Economic Woes Could Threaten Incumbents, Pollster [Zogby] Says

The St Louis Post-Dispatch ^ | 9/22/02 | Bill Lambrecht

[Gothmog]

WASHINGTON - Republicans in key election contests around the country haven't shared in President George W. Bush's recent popularity surge as he made the case for invading Iraq, new polls show.

Instead, the White House focus on war and terrorism may be compounding voters' nervousness about the economy, and in the process fueling anti-incumbent sentiments that threaten sitting Republicans and Democrats alike.

[Dialup Llama]

>Economic Woes Could Threaten Incumbents, Pollster [Zogby] Says

The headline should read Economic Woes Could Threaten Incumbents, Pollster [Zogby] Hopes

[arkfreepdom]

"The fact is, people are feeling insecure, and that's one of the things that the president and the Republican Party need to worry about as far as the war in Iraq," said pollster John Zogby."

Not nearly as much as Iraqis should worry.

[Gothmog]

Or "The headline should read Economic Woes Could Threaten GOP Incumbents, Pollster [Zogby] Hopes"

[Sungirl]

Well...he's got a point you know.....the economy sucks and unfortunately Bush is president even though it was going downhill before he became president ...which has been 2 years now.... and all you hear about is that he's concerned with Iraq. He is even going to skip new tax cuts which I thought would help the economy(?) Then I read how he and Mexico's Fox are going to start their immigration...amnesty talk after the first of the year?

[Vets_Husband_and_Wife]

I've learned to believe in NOTHING Zogby!!

He has made known his liberal AGENDA in the last year. I un-subscribed from his e-mail list, and discredit his methods of poll taking. There are better information "gathering" organizations out there. Zogby is a farce.

[Gothmog]

Don't worry, the GOP candidates will run on a strong conservative domestic platform of having passed campaign finance deform, increased Federal spending on education, increased spending on Rx drugs for seniors. All sure to get out the GOP base.

Bush did get a tax cut (much of it delayed) passed, but I don't hear anyone talking about that now, so I doubt it's going to motivate the base much. Oh, and GOP candidates are running away from at least partially privatizing Social Security, a great issue for attracting women voters.

[1Old Pro]

Zogby is on the Golisano payroll. Some say Golisano is running to help the Dem (McCall) beat Pataki-R. Many Clintoon operatives are also working for Golisano.

Connect the dots....Zogby is basically a Dem partisan.

[Gothmog]

Oh, I know who Zogby is, don't worry, but tracking polls are always interesting because you can 'track' them and then match them versus his previous results and other polls. In a few weeks maybe I'll make a chart of his tracking polls vs. others and we can see how off he is.

[drjimmy]

Zogby is on the Golisano payroll.
I wasn't aware of this tidbit. Can you point me to a news story about this?

[1Old Pro]

It's an open fact. It's probably on Golisano's or Zogby's site. If it's not on Zogby's site then he is attempting to deceive people. Check the NY Post, I'm sure they have written about this numerous times.

[Eva]

Zogby does seem to have advance knowledge of voter fraud, though. Maybe we should use him to be extra vigilant in areas where his polls conflict with other information.

[drjimmy]

I thought it was something different than hiring him to do polling. John Sununu also hired Zogby to do his polling in New Hampshire.

[Sungirl]

Why do you say that would attract women voters? (Privatizing SS)

And I just read how the Bush Admin is cutting benefits to medicare for many outpatient procedures...a biggy here in FL.

[Gothmog]

Privatizing SS and why the GOP would benefit electorally will take a little explaining and my recollections from reading/browsing lots of political articles, so please be patient if I don't document everything.

From an article I read by two pollsters (not politically affiliated) in Atlantic Magazine just post-2000 Bush win: National and Senate elections (not as much House) are decided by Nixon's "Silent Majority" and Reagans' "Conservative Coalition."

This demographic group is made up of white men and women who have HS education or some post-HS education and work in trades like: Mechanic, waitress, nurse, public teacher; technician, etc. The people who make everything work on a daily basis.

It is this demographic group, more than any other, which has a predominant influence on national and statewide elections. By far, they are the 800 lb. gorilla. They will continue to dominate elections until at least 2016.

The GOP has a slight advantage (Male gender gap the media never really reports on) with the white males; guns, military spending, taxes. The Dems have a slightly larger advantage (The gender gap always reported) with white women.

As a note, that is why Gore never ran on the liberal line against gun rights -- he saw what happened in 1994 and he desperately needed to get as much support from white males as he could because Bush was clearly their obvious choice.

So, how does privatizing SS attract to the GOP the second half of the key voting block?

As I understand the reasoning in general, and in particular with the demographic group of white women who are at least partially educated and hold professional jobs, women are the ones who deal most with both the 'past and present' needs of elderly care.

Please remember, I am speaking in general terms about a large demographics group, but women are the primary caregivers in their lives and in their families. Especially since women tend to live longer.

Past: They are the ones most likely dealing with Senior-care issues, and mainly that is with their mothers and/or their spouses' mothers.

Present: They are also likely to be more focused on their own future needs since they may not be the primary wage earner and will live longer than the primary wage earner.

They can certainly look at the hospital bills, nursing home bills, etc., and compare them with their savings and expected SS benefits.

A plan that allows them to make the choice to invest at least a portion the majority of their lifetime savings (for this income group) in a system that will earn them more money is attractive -- and as the political analysts say, pocketbook issues drive voters.

An anecdote, during the 2000 election President Bush appeared on the CBS morning show with one of the cast members of CBS' first season of "Surivor," Susan, the truck-driving-woman from WI. I was certain (especially since she was such a hard-case on the show and from a semi-socialist state) that she was going to try to embarass him w/ all sorts of populist nonsense. Instead, she was actually quite polite.

But she really perked up when he mentioned privatizing SS. She was quite supportive, very enthusiastic, wanted control over her own money.

Married, blue-coller, independent businesswoman. Just the thing the GOP should be looking for.

Please note: I am not saying that men or minorities might not be attracted to SS privatization, or that they care less about their own future or their parents' care.

[lasereye]

All this Zogby bashing looks like whistling past the graveyard to me. The fact is he has probably been more accurate than any other pollster over the years. He showed Gore catching up to Bush in 2000. In 94 he was the only pollster showing Pataki had pulled ahead of Cuomo. All the other polls showed Cuomo ahead, some by double digit margins. How does that fit with rigging his polls to favor Democrats?

If Zogby's accurate, and I think he is, things are clearly trending in a Democratic direction, and the GOP will lose a net of 2 or 3 Senate seats and maybe the House. The stock market is collapsing almost daily and Bush has basically nothing to say about the economy. Don't you think people notice that? It's spooky how much he's like his father. Try to act Presidential while the Democrats say it's the worst economy in 50 years or Dubya killed the economy or whatever. Why doesn't he just come out and call the Dems a bunch of lying so and so's? I think the Republicans could be looking at a real disaster here. After the election the same FReepers confidently predicting control of the Senate and continued control of the HOuse will all be posting angry messages about how the Dems lied in their commercials or they paid for votes or soccer moms or something.

[Vets_Husband_and_Wife]

I belonged to Zogby's e-mail polling for years. Until recently.

He showed an extreme bias in giving his "views" which are admittedly liberal, regarding President Bush. He never did that during the Clinton admin, so why now?

I'm a "no spin zone" card carrying member. Zogby has been at odds with a lot of other polsters in the last year and a half. His underwear is showing....

[Sonny M]

Zogby does have a brother who does political consulting work in regards to polls. He worked for Al Gore during the elections and is pretty much blamed by Gore former campaign manager for costing Gore the election. (i.e. told the campaign that california was a concern, played down any worry about tennesse, said people in West Virginia were concerned about gun control and the enviorment, which actually meant they were coal miners and believed in the second amendment, etc).

[kim r.]

i remember zogby declaring mccain the winner of the south carolina primary the night before the vote.
was he right then? no. is he right now? only God knows.
may God bless us w/an republican victory in the house & senate come november.

[DaGman]

You may choose to disbelieve him but remember he was the only pollster to call Gore winning the popular vote. Sorry, but he's no farce. His polls are taken as pretty much gospel by Republicans as much as Democrats, like it or not. The movers and shakers don't let emotion get in the way when they're looking for good information.