Kos: DC: Where the losers are winners

[Pirate Smile]

DC: Where the losers are winners

by kos
Mon Feb 16, 2009 at 08:15:03 AM PST

Perhaps the best innovation in the 2008 presidential campaign was the advent of the post-debate snap poll. For years, we had heard the usual lineup of right-wingers on cable news tell us how bold and impressive their candidate had been in the debate, and somehow, these jokers were allowed to determine the winners and losers of the debates.

In 2008, those snap polls made fools of the talking heads until the last debate, when they finally shut their traps and let the snap polls determine the winners. Because according to them in the previous three debates, McCain, Palin and McCain had won. The people, on the other hand, had drastically different thoughts on the matter. The gap between the chattering class and the populace couldn't have been starker.

But the lesson hasn't been learned, and we're once again seeing this huge divide between the out-of-touch DC chattering class and, well, everyone else. Jane has a remarkable roundup:

- MSNBC's First Read lists among its winners "the Republican Party (which demonstrated unity after its big losses in November), and No.2 House Republican Eric Cantor (who raised his profile during the debate)." Reid gets a win, Pelosi gets a loss.
- Chris Cillizza also declares Eric Cantor a victor for maintaining party discipline (although he tags him a loser too for the AFSME ad). Reid gets a "win" her too, and House Democrats are deemed losers, because "it appeared as though this was a Senate-run production."
-Fox News unsurprisingly says "Republican lawmakers may turn out to be winners. Most of them voted against the package, and in their largely unified opposition, they found an issue to galvanize the party after two consecutive dispiriting electoral defeats." Reid and Pelosi don't exist.
-Liz Sidoti also says the Republicans win: "Adrift after back-to-back electoral losses, they found their voice against a Democratic speaker and an expanded majority. They held to the GOP's cornerstone of fiscal conservatism as they led the effort to define the package as too costly and too quick." Likewise, Jon Boehner: "He strengthened his hold on his job, keeping his rank-and-file united against the House version." Again, Reid gets a win. She gives Pelosi and Mitch McConnell losses.

So according to the DC punditry, last week was a big WIN for the GOP! Huzzah! Except that as Jane points out, the reality is much more different, as our weekly polling starkly shows:

Research 2000 for Daily Kos. 2/9-12. All adults. MoE 2% (1/5-8 results)

FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE NET CHANGE
PELOSI: 42 (39) 39 (37) +5
REID: 32 (33) 42 (41) -2
McCONNELL: 22 (29) 50 (46) -11
BOEHNER: 18 (21) 55 (47) -11

CONGRESSIONAL DEMS: 39 (36) 53 (53) +3
CONGRESSIONAL GOPS: 19 (24) 69 (64) -10

DEMOCRATIC PARTY: 56 (53) 37 (39) +5
REPUBLICAN PARTY: 31 (32) 61 (60) -2

:

The people who live in DC, who pretend to speak for the rest of the country, have no direct experience with what is happening there -- and their attempts to handicap DC politics have more to do with the inside baseball games that seek to protect their own interests above all else. The fact that three and a half million Americans will have jobs as a result of the passage of this bill, or that people who are unemployed or living on food stamps will continue to be able to eat, doesn't seem to graze their analyses.

It seems like the American public looked at DC, they saw the Democrats trying to do something, and they liked what they saw. People who are deeply worried about staying employed and taking care of their families do not seem to have the universal high regard for House Republicans who stood together to oppose helping them out that the DC establishment do.

It's as if the DC chattering class is going out of its way to prove that it has completely lost touch with the country it's supposedly trying to inform. It's as if they want everyone to know, without a shadow of a doubt, that their bubble is impenetrable to things such as "reality" and "facts" and "truth". It truly is bizarre.

But it's also dangerous, which is why I invested in these weekly polls. During the primaries, I had no idea how the American people would react to the debates, so I was happy to wait for the poll results to come back. It was clear that Americans knew better what they themselves thought than arrogant cable news blowhards. I loved the concept, so I wanted to apply it more broadly to the coming policy debates in 2009 and 2010. Instead of depending on clueless, out-of-touch blowhards in DC to declare winners and losers, why not ask the American people themselves?

And I'm glad we are, because the gap is real and seemingly getting bigger by the week.

Permalink :

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/2/16/11152/4105/870/697811

[Danger Mouse]

1. It's because they're paid to shit out right wing talking points by the bucketload.

They're incapable of anything else.

[GiveMeFreedom]

9. Hope this helps

[pinto]

2. Great reality check. Thanks for posting this.

:kick:

[annabanana]

3. EVERY DUer should read this article and send it onto anyone

who is even remotely interested in how people get their information, and who they trust to tell them the truth.

It has been generally agreed (online) for some time that there is a pretty stark disconnect between what we know and what they tell us we know.

It is only by exposing them, making them look like the fools they are, and sending them from the room with peals of laughter ringing in their ears.. that the American people at large will become acquainted with the facts on the ground....

[OHdem10]

4. "nattering nabobs of negativism".

[Z_I_Peevey]

7. It took only 39 years to become correct, but yeah, THEY ARE

nattering, and negative.

[KoKo]

5. K&R

[On the Road]

6. I Remember Election Night 1980

when the whole country was lighting up red and DC was one of the few Democratic strongholds. George Will was portraying that as a sign of how out of touch Washington was with the rest of the country.

Even though the DC election results had nothing to do with how politicians and lobbyists had voted, Will had sort of a point in a larger sense. But after 28 years of Republican resurgence, now the shoe is on the other foot. It's becoming painfully obvious.

[asphalt.jungle]

8. it's funny how their themes are so similar

MSNBC's First Read, Chris Cillizza, Fox News and Liz Sidoti. it's like they met at some local watering hole and decided the spin they would push for the day.

[FrenchieCat]

10. They did meet and colluded. How else can we explain their similarities?

and how those similarities differ from what the people truly believe?

[Cha]

11. Public Enemy Number One is

the cmwhores..and they strike again.


I call Double Bullshit on their stupid analysis. When are we getting rid of them?