Turner poised for big upset

Republican Bob Turner is poised to pull a huge upset in the race to replace Anthony Weiner as the Congressman from New York's 9th Congressional District.  He leads Democrat David Weprin 47-41 with Socialist Workers candidate Christopher Hoeppner at 4% and 7% of voters remaining undecided.

Turner's winning in a heavily Democratic district for two reasons: a huge lead with independents and a large amount of crossover support.  He's ahead by 32 points at 58-26 with voters unaffiliated with either major party.  And he's winning 29% of the Democratic vote, holding Weprin under 60% with voters of his own party, while losing just 10% of Republican partisans.

If Turner wins on Tuesday it will be largely due to the incredible unpopularity of Barack Obama dragging his party down in the district.  Obama won 55% there in 2008 but now has a staggeringly bad 31% approval rating, with 56% of voters disapproving of him.  It's a given that Republicans don't like him but more shocking are his 16% approval rating with independents and the fact that he's below 50% even with Democrats at 46% approving and 38% disapproving. Obama trails Mitt Romney 46-42 in a hypothetical match up in the district and leads Rick Perry only 44-43.

Beyond Obama's weakness, Turner has actually proven to be a pretty strong candidate.  45% of voters rate him favorably to 30% with a negative opinion.  Independents give him good marks by a 56/17 spread and he has better than normal numbers across party lines with 29% of Democrats expressing a positive view of him to just 43% with an unfavorable one.

Weprin has been much maligned as a candidate but he actually has positive favorability numbers too with 39% of voters rating him positively and 36% negatively.  Over the last few years there have been very few races we polled where a candidate had a postive net favorability spread and still lost.  If Obama's approval in the district was even 40% Weprin would almost definitely be headed to Congress. He's getting dragged down by something bigger than himself.

The issue of Israel does appear to be having a major impact on this race.  A plurality of voters- 37%- said that Israel was 'very important' in determining their votes. Turner is winning those folks by an amazing 71-22 margin. With everyone who doesn't say Israel is a very important issue for them Weprin actually leads 52-36. Turner is in fact winning the Jewish vote by a 56-39 margin, very unusual for a Republican candidate.  This seems to be rooted in deep unhappiness with Obama on this issue- only 30% of voters overall approve of how he's handling Israel to 54% who disapprove and with Jewish voters his approval on Israel is 22% with 68 of voters disapproving. That has a lot to do with why Turner's in such a strong position.

The only reason this election is being held in the first place is because Anthony Weiner had to resign and voters in the district are very down on him.  Only 29% have a positive opinion of their former Congressman to 53% with a negative one.  That can't help his party's prospects for keeping the seat either.

One final note on the poll and what perhaps should concern Democrats most of all. 55% of voters in the district report having voted for Obama in 2008, which is the actual percentage of the vote he got in the district.  Last year a lot of the races Democrats lost were because their voters didn't show up and the electorate was far more conservative than for a Presidential year.  When you lose that way you can say, well, our voters will come back out in 2012 and we'll be fine.  But there is no enthusiasm gap here.  Obama voters are showing up in the same numbers they did in 2008.  But only 65% of them are voting Democratic.  That's a really big cause for concern.

Full results here

Comments

[Kevin]

Wow, it looks like Turner is going to win.

Why is Obama so unpopular in NY-9? What happened?

[Matt D]

Well, this proves that this district is not representative of the country at all. I mean, yes, the political climate is not good for Obama at all, but it will not be possible next year for Obama to lose 30% of Democrats nationwide to Romney or Perry.

And Jews cannot have turned GOP nationally that quickly. Orthodox Jews have been trending Republican for years. I believe this poll, and that it shows that the political climate for Dems is not good right now, but I refuse to believe that these will be the voting patterns next year.

[Nick]

I live in NY-09, Obama is unpopular for one reason...he's black.

[Westwoodnc Westwoodnc]

Interesting. All the polling were the days AFTER the jobs speech on Thursday right? Did it move the needle as the days went on?

[Michael Low]

There's no enthusiam gap because so many Democrats in the district don't like Obama, especially on Israel. I'd like to see what Obama's approval rating is among Jewish voters in PPP's next national poll.

[Steve]

This is quite something. If Nevada goes Republican (as expected), then Tuesday will be a double win for the GOP. The interesting thing is that it will put the GOP back to 242 seats which is exactly the number they were at after Election Day. It will be interesting if these numbers in New York are a larger trend in the state or what will happen.

[Disturber]

Whether the district is representative of the country is a meaningless inquiry. This is a big country and there are all kinds of demographic and political differences throughout the many Congressional districts. What this election portends, however is that the euphoria that greeted Obama's campaign in 2008 is largely dissipated and it is not likely to return. Either Obama finds some other formula that re-inspires that spark or he is a one term president. Attacking Congress and attacking the Republicans may have worked for Truman, but it isn't going to work this time around. The Democratic party in Truman's era (and Kennedy's as well) was considerably to the right of the Democratic party of today. While there is a vocal left wing constituency, the bulk of this country is center right and the "progressive" experiment conducted by Obama has not garnered an increase in his core constituency and in fact, has driven many of his former supporters away. It can even be argued that it failed utterly. I don't believe I am an ideological purist, but I am right of center and I am a business person. I listened to Obama's speech the other night and I found it redundant, uninspiring, and replete with political calculation. It was not about jobs and the country, it was about Obama. I submit that approach is not going to win adherents to his cause and will continue to drive away voters disappointed in his performance. He will still have the African-American vote (although will less enthusiasm with a 27% unemployment number) and he will have some of the Jewish vote who would vote Democratic if the party ran a real donkey. He will have some of the far left, but many of those will sit it out. The great middle has abandoned him and it is that great middle that determines elections. I see no calculus that re-elects Obama.

Disturber

[connie lykstra]

Matt - time to come out of the fog... Obama wasn't really the Messiah, was he?

[Drizzit]

There are two ways to conquer a nation, one is by the sword & the other is by debt ~ John Adams ~

[Gerald]

Bottom line: If you are a Democratic President, you can be popular with your base if you stay true to your principles, but fail to revive the economy. You can also succeed with your base if you betray your principles through triangulation and compromise, if doing so revives the economy. But if you betray your principles and at the same time fail to revive the economy, your base will feel as though they were conned. And they would be right.

[Nadia Hassan]

Disturber, you write that running against Congress worked for Truman, but won't work for Obama because of ideology. If the Truman party was so much to the right of today's, how is it that the President's proposed top tax rate is far lower than Truman's?

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=213

And, what about Truman's support for a national health service that entailed far more government intervention than Obamacare does?

[elixelx]

"I live in NY-09, Obama is unpopular for one reason...he's black." Nick.
No, he isn't You know he isn't! He's white!
Why are you appropriating the only thing we poor white people have?
At least leave us Barry-boy, the only proud thing to happen to White America since slavery ended!

[Pitbullll]

"I live in NY-09, Obama is unpopular for one reason...he's black."

LOL! You race-baiter Libs are a crack-up! So Democrat David Weprin is losing because he's..... white?

[elixelx]

Why have you allowed Nick to allege that Obama is black, when we all know that that is only half true and in any case Obama himself denies that it has anything to do with his agenda or the opposition to him?

[Cherly Nicholson]

Connie,

There was no "fog". No one believed then Senator Obama was the "Messiah" just a better choice than Senator McCain and the Republican Party in general, and most Democrats still do believe this. That big racist windbag, Limbaugh began using that blasphemous term "Messiah" shortly after the 2008 election. After Limbaugh's present life is over, he will have a lot for which he will be held accountable in the next; and, IMO, you should stop using this term also unless you want to be in the same spiritual boat as Limbaugh.

[fredCPA]

I live in NY-09, Obama is unpopular for one reason...he's black.

Posted by: Nick | September 11, 2011 at 11:22 PM

so when he got 55% of the vote 3 years ago....he WASN'T black? nice try dude. rediculous. and amusing. but idiotic. peace out.

[Akatsukami]

"Well, this proves that this district is not representative of the country at all."

Unlike NY-26, which proved beyond doubt that the TEA Party phenomenon was over?

[Phishmelt]

You know Nick. Obama was black in 2008 also. Only difference now is that he has a record he has to run on.

[D]

Disturber: ???

1) Why won't "attacking Republicans" (the least popular political party by a wide margin) and "attacking Congress" (whose approval rating is dangerously close to single-digit territory) work? We're in the middle of an economic crapstorm, and Obama isn't going to win by telling Americans that it's sunny outside. No, the best strategy is to make sure more crap falls on his opponents than on him.

2) The idea that Obama is some radical leftist, or that he is held captive by the left wing of his political party, is simply absurd. I know, you'd get that impression if you watched Faux News, but it defies reality.

His health care reform bill was patterned on RomneyCare, which was basically the Republican answer to Bill Clinton's health care reform bill. There has not been a major expansion of the federal government as measured by GDP or by government workforce. Most of the (pathetically small) stimulus bill came in the forms of tax cuts and grants to states (which have been slashing their own budgets like mad). In the war on terror, he has essentially left Bush-era policies intact. In the war on the environment, he has expanded offshore oil drilling, delayed the EPA's new smog regulations, and is set to approve a massive pipeline from Alberta's tar sands to the Gulf.

Obama takes great pride in standing up to the left wing of his own party, and the Democrats as a whole have been slouching rightward ever since Reagan got elected.

3) We are not a center-right nation. Judging by polling, we are a center-left nation with a center-right political class and far-right business elites. For example, the health care reform bill hasn't quite gained plurality support (39% approve, 44% disapprove), but a full third of that disapproval comes from people who wish the bill was further to the left. Americans in overwhelming numbers think the rich aren't paying their fair share of the tax bill, and the only area of government spending that a majority of people want to cut is foreign aid.

If Obama loses, it will be because of the poor economy, full stop. I blame that poor economy on Republican stonewalling and Obama's capitulation. He's spent far too long treating the Republican party -- whose only goal is to stop him from getting re-elected -- as though they were serious partners who want what's best for the country.

[D]

yes the voters in the District weren't racists in 2008 when they voted in huge #s for Obama but they are now! That's the answer! Yes!

[Alex]

I really wish you had found some numbers on gay marriage in the district - anti-marriage orgs are going to say that a Turner win is a repudiation of Weprin's support for gay marriage, and I'd like to know whether this is actually true.

[jackster]

Disturber's entire comment was negated with the phrase "the bulk of this country is center right and the 'progressive' experiment conducted by Obama..." Obama is in no way progressive and that is the reason the dew is off the rose. The campaign Obama was progressive and he won the election handily. The President Obama has governed squarely from the center and that is why he has lost support amongst Democrats, independent, and the young. And while the myth that this is a center right country continues to be pushed by the media, if you look at the data that is not the case. When asked specifically what they support, the people of this country continually and consistently support liberal ideology over conservative ideology.

[Tom Jensen]

Alex,

We did ask about gay marriage. Go to the link to the full results PDF at the bottom of the post.

[JFM]

"I live in NY-09, Obama is unpopular for one reason...he's black."

Didn't Obama carry this district in 2008?

[In the Hook]

NY-9 is a pretty unique district given the relatively large population of Orthodox and Conservative Jews there. I do not think for a moment that this poll is indicative of a nationwide feeling, except maybe when it comes to more foreign-policy focused Jews. You'll see the enthusiasm in the minority districts nearly as strong as it was in 2008 when 2012 rolls around. There will be some tapering off in the university/elite liberal districts but not a ton. The real question will be the marginally attached groups that voted for Obama in droves in 2008. That's going to be over and done with in 2012 so Obama will inevitably have a smaller coalition. His task is to ensure they are as dedicated as the slim majority that came out to vote for Bush in 2004. It's doable but rough going. 2012 is not going to be a positive year for camapaign ads and stump speeches...

[Crush Liberalism]

"Why is Obama so unpopular in NY-9? What happened?"

He sucks. And everyone sees it now.

[Jo]

@ Nick | September 11, 2011 at 11:22 PM

"I live in NY-09, Obama is unpopular for one reason...he's black."

Really? Wasn't he black in 2008 too?

[GetStones]

"I live in NY-09, Obama is unpopular for one reason...he's black."

The same reason these people helped elect him in the first place...since it CLEARLY was not qualifications.

[the wolfpack leader]

Your comments on gay marriage,and your poll results, are interesting but misleading. The Jewish community did not care about Weprin's personal view about this- but they did care about the fact that he stated that the Orthodox Jewish view was that gay marriage is okay. If you read any of the local jewish papers, you would see that the disapproval of Weprin on this issue was quite overwhelming.

[a Orthodox Jew]

"We did ask about gay marriage. Go to the link to the full results PDF at the bottom of the post."

you missed 2 important questions
1. you should have broken down the Jewish vote in to Orthodox and other if you wanted to truly gage what the jewish vote will be like (they could break 90% in certain areas) and tend to always be underestimated in the polls.
2. you also don't say on the Importance of Same-Sex Marriage on Vote question, do they plan on voting for Turner or Weprin, and you would need to break this down by religion to see what's truly happening (in regards to marriage) in this district.

[Brian]

This is one hell of a gerrymandred district. This is one hell of a conservative district in New York City. Rick Perry is tied in this district?

I guess the old Seniors don't realize he wants to abolish Social Security. Plus, it's an estimated 2.5 trillion dollar cash cow for Wall St if you make the system private.

When you look at the internal figures you see the Jewish voters not pleased with Obama's view on Israel. In particular, he supports a Palestinian state based on borders that existed before 1967.

Benjamin Netanyahu came off like a jerk when he spoke in front of congress this past year. Personally, I support Obama's borders view on Israel, but it won't have much impact during the Presidential election. There are so many views where you can nit-pick with the president. The good news is that this president is squeaky clean in terms of personal scandals. (Huge plus for him).

I don't read much into this special election because I really don't know anything about these candidates. McCain and Bush did get into the mid 40's with this district in 2008. As we know, the rest of NYC did not come close to this GOP support level.

This could be the most GOP happy district in the city. Al Gore got 67% here, but Obama only 55%. Race could be underlying factor on top of Obama's Israel stance. In reality, most districts in NYC showed much greater support for Kerry and Obama.

This is how NYC voted in 2008 .
Manhattan 86-14 Obama
Bronx 89-11 Obama
Queens 75-24 Obama
Brooklyn 80-20 Obama
Staten Island 52-48 McCain

[a Orthodox Jew]

"This is one hell of a gerrymandred district. This is one hell of a conservative district in New York City. Rick Perry is tied in this district?"

actually the neighborhood in Brooklyn right next of this district (Borough Park in NY8 Nadler's district) is even possibly the most Conservative neighborhood in the country (there was a area of this neighborhood with 50,000 people that voted for McCain at over a 90% rate). This district was gerrymandred for the democrats while still sticking to the voting rights act. (Southern Brooklyn (at least the district I made) voted for McCain with a overall population over 1,000,000)

[a Orthodox Jew]

"Your comments on gay marriage,and your poll results, are interesting but misleading. The Jewish community did not care about Weprin's personal view about this- but they did care about the fact that he stated that the Orthodox Jewish view was that gay marriage is okay. If you read any of the local jewish papers, you would see that the disapproval of Weprin on this issue was quite overwhelming."

no that just amplified the elephant in the room to a 50 ton elephant. (he would have been hit hard no matter what even if he wasn't "orthodox")

[K2K]

NY9 is gerrymandered 'white' parly because of the adjacent minority-majority CDs.

and, voter turnout in NYC was only 50%, which included the below 35% in The Bronx. So much for the "historic" election. NY9 had the lowest voter turnout in America in 2008.

NYC Dem machines rely on low voter turnout.

[Spqr1052]

Turner is loosing because he is nt a strong candidate. Even if the Republicans dug up the 25 year old child support scandal, it was there and he knew it.

Republicans will stop at nothing short of victory. I know I was one for twenty-five years until 2008 now I am commando.

Also, Jews like Progressive want their pet-projects protected in this instance Israel remain the dole for financial aide.

I say let them get this GOP in and be done with it Weiner was a creep and was a Clintonite.

Far lefties and Jews are giving the GOP a victory.

Who cares. They can have it.

Also, the president is BLACK and we know what that means in this district.

[Gerald]

May I ask a question of PPP?

When polling on salience, why do you ask whether particular issues are very important/somewhat important/not important? Doesn't that give the respondent the opportunity to say that each issue you ask about is important?

If you were to ask me whether I think that the economy,national security, crime, immigration, and campaign finance are important, I would give you a very important or somewhat important to each. If I don't have to prioritize, then everything is important. But in the real world, where there is no candidate that perfectly reflects my views and there are only 2 options on the ballot, I would have to prioritize one or two issues and largely forget the rest. Why not ask the respondent what the "most important" issue is? Or alternatively, provide a list of issues and have the respondent rank them?

Not criticizing here, and I know that your method is commonly used. Just looking to be educated.

[Capitalist Infidel]

It couldn't be the 9.1% unemployment, it can't be the outrageous 14 trillion dollar debt, it surely can't be the mind boggling 1.6 trillion dollar deficit. It has to be race right? Are the fringe left really going to rely on race to win the election? Really?

[Barry]

Spqr -

Please explain . . . what does it mean in this district that the "president is BLACK".

Are we back to the 2008 campaign, where if you politely and respectfully disagreed with Obama's policies you were hunted down as a racist?

Those days are over, Jack. Obama is an absolute failure. An inarticulate buffoon who lied his way into an Affirmative Action election against an old dolt who didn't want to win.

If I can paraphrase Rev. Jeremiah Wright - God Damn Obama's America!

[Peterfeld]

You make a major elementary mistake regarding causality in your Israel interpretation. You made no attempt to figure out if the people who say Israel is an important issue would have been for Turner anyway (e.g., they're already Republicans and conservatives); no attempt to find out if the issue has pulled people away from Weprin who would otherwise be for him. Polling 101: coincidence isn't causality.

[Apps 55753818692 100000005296979 C93ae0c7e8bd0a2dfa7bb20dc69a025e]

Already the excuses are rolling in from the whistling-past-the-graveyard Dems : Welprin was a "weak candidate" (as if the Dems have always had strong candidates for the past 80 years they've carried this district). Next we will hear a thousand
ways to say "Obama Who?" from Dems up for re election. Obama has done the unthinkable - influenced a local election in NYC.
Now we will see how the Dems are planning to dump Obama without losing their Black support. That should prove interesting.

[Alex]

Tom,

Pardon my oversight, and thank you for pointing that out to me - I was reading this post in class and didn't see that there was a PDF with more results that weren't discussed in the post itself.

It seems like almost as many people thought gay marriage was unimportant as an election issue (44%) as those who did (55%). And who's to say there weren't Democrats who voted FOR Weprin because he supports gay marriage? Apparently the issue is almost dead-even in the district.

Very interesting stuff - I'm glad you polled the question.

[Dustin Ingalls]

Gerald: I understand your criticism. Unfortunately, our software doesn't allow ranking within one question--only one answer per question can be recorded. We could have asked what was the MOST important issue, as we often do, but I guarantee if we had done that and included "jobs and the economy," that would have come in at number one, and not given any insight into the importance of Israel or gay marriage. The fact of the matter is it's difficult to truly gauge in polling what was in voters' heads, what truly motivated their votes. We can only approximate it by asking questions.

[Marc Zell]

It is important to remember that we are speaking about an opinion poll here. This election will not be decided by the pollsters but by real voters casting real votes. The Democratic Party has a 3:1 advantage in this District, they have money and and they have organization (principally through the labor unions). They will be a formidable force today on Election Day. Like many of you I want Turner to win, but for that to happen we have to get the vote out. There is no room for arm-chair quarterbacks on Election Day. Vote and get your friends and family to vote. That's democracy and that's the only way this election will be won.

[me.yahoo.com/a/E8cgHOgsyd3AaH1t2GiR8vDgjz0-]

Why does your press release say NY-9 is a "heavy Democratic district", when it only went 55-45 in 2008?

In fact, the Democratic share of the vote in NY-9 declined in 2008 by 1 pt, even thought the Democratic vote rose state wide by 5 pts.

When the GOP lost NY-26 three months ago, you didn't refer to it as a "heavy Republican district" even though McCain carried it by 6 points.

I thing you guys are getting carried away. Wouldn't a heavy Democratic district be closer to Jerry Nadler's district?

[Ally]

I'm not incline to accept the argument - that Obama is dragging down the Democrat in NY-9.
Welprin was a sloppy choice to replace Weiner - period. More importantly, if anyone really knows NY-9 they don't object to Obama's policies, they object to his skin color.

[Author - The Third Cell]

The Conservative Right and the Tea Party is blaming the President for the nation’s problems, but he is powerless to make any legislation. He can suggest, he can veto, but he is not the decision maker:
Under the United States Constitution:
Article 1 - Section 8:
The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States:

IT IS CONGRESS THAT HAS FAILED THE AMERICAN PEOPLE!

[Rupert Pupkin]

"Why is Obama so unpopular in NY-9? What happened?"

Yet another commenter who has seemingly been living in cave for the past 2.5+ years. What happened? What happened? Well there is the record string of months with 9% or greater unemployment, the record foreclosures, the record debt, the record monthly deficits, the record long-term unemployment, record number of individuals on public assistance, record nationwide poverty, open and blatant hostility towards one of our key allies, the list goes on.

Another commenter wrote:
"Why does your press release say NY-9 is a "heavy Democratic district", when it only went 55-45 in 2008?

In fact, the Democratic share of the vote in NY-9 declined in 2008 by 1 pt, even thought the Democratic vote rose state wide by 5 pts.

When the GOP lost NY-26 three months ago, you didn't refer to it as a 'heavy Republican district' even though McCain carried it by 6 points."

So let me get this straight, Obama wins by 10 points in 2008, but that doesn't qualify as heavily Democratic in your mind, even though that is a higher % than what Obama got nationwide, but when McCain wins by only 6% in a district, that does qualify as heavily-Republican? Seems that the commenter I quote wants the definition of heavily Democratic to be contingent upon whether the narrative concerning a Dem loss will hurt Obama or not.

Another commenter wrote:
"IT IS CONGRESS THAT HAS FAILED THE AMERICAN PEOPLE!"

Yeah, and for more than 2/3s of the time Obama has been in office the Democrats controlled both chambers of Congress, including a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. But hey, you go on acting as if the President of the US has no responsibility for what is happening in the country. Moreover, I notice noone of the people peddling the ":it was Congress" line seem willing to blame, even partially, the Dems, who were in charge of both houses of Congress from 2007-Jan 2010, for the financial collapse of 2008, something that happened while they held Congress. The fact is, since the founding of the Republic, presidents have received the brunt of the blame when something goes wrong on their watch. Obamabots want him to be the only president in US history who is not blamed when something goes wrong while he is in the Oval Office.

"More importantly, if anyone really knows NY-9 they don't object to Obama's policies, they object to his skin color."

Yeah, sure thing, because in less than three years, the district that voted for Obama by a 10% margin over his opponent has all of a sudden become a bunch of bigots. Seriously, it is absolutely amazing to read the lengths some people will go to in order claim that Obama's policies are not to blame, at all, for the seemingly impending loss of the Democratic candidate.

From another commenter:

"It seems like almost as many people thought gay marriage was unimportant as an election issue (44%) as those who did (55%)"

I guess you are using the "new math" I have heard so much about. You know, the math that says 44% is almost the same amount as 55%. Give me a break. Yet another person struggling to claim that one of the pet issues of liberal Demcrats is not unpopular.

Another commenter wrote:
"His health care reform bill was patterned on RomneyCare, which was basically the Republican answer to Bill Clinton's health care reform bill"

The Republican answer? I think you mean to say it was the answer from one very moderate, almost liberal, Republican who was governor of the most left-wing state in the Union. And of course, the commenter I mention also mentions "Faux News" because, evidently, those on the left are so lacking in creativity they can't write a single post without mentioning one of the following:
a)Fox News
b)Sarah Palin
c)Rush Limbaugh
d) Tea Baggers (yeah, that juvenile sex joke didn't get old two years ago, did it)
e)opposition to Obama is de facto evidence of racism.

Another commenter wrote:
"Interesting. All the polling were the days AFTER the jobs speech on Thursday right? Did it move the needle as the days went on."

It is hilarious reading posts from Democrats who act as if another speech offering the same tired old spending plans is somehow the equivalent of the Gettysburg Address. The notion that the "jobs speech" is somehow going to "move the needle" is absolutely hilarious.

I leave the funniest comment for last:
"If the Truman party was so much to the right of today's, how is it that the President's proposed top tax rate is far lower than Truman's?"

Wow, Obama wants the highest marginal tax rate to be below 90%. Boy he is a real moderate. Give me a break. There is no way on earth Obama would be able to propose raising marginal rates to the level they were during the Truman administration. That he doesn't is not evidence of his supposed moderation. As for why his health care bill wasn't more liberal, it is because members of his own party, namely Ben Nelson, Mary Landrieu, Blanche Lincoln and Joe Lieberman wouldn't allow it to pass. That the bill he signed wasn't as far to the left as he would have liked is not evidence of his supposed moderation either. Obama is the most liberal president this country has had at least since FDR and maybe ever. His liberalism has been constrained by the members of his own party and, since 2010, the members of the Republican House.

And by the way, it is absolutely hilarious how Nick played the race card under two separate names in order to try and bolster his argument that it was racism that was behind Obama's unpopularity, as if the people from NY-9 who voted for Obama in 2008 are just now discovering he is the first black president of the United States.

If Turner does hold on to win, I look forward to hearing from left wing political pundits claiming it was because the candidate was lousy, or that this has no national implications, even though these same people act as if a Republican lose in an election for dog catcher in Podunk, USA means the Republicans are doomed in November. If you don't believe me, look at what the Dems said about the election of Scott Brown in MA vs. what they said about the supposedly huge nationwide implications for a House election in PA. that was held at about the same time.

[Rupert Pupkin]

"The Conservative Right and the Tea Party is blaming the President for the nation’s problems, but he is powerless to make any legislation. He can suggest, he can veto, but he is not the decision maker."

This is not meant to sound harsh, but you either have to be exceedingly naive or extremely ignorant of American politics to claim that the President of the United States, the obvious leader of his party, is not calling the shots in regards to what his party does in Congress. When the Dems were in control of both chambers of Congress for the first two years of Obama's presidency, they didn't initiate anything that wasn't approved by him. Again it is, frankly, laughable the lengths people are going to in order to claim that Obama should be the first president in US history who shouldn't shoulder some of the blame for the numerous problems that have arisen or gotten much, much worse on his watch.

[Missy T]

“ There are two ways to conquer and enslave a nation. One is by the sword. The other is by debt. John Adams (1735-1826)

I saw this quote but the "enslave a nation" was removed.

This appears to be the ultimate point to the massive debt, class warfare and what appears to be incompetence.

[Gerald]

@Dustin:

Thank you so much for the response. Absolutely no criticism intended. PPP does an amazing job and has scored another win with this NY9 poll. I was just curious as to why different polling outfits seem to use different methods to determine salience.

I know one respected polling group uses a method in which they list a number of issues and then ask for a percentage rating (0 percent through 100 percent) as a measure of importance. In theory, this approach still allows the respondent to give a 100% rating for every issue, but probably in practice it provides a more nuanced ranking.