Disturbed And Disturbing Democrats

There is always some correlation between what pollsters call “engagement” with an upcoming election and the eventual electoral turnout on election day. Just how well prior engagement and turnout correlate is a matter of debate, but the news from the latest in-depth Pew Research survey is not good news for Democrats in terms of a voter interest gap in the November election.

While it is true that more Democrats are juiced about their candidate than Republicans are juiced about Etch-A-Romney, this bothers me a lot:

Republicans hold the edge on several turnout measures, in contrast to 2008 when Democrats had leads – some quite substantial – on nearly every indicator. More Republican voters than Democratic voters are giving quite a lot of thought to the election (73% of Republicans vs. 66% of Democrats) and paying very close attention to election news (45% vs. 37%). In 2008, Democrats held leads on both interest measures, the first time that had occurred in campaigns dating to 1992.

Moreover, GOP voters are more likely than Democrats to say it really matters who wins the 2012 election (72% vs. 65%). Four years ago, Democrats were more likely than Republicans to say it really mattered who prevailed.

How can it be that only about two-thirds of the Democrats polled believe it “really matters” who wins? What narcotic, legal or illegal, is being ingested by the one-third of Democrats who don’t think it really matters? Whatever it is, Democratic leaders had better figure out how to pound reality into the heads of these disturbed and disturbing Democrats in the next four months or all of us will need narcotics to endure the reality of a Romney administration.


  1. I believe that Democrats will become more engaged as they learn about Romney. As debates and closer candidate analysis hit the news, Democrats will see the elitist, one-percenter that Romney is. Also, his choice of vice-president will make a difference. It was reported on the news that he is looking at Paul Ryan. If he gets the nod for the VP, Obama and Democrats everywhere will have the “kill the middle class” budget author himself to blast. Another area that Democrats will have to improve on is their criticism of Republican policies. Romney and the GOP will come out swinging and lying about Obama’s record (they already are), and if Democrats do not respond in kind, people will believe their illusions. In other words, grow a pair, Democrats, our country’s future depends on it.


  2. King Beauregard

     /  June 24, 2012

    It all depends on which pair of glass you (“you” = “random lumpenDemocrat”) look at politics with. If you are wearing your “money is driving politics” glasses, then the Democrats are visibly participants in the money, and they start looking like Republicans. But if you are wearing your “foreign relations” glasses or your “civil rights” glasses or your “economy” glasses or your “protection from terrorism” glasses or your “I really don’t want my loved ones to be forced into transvaginal ultrasound” glasses, the differences suddenly become a lot clearer.


  3. Treeske

     /  June 25, 2012

    Goodlooking King: Don’t try to clarify anything you write, nothing makes sense. If you tried to be funny, it ain’t!


    • King Beauregard

       /  June 25, 2012

      A bold gambit on your part: what happens if other people can read what I said and it makes sense to them?


  4. ansonburlingame

     /  June 25, 2012

    King makes sense to me and it makes no difference whether he is writing about GOP or DEM voters. No thinking voter could possibly agree with every position of either candidate, in my view. Yet about 80% of all voters in Nov will vote as if that was the case.

    Just look at the whole picture of illegal immigration reform. One side has not enforced border control to the extent many, even most Americans would prefer, secure borders. Now on top of that the President has chosen to use an Executive Order directing the federal law enforcement authorities to ignore the current law and not prosecuted hundreds of thousands of people residing herein illegally.

    The other side calls for a “wall” on our southern borders bringing to mind the Berlin Wall of decades ago. As well “police state” tactics”, or seemingly such, are espoused to round up every illegal resident in the country and deport them, self imposed deportment being the prefered mechanism.

    Neither one of those approaches make any sense, at least to me. There must be some balance between both sides. And the “Dream Act” failed to achieve that balance and thus went down to defeat. Why? Because blank amnesty was the prefered approach to dealing with all illegal immigrants already residing in America.

    Americans do not want every young man or woman living in America to automatically be deported, even older “granmas” that have been here a long time. BUT most Americans want “gang bangers” sent packing immediately.

    As well most Americans do not want to drain the already overloaded entitlement system on “illegal” residents. Spend scarce resources on AMERICANS first and formost, LEGAL Americans, as a matter of priority.

    But such an approach seems to be beyond the ability of any bureaucracy to implement. There are over 10 Million “illegals” residing in America right now. How can a bureaucracy “sort them out” into “good or bad” illegal residents?

    I would suggest a “purple card”. Any illegal could apply for such a residency permit. A simple fingerprint and police check would be all needed to issue such a document. “Granma” or a “youngster” could obtain a “purple card” as long as there was no police record on file. As well their fingerprint (or better yet their DNA) would then be on file and available for future use to prosecute lawbreakers.

    Then establish a reasonable way to transition from purple card to green card in a given period of time.

    But for such a system to work effectively, borders must become more secure and police, state, local or federal should have the authority to ensure that potential law breakers (or those showing up at a hospital for free medical care) in fact have “some kind of card” showing legal residence in the country. Same with public schools or other government services. No card, no services, period.

    But no, politically we are faced with an “open state” or a “police state” for lack of better words. I don’t like either one.



%d bloggers like this: