Comments on: Republican Support Trending Up?

By: Betsy Newmark

Betsy Newmark — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 21:29:32 +0000

Thanks for the link, James. But one quibble: I didn't credit the GOP in Congress with having seen the evils of their ways. I rather think that this is a case of disenchanted Republican voters who had splintered off in 2006 starting to return home now that they've seen the full glory of the Democrats in power.

Betsy

By: yetanotherjohn

yetanotherjohn — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 20:54:50 +0000

Tano,

Your right on the '72, my bad.

You could look at it as the public preferring democrats the 3 of the last 4 times, but that would be stretching it. In fact, 4 out of the last 4 times, a majority (aka > 50%) of the people preferred someone other than the democrats. 1 out of the last 4 times (aka the last time) a majority preferred the republican.

The Clinton in 92 was the low point for the republicans. But consider this, outside of his home state (Arkansas) and the perennial democratic bastion of DC, Clinton failed to get a majority of the votes in any state.

Bottom line is that the democrats can win if the republican vote is split (e.g. 92), but they have a hard time putting forward a position that the majority of the country can support. On the other hand, the republicans have found that > 50% point 5 of the last 10 times. You may take comfort in 3 of the last 4 as you say, but you are ignoring the fact that you haven't put forward a majority position in any of those last 4 elections.

By: Tano

Tano — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 20:19:00 +0000

Oh, and over those past four presidentials, the Dem candidates have recieved 48.1% of the vote, the Republicans 45.3.

Its all in the way you slice it, john.

By: Tano

Tano — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 20:12:01 +0000

YAJ,

Your numbers seem to make the case that the American people have preferred the Democrats in three out of the last four presidential elections.
Thanks for pointing that out!

Oh, and btw, you transposed the numbers for '72. It was R+23, not 32.

By: yetanotherjohn

yetanotherjohn — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 18:44:11 +0000

Take a longer term look at the presidential elections of the last 40 years.
68 - R+0.7%
72 - R+32.15%
76 - R-2.06%
80 - R+9.74%
84 - R+18.21%
88 - R+7.72%
92 - R-5.56%
96 - R-8.51%
00 - R-0.51%
04 - R+2.46%

R > 50% 5 out of 10 times.
D > 50% 1 out of 10 times

R average 50.08% (median 49.39%)
D average 44.64% (median 44.33%)

The modern electorate has favored the GOP in general. Both parties have had about the same floor (37.52% for dems in 72, 37.45% for reps in 92). The difference is that the dems have only once in the last forty years been able to break 50% (76 with 50.08%), while the peak for the reps was 69.67%.

These numbers by Rasmussen are playing around with the base. The election is decided by the other 29.5%. That is also why 2 out of 3 of the dems wins came with significant 3rd party participation and the third came from significant reps screw up (76 after Watergate).

By: Michael

Michael — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 18:06:26 +0000

The number of Americans who consider themselves to be Republicans jumped nearly two percentage points in December

2%? Isn't that what Ron Paul is polling? Coincidence, I think not. They should have banned Paul supporters from participating in that poll, not because it would make it more accurate, but just because it's fun to mess with them like that.