The latest Washington Post/ABC News poll shows that President Obama's approval ratings have ticked up and so have the voters' estimation of the Democratic performance in Congress. For all the hoo-hah--ranting white men in the streets!--the American people as a whole seem to have a growing confidence in the administration.
It should be noted as well that President Obama's approval ratings have never been low, although that is not the general impression you would have from the mainstream press. The President is always in dire straits, they always say, and peasants armed with pitchforks are advancing on Congress.
In actual reality, the President's approval numbers have almost always been in the 50-55% range, which is roughly the percentage of people who voted for him in the first place. That level of popularity makes him wildly popular compared to the previous occupant of the office, but that is not the impression you'd have without paying fairly careful attention.
Oh, the voters were going to make the Democrats pay. They're rip-roarin' mad. They were going to throw Democratic Senators and Congressman into the streets. Why, the Democrats might even lose Congress!
That was always overblown. The tea-baggers represent 18% of the country--older, white men. The opinion of older white men is no longer the "default conventional wisdom" in this country, but those who hold to that view don't know it yet. That's all that's about.
In any case, they were never going to vote Democratic anyway. The rest of the country seems to be thinking differently. Health care reform will turn out to be a political plus. On financial reform, the public is much more with the Democrats than the Republicans. In fact, the current boost in Democratic fortunes is probably largely because of those two issues.
The current argument in Democratic circles is whether or not to finish financial reform and then call it "good enough" and go into the midterms on the basis of their current record. Or, should the Democrats continue on with immigration reform and environmental legislation?
Tough call. On the one hand, taking on difficult issues is the right thing to do. On the other hand, both of those are going to be unpopular in the short-term--(though not the long term; long term, they're both political winners; the problem is that both are easily demogogued and that's undoubtedly what would happen because it always does, and in the short term it usually works).
We need immigration reform, no question, but the Democratic Party's political position with Latino-Americans is not going to be endangered if we put it off until next year, mainly because the Republicans can pretty much be counted on to keep shooting themselves in the foot when it comes to issues that affect Latinos.
So, forge ahead? Or call it good and go into the midterms on the current record? If the former, then, I don't care who you are, you'd have to give the Democratic leadership some credit for political courage. It might even work.
If the latter, the thinking would be that it is better to ensure continued governance--i.e. win this election--because that increases the possibility of getting better legislation next year on those very same issues of immigration and the environment.
If the Democrats win it will be because the GOP doesn't offer a serious alternative. Unemployment is still off the charts and Obama's approval ratings will not move till thosse stats improve. Obama doesn't seem to be worried about that, doubtless calculating that the worst will be over by the time he has to face the voters again, but in the meantime people are suffering. Arizona just did the Dems a big favor, though.
Posted by: Hypatia | April 29, 2010 at 11:05 AM