Peter A. Brown, Quinnipiac University Polling on Primary Schedule Change

[wyldwolf]

When you're on a losing streak, it is human nature to see change - any change -- as a good thing. But superficial change that becomes an excuse for ducking a more fundamental and difficult problem can be counter-productive.

Take the Democratic Party, which has been losing presidential elections at an alarming rate over the last 40 years, and is rearranging its presidential primaries schedule as a way of winning the White House.

The party's problem is that the presidential candidates its activists nominate in the spring don't attract enough Democrats who don't vote in the primaries, or sufficient independents and Republican crossovers, in November.

But instead of dealing with the underlying problem - that those who vote in the nomination process are out of touch with the views and values of the larger electorate - the Democrats are rearranging the 2008 primary and caucus schedule.

---snip---

Simply put, Democratic primary votes have been out of step with the views and values of the larger electorate. The data on that issue to so heavy it has choked the donkey.

There is nothing wrong with the Democrats shaking up the primary schedule, but no one should think that the move will do anything to address the underlying problem.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/07/presidential_primary_schedule.html

[blm]

1. LIAR! The underlying problem is GOP control of media and voting machines

Peter Brown is a focking LIAR.

It is known that the people FAVOR Dem platforms over the GOP platform and issue by issue Dems win.

The GOP didn't buy up control of most broadcast and print media over the last twenty years so Democrats and the issues can be viewed fairly.

And they didn't buy up control of the voting nmachines so Dem votes can be counted accurately.

[napi21]

2. He's partly right, but has the wrong reason.

I believe there IS something to the idea that more Pubs are motivated to vote, but it's because they have found a few issues that rile up their voters enough to get them to the polls. So far, I haven't seen that same anger in the Dems, and I STILL hear people, when I ask, "Did you vote today?", say, naw, I didn't hae time, or it was too hot, or some other non-excuse.

I can only HOPE many Dems are angry enough ThiS TIMe, and intent enough to get the criminals out of power, that they'll MAKE TIME, or suffer the heat...just a little!

[snowbear]

3. *** REAL CLEAR POLITICS IS A RIGHT WING WACKO SITE !! ***

Sure, Quinnipiac University themselves are great as far as the polls they release, etc..

But this dude... this Peter A. Brown dude.. writes for a bias, one-sided, rightwing, wacko conservative, Democratic-bashing website!!!!!

In fact, on the "Rightwing News" website, they rate RCP as #4 out of their top-20 favorite sources. http://www.rightwingnews.com/archives/week_2005_04_24.PHP

Their list from 20 to first:

20) Hundred Percenter
19) Tim Blair
18) Jewish World Review
17) FoxNews
16) Power Line
15) Cybercast News Service
14) Ravenwood's Universe
13) Little Green Footballs
12) TownHall
11) Blacksheep News
10) Betsy's Page
9) Instapundit
8) Polipundit
7) Newsmax
6) Michelle Malkin
5) WorldNetDaily
4) Real Clear Politics
3) National Review
2) The Drudge Report
1) Lucianne

PLEASE, wyldwolf....

[wyldwolf]

4. but Quinnipiac University Polling isn't... should we question their polls?

...and should information and theories people on DU might disagree with be avoided?

[snowbear]

5. No, their polls are some of the BEST !!!

But any article found on RCP is sure to be slanted to the right.

Why he's writing for them is crazy!! Maybe I'll e-mail and ask him why he'd contribute to them..

peter.brownquinnipiac.edu

[wyldwolf]

6. yes, email him. I'd be interested in the answer...

[madfloridian]

7. Click Peter Brown's name at the site....read his articles.

Especially the ones about Hillary and Lieberman. I am sorry, but Peter is not on our side at all.

[wyldwolf]

8. The two on Hillary and Lieberman

1. How is what he wrote about Hillary any different than some of the nicer things said on DU about her daily?

2. I agree in part with his Lieberman article.

I know he's writing for a rightwing source, but in the examples you referred to, I don't see the results being too different than DU.

Based on that criteria, I could say DU is not on our side at all.

[madfloridian]

9. You are right.

DU is not very much for Democrats lately.