not just political officials but key players in more than a few media organizations would be hauled in for their atrocious degrees of apathy and complicity amidst the alarming decline of the country under the B.A. as well. We need mass reform, but in the meantime, Dems cannot depend on them to clean up their act.

Dems MUST hammer issues like this with facts. I agree with you completely: Between now and Nov and now and 08 they **better figure this out** for good. Scorched earth strategy is seriously needed!

[jackbourassa]

43. I think the original poster is mistaken...

No such poll was ever released by Gallup showing the Democrats ahead by only two points in the generic ballot.

I think he may have gotten confused...

There is a new poll by Gallup. One which shows Bush at 42%. But the generic ballot lead for Democrats is 10% not 2%. And that same poll shows Democrats above the 50% mark.

This poll was a technical improvement from other recent polls where we led anywhere from 15% to 19%. But the reason for those numbers, like I mentioned in an above post, was because the Republican numbers were so low. It was almost guaranteed that when forced to pick a side, those undecided Republicans would support the Republican Party. Hence my earlier post that these were actually good numbers for us.

Since the Democratic lead technically "shrank" and Bush's approval rating slightly improved (as many others have mentioned, this conflicts with several - if not all - other polls released during the same period), I can see how Gallup would argue that these numbers spelled an "improvement" for the Republicans. The 47% to 45% Democratic lead, that the original poster cites, is actually a reflection on the general publics opinion on who is better at terrorism. Thus, Gallup concluded that terrorism is what helped the Republican alleged "rebound."

I think this is what led to the confusion.

[Time for change]

44. Why do you think that?

I put the link for the full poll in the OP. You might not be able to access that, so here is an article on the poll:

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/08/republicans_surge_in_generic_poll/

[jackbourassa]

57. I stand corrected...

I checked other sights and they confirmed that the Gallup Poll did indeed post those results. I was the one who was confused. I confused the Gallup poll with the CNN poll. My mistake.

In case you're interested though. There have been six other polls released since that Gallup poll.

Here they are:

Cook Political Poll/RT Strategies (released today) Aug 25-27 (801 Reg. Voters) +/- 4%

Dems 51%
Reps 40%

(Dem lead +11%)

Newsweek Poll August 24-26 (895 Reg. Voters) +/- 4%

Dems 50%
Reps 38%

(Dem lead +12%)

Quinnipiac Poll August 17-23 (1,080 Reg. Voters) +/- 3%

Dems 48%
Reps 32%

(Dem lead +16%)

Harris Poll August 18-21 (1,000 Reg. Voters) +/- 3%

Dems 47%
Reps 32%

(Dem lead +15%)

CBS/NYT Poll August 17-21 (1,206 Reg. Voters) +/- 3%

Dems 47%
Reps 32%

(Dem lead +15%)

CNN Poll August 18-20 (1,033 Reg. Voters) +/- 3%

Dems 52%
Reps 43%

(Dem lead +9%)

This last one was the one I was talking about.

Anyway, all of these polls were released after the Gallup poll you're freaking out about and we are leading between 9% and 16% in all of them, and are above 50% in three of them (the other three we currently lead by 16%, 15% and 15% respectively).

There is NO Republican surge. As usual Gallup is full of shit. Which is probably why no one has heard its results.

A side note in case you're interested...

The Newsweek Poll (Dem 50% and Rep 38%) added a side note showing the totals breakdown. Apparently, Reps are getting 92% of their base and Dems 93%. The undecideds are all independents. Democrats currently hold a lead of 47% to 29%. Given that the Republicans are currently polling poorly among independents (about a third) I can't see them improving much. Which means the potential I wrote earlier about (of Democrats winning by 12%) may be accurate, and if anything, underestimates the potential size of the Democratic victory come November.

[Time for change]

59. I think that there was a GOP surge, but it was short lived and smaller

than Ioriginally thought.

In order to best evaluate whether or not there was a surge, the way to do that is not just to look at current poll numbers, but to compare those numbers with results from the same polls from earlier times, as I did with the Gallup poll.

I did that to the extent that I could in post # 18 of this thread, after I found out about the other poll results. That analysis shows an average surge for the Republicans of about 4%, over four different polling organizations. In that limited analysis, the CBS/NY Times poll appears to be an outlier when compared with the other polls.

Anyhow, I wouldn't say that I was freaking out about the Gallup poll, but I did believe (and still do, but to a smaller extent) that this whole episode was something that we should be concerned about and something which should serve as a warning to us of things to come between now and November.

But I am much relieved to see all those other polls now. I think that they show not only that the damage was less than I had originally thought, but that it was short lasting, and that Gallup may be an outlier weighted to the Republican side (unless the poll that I cited was a wierd statistical anamoly that won't be repeated.)

[Time for change]

50. Thank you chill wind

You are absolutely right that the truth of these alarms never emerges with the same degree of alarm as the original sensational story. I believe that it goes way beyond doing a poor job. There are large sections of our corporate media that actively work to hide the truth and to maintain Republicans in power. For example, I read recently that ABC News is coming out with a documentary shortly before the elections that blames Clinton for the 9-11 attacks.

Here is something that I wrote on that recently:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1784920

I really believe that this situation is worse than even our Democratic leaders are willing to admit, and that they need to be very aggressive about counteracting this.

[chill_wind]

56. Yes. Res Ipsa Loquitur

Here's another very recent and chilling illustration.

The Common Dreams story on the DU front page.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2013149

There's a breakdown of the time in minutes vs seconds the media devoted to the ramsey story vs bad news for Bush.

They are co-conspirators. Period.

[Time for change]

58. Oh yes, that was an excellent article

The saddest thing about it is that it doesn't by any means represent an isolated incident. This kind of thing has been standard practice for several years, especially since the start of the Bush pResidency.

I wonder if our Democratic leaders recognize this, or if they're in denial about it. One the one hand, I think "How could they possibly not know?" But on the other hand, I ask myself, "If they know, then why don't they complain and hammer away at this issue, so that it becomes apparent to more people?" (sigh)

[mmonk]

42. They should concentrate on the administration's malfeasance

and talk of terrorism as a law enforcement job that they will take care of if elected. But they shouldn't play on the bush battlefield, they should create new ones. They also need to know how to correctly frame an issue or response.

[illinoisprogressive]

46. So Damn Gullible

The British newspapers asked how so many people could be so stupid when the dimwit was re-elected.
Well, it is because they are and totally gullible too.
They wonder why things are so bad. Well, they have no one to blame but, thier own uninformed and woolheaded brains.

[Time for change]

51. True, but there are two other factors as well

Election fraud

And a corporate national news media that is determined to do everything they can to help the Republicans stay in power:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1784920

[Maxdee55]

48. Terror Plot

Over the past few years I have read some excellent postings,
articles, or just plain comments which have explained the
Democrats positions and accomplishments in the war on terror.
I have learned that President Clinton did so much more to
fight terrorism than he is given credit for, I have learned
that the Bush administration ignored the threats and warnings
from intelligence sources foreign and domestic during the 8
months leading up to 9-11, and most important I have learned
that the Republicans, sabotaged Clinton's efforts to fight the
terror threat in this country and abroad, preferring of course
to bring down the Democratic President. Democratic candidates
need to take the gloves off and start bringing this message to
the American people, we need Democratic Senators and
Congressmen to pound this message on a daily basis, like the
neocon do with "cut and run, appeasement, and
cowardly". Democrats need to get down to their level and
play dirt for dirt, make the message something like
"politics before safety, or war isn't a game you play to
win votes" anything is better than the message that is
getting out there now. Democrats need to stop reacting and
start acting the part of leaders, they need to point out the
lies of Republicans lie by lie, show the American people the
hypocrisy of the Republican party, remember we have the truth
and the facts on our side.

[Time for change]

53. Well put Maxdee

I take it you saw Will Pitt's recent article on DU?
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/WilliamPitt/84

[lonestarnot]

52. He probably runs around the White House while farting and yelling terra

terra terra since it's been sooooooooooooo successful. That freak defending his inaction against the aftermath of Katrina this week has been disgraceful.

[Time for change]

54. I have said

that if the media would have held him accountable for any number of things: Katrina, 9-11, tax cut policies, doing a presidential debate while being wired to his puppetmasters, going AWOL from the national guard, lying us into war, outing a CIA agent, etc. etc. etc., he would have trouble polling double digit approval ratings, and he would have been unlikely to reach double digits in the 2004 election, election fraud or no.

[lonestarnot]

55. And you are probably right,

however, there is nothing to stop each and every American from becoming the media.