Rasmussen Trust on Issues/ Congressional Ballot-Mid July 2009

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I have noticed some interesting trends on both of these. I figured one month would be an aberration but the GOP leads on 8 of 10 key issues. I can remember when struggle to maintain one key issue.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/trust_on_issues
Issue
Democrats
Republicans
 
Health Care
46%
42%
Economy
41%
46%
Education
41%
38%
Iraq
41%
45%
Nat'l Security
40%
49%
Abortion
39%
46%
Social Security
37%
42%
Taxes
36%
52%  
Immigration
34%
40%
Gov't Ethics
33%
34%
 
The three bolded ones indicate the issues I beleive would most likely indicate a swing towards the GOP in 2010 should the Dems screw up. If you start seeing the GOP lead by 10 points or more on at least 2 of the three consistantly then I think its likely that the Dems are big trouble.

Congressional Ballot
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/generic_congressional_ballot

Date
Dem GOP
 
07-26-09
39%
42%
07-19-09
38%
42%
07-12-09
37%
40%
07-05-09
38%
41%
06-28-09
39%
41%
 
Another interesting fact is that Republicans lead among Independents by a margin of 39% to 19% on the Congressional Ballot. Republicans will have to continue to do well among this group due to the fact that the GOP is now much smaller then it was a few years ago.

Other good barometers include the Governorships in New Jersey and Virginia.

[Rowan]

Silence is golden.

[PASOK Leader Hashemite]

Oh, this is awful.

[All life is a blur of Republicans and meat.]

Jeez, Rasmussen is in full-on shill mode.

[SamInTheSouth]

Jeez, Rasmussen is in full-on shill mode.

So because you don't like the results of the poll that makes them a shill?

[Beet]

Rasmussen has long been an outlier in the Presidential approval polls, and I have been skeptical of them since last year. Still, it's believable that things are heading down for Obama and the Dems. Anyone know what their 'likely voter' model does, and if they still do landline robocalls-only? Both of these could affect their results.

Update. Here is an illustration of why I am skeptical of Rasmussen:

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 37% of voters now favor her confirmation while 43% are opposed. (7/15) For the past 2 weeks, they have found more opposed than support.

link

Compare with other pollsters on substantially the same question:

Diageo/Hotline 50-28
Gallup 53-33
CBS 30-14
Quinnipiac 54-26
CNN 47-40
ABC/WashPost 62-25
http://www.pollingreport.com/court.htm

[CARLHAYDEN]

Rasmussen has long been an outlier in the Presidential approval polls, and I have been skeptical of them since last year. Still, it's believable that things are heading down for Obama and the Dems. Anyone know what their 'likely voter' model does, and if they still do landline robocalls-only? Both of these could affect their results.

Update. Here is an illustration of why I am skeptical of Rasmussen:

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 37% of voters now favor her confirmation while 43% are opposed. (7/15) For the past 2 weeks, they have found more opposed than support.

link

Compare with other pollsters on substantially the same question:

Diageo/Hotline 50-28
Gallup 53-33
CBS 30-14
Quinnipiac 54-26
CNN 47-40
ABC/WashPost 62-25
http://www.pollingreport.com/court.htm

Sorry Beet, but the largest margin the Democrats have achieved over the Republicans in a Congressional election in a generation was 11 points (2008).  If you believe the polls you cited (with the exception of ORC), then you're really out of touch with reality.

While Rasmussen may be slightly optimistic about the Republican vote (I put the Democrats up by 2 points at this time), polls showing the Democrats ahead by 16 - 37 points are laughable.

Oh, and to correct a couple of your polls, the most recent results of FD (you identify them as Diageo/Hotline) from July 9-15 is 39 Democrat and 32 Republican, a 7 point Democrat advantage, not the 22 points you cited, while the Quinnipiac survey from June 23-29 was 42 Democrat and 34 Republican, an 8 point Democrat advantage, not the 28 points you cited.

[Mr.Phips]

There is no way that Republicans are trusted more on Social Security after what they tried to do to the system in 2005.  People may have short memories, but not THAT short. 

[Bandit3 the Worker]

I have noticed some interesting trends on both of these. I figured one month would be an aberration but the GOP leads on 8 of 10 key issues.

It's Rasmutant. You can't trust it.

[Ronnie]

I have noticed some interesting trends on both of these. I figured one month would be an aberration but the GOP leads on 8 of 10 key issues.

It's Rasmutant. You can't trust it.

Just because he doesn't give favorable results to the messiah, doesn't mean that you have to go all hating on him. 

All things aside, I have doubts about this poll as well.

[Torie]

If the Dem plan passes to raise marginal tax rates to 47% passes (which it won't),  the GOP will get near to taking control of the House in 2010, with about 10 seats gained due to party switches. There was an interesting piece in the WSJ today, that the Dems control a majority of the hyper wealthy CD districts, and most of those Dem congresspersons are sweating bullets.

There are no permanent alignments, just permanent interests.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

The GOP has a 1% chance of gaining any seats, and a 0% chance of taking control of Congress outright.

[I left.]

The GOP has a 1% chance of gaining any seats, and a 0% chance of taking control of Congress outright.

lol

[President Marokai]

If you expect me to take this poll seriously.. then.. yeah...

[Democratic Hawk]

I'm saying nowt

[Mr.Phips]

If the Dem plan passes to raise marginal tax rates to 47% passes (which it won't),  the GOP will get near to taking control of the House in 2010, with about 10 seats gained due to party switches. There was an interesting piece in the WSJ today, that the Dems control a majority of the hyper wealthy CD districts, and most of those Dem congresspersons are sweating bullets.

There are no permanent alignments, just permanent interests.

A lot of those wealthy districts are also super liberal.  They are represented by safer than safe Democrats like Carolyn Maloney, Pete Stark, and Henry Waxman. 

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

There is no way that Republicans are trusted more on Social Security after what they tried to do to the system in 2005.  People may have short memories, but not THAT short. 

I agree Rasmussen tends to be off slightly from other polling firms on these things. But they were dead on in 2006 and fairly good in 2008. They also did well in 2004.

As for Social Security the issue as its not addressed people will began to question Dems seriousness about doing anything about its coming insolvency.

I keep wondering why people are so opposed to the privatisation even partially, there is no risk of lossing the money(depends on the account the program uses, if you allow people to invest in low risk accounts like IRA's or even CD's there would be almost zero risk to them at all) and its the only real fix out there. Sure you can raise taxes and cut benefits and that kicks the can down the road and guess what, 20 years later its worse then before. Lets fix it once and for all and get it over with. Technically Socially Security is already invested, in Gov't T-bonds. Which I think puts them at just as much risk as some of the ideas being proposed ways to invest Social security under partial privatization.

If you expect me to take this poll seriously.. then.. yeah...

Your opinion is highly irrelevant considering the level of contempt you hold for those that disagree with you.

If the Dem plan passes to raise marginal tax rates to 47% passes (which it won't),  the GOP will get near to taking control of the House in 2010, with about 10 seats gained due to party switches. There was an interesting piece in the WSJ today, that the Dems control a majority of the hyper wealthy CD districts, and most of those Dem congresspersons are sweating bullets.

There are no permanent alignments, just permanent interests.

A lot of those wealthy districts are also super liberal.  They are represented by safer than safe Democrats like Carolyn Maloney, Pete Stark, and Henry Waxman. 

Yes but some of them like Gerry Connolly, Jim Himes, and other freshmen aren't safer then safe. Connolly is one of the Dem complaining about how the Health Care bill is paid for. He was just on CBS Evening News voicing his concern about it. I would say its a fair statement to they are sweating bullets.

The GOP has a 1% chance of gaining any seats, and a 0% chance of taking control of Congress outright.

Your half right. They have a chance of gaining 5 or 6 seats. Maybe 10 to 15 if the winds really blow hard for them.

[Torie]

If the Dem plan passes to raise marginal tax rates to 47% passes (which it won't),  the GOP will get near to taking control of the House in 2010, with about 10 seats gained due to party switches. There was an interesting piece in the WSJ today, that the Dems control a majority of the hyper wealthy CD districts, and most of those Dem congresspersons are sweating bullets.

There are no permanent alignments, just permanent interests.

A lot of those wealthy districts are also super liberal.  They are represented by safer than safe Democrats like Carolyn Maloney, Pete Stark, and Henry Waxman. 

The WSJ today said there is a rebellion among these Dems from wealthy districts, and some blue dogs, and a big tax increase on the rich is effectively dead. This does not surprise me at all. It was political poison, and I stand by my prediction, which of course, will not be tested.

[Mr.Phips]

There is no way that Republicans are trusted more on Social Security after what they tried to do to the system in 2005.  People may have short memories, but not THAT short. 

I agree Rasmussen tends to be off slightly from other polling firms on these things. But they were dead on in 2006 and fairly good in 2008. They also did well in 2004.

As for Social Security the issue as its not addressed people will began to question Dems seriousness about doing anything about its coming insolvency.

I keep wondering why people are so opposed to the privatisation even partially, there is no risk of lossing the money(depends on the account the program uses, if you allow people to invest in low risk accounts like IRA's or even CD's there would be almost zero risk to them at all) and its the only real fix out there. Sure you can raise taxes and cut benefits and that kicks the can down the road and guess what, 20 years later its worse then before. Lets fix it once and for all and get it over with. Technically Socially Security is already invested, in Gov't T-bonds. Which I think puts them at just as much risk as some of the ideas being proposed ways to invest Social security under partial privatization.

Democrats will not let Republicans do anything to Social Security, especially if healthcare reform is killed again.  An eye for an eye. 

[SamInTheSouth]

Democrats will not let Republicans do anything to Social Security, especially if healthcare reform is killed again.  An eye for an eye. 

Ah yes, instead of actually doing something good for Americans they'll all just act like spoiled children.

[Mr.Phips]

Democrats will not let Republicans do anything to Social Security, especially if healthcare reform is killed again.  An eye for an eye. 

Ah yes, instead of actually doing something good for Americans they'll all just act like spoiled children.

Republicans are doing the same thing on healthcare. 

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Party ID as of August 1st.
Democrats 36.8%
Republican 33.3%
Independent 29.9%

Mostly indies growing at the Expense of the Dems. The GOP seems pretty stagnant in the low 30's while Indies gained a full percent. Other firms tend to show the GOP at 22% and the Dems at 51%. I think that exaggerates the size of the exodus from the GOP and it fails to account for any movement away from the dems because of rising opposition to Obama's programs. My personal view is the Dems probably have a 10 or 12 point advantage after dividing up the Indies which meshes well with Obama's Approvals/Disapprovals which generally have him in the mid 50's.

When they come out in the middle of August I will post the New "10 key Issues" and the new Congressional Ballot numbers, just so I can see another 10 posts full of liberal moaning. .

More August polling
Congressional Ballot
Date
Dem
GOP
 
08-02-09
38%
43%

Time for some more leftist moaning!
 

 

[Rowan]

Well considering that for the month before the election Rasmussen found a party ID of D+7.1 and the exit polls showed a D+7 party ID, I would trust his numbers over the people like CBS and WAPO who just make things up.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Well considering that for the month before the election Rasmussen found a party ID of D+7.1 and the exit polls showed a D+7 party ID, I would trust his numbers over the people like CBS and WAPO who just make things up.

I added the last two Congressional Ballot polls of July to my first post in this thread on Page 1 as well because I wanted to continue grouping the polls by month.

[Vepres]

While I agree Rasmussen is typically an outlier, look at this Gallup poll. Scroll down a bit to get to specific issues. More people disapprove of Obama's handling of health care, taxes, and the budget deficit than support. Approve and disapprove are about even for handling the economy.