Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 12:31 PM ET, 12/15/2010

Still another poll finds Dems support tax cut deal

By Greg Sargent

Gallup released a poll this morning finding that a plurality, 49 percent, want Congress to pass the Obama tax cut deal, and I asked Gallup to send over a partisan breakdown to gauge whether there's really any revolt among rank-and-file Democrats over the compromise.

Here are the numbers, among Dems:

Based on what you've heard or read about the tax agreement, do you think Congress should or should not vote to pass it?

Yes, should vote to pass it 48

No, should not vote to pass it 36

Those are almost identical to the numbers among adults overall, who want Congress to pass the deal by 49-32. What's more, this is the third poll to find that Dems support the compromise. The Washington Post and Pew Research both found that support for the deal among Democrats is in the sixties.

Polls have consistently shown that Dems are strongly opposed to extending the Bush tax cuts for the rich. Yet Dems still favor the Obama deal, suggesting they may buy the argument that accepting an extension of the high-end tax cuts was the only way to get the things Obama and Dems do want.

The Senate is set to pass the tax cut deal today. Among House Democrats, there seems to be a growing sense of resignation that it's going to pass the House mostly in its current form, and officials still seem to be furious about it. But there does seem to be a persistent gap in opinion of the deal between Dem officials and high profile liberal critics who think Obama could have gotten far more, and rank and file Dems who appear prepared to accept what he did get.

UPDATE, 1:43 p.m.: Make that four polls: A new NBC/WSJ poll finds that 54 percent of Dems and 57 percent of liberals support the tax deal.

UPDATE, 1:54 p.m.: The Senate has now overwhelmingly passed the tax deal, 81-19, and House Democratic aides say the House vote on it will be tomorrow.

By Greg Sargent  | December 15, 2010; 12:31 PM ET
Categories:  House Dems, House GOPers, Senate Dems, Senate Republicans, taxes  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Why Gen. Amos is wrong about his own Marines
Next: Jim DeMint's office: Reading full START treaty is a delaying "tool"

Comments

Liberals hate successful people. they hate the rich. the comments on the tax rates that have been left on this blog prove that.

Uninformed, irrational hatred is no basis for public policy.

Perhaps this is a function of years of using class envy as a weapon against the conservatives. Even if, at the start, the garden variety liberal wasn't actually envious, at this point, after years of brainwashing the envy is palpable.

Facts don't matter. The good of the country doesn't matter. All that matters is that the people whom the liberals dislike be punished.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | December 15, 2010 12:39 PM | Report abuse

Still waiting for the poll showing Obama with 87% support among Liberals.

Posted by: wbgonne | December 15, 2010 12:40 PM | Report abuse

Were they asked:

Do you support borrowing another, 900 billion dollars, and adding it to the national debt, in order to let the Republicans extend the Bush Tax Cuts, for millionaires and billionaires?

Unless they were asked a question similar to that, then I doubt if the poll has really taken the pulse of rank and file democrats.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 15, 2010 12:40 PM | Report abuse

Surprise !!!


The democrats support another 900 Billion added to the DEBT

Who would have thought?

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | December 15, 2010 12:43 PM | Report abuse

OT:

Buried at the end of the WaPo article on Fox News:

"Media Matters said it is in possession of other internal e-mails from Sammon and other Fox News executives that indicate other efforts to slant news reporting. Those memos will be released in coming weeks, the group said."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/15/AR2010121503181.html

I can't wait for more! Keep it comin' MM!

Posted by: Ethan2010 | December 15, 2010 12:45 PM | Report abuse

Skip, you're spewing uninformed, irrational hatred here (and making sweeping statements to boot). I'm a Liberal. I don't hate the rich, I'd *love* to be in their ranks. However, I think that tax rates need to revert at least to what they were under Clinton, and I'd be even happier if they went back to what they were under Reagan. You remember Reagan, right? That Wealthy-Hating Class-Warrior Commie. . .

Posted by: Michigoose | December 15, 2010 12:45 PM | Report abuse

"Were they asked: Do you support borrowing another, 900 billion dollars, and adding it to the national debt, in order to let the Republicans extend the Bush Tax Cuts, for millionaires and billionaires?"

Of course not b/c the White House doesn't want to hear the answer to that question and most definitely doesn't want it reported in the Washington Post.

Posted by: wbgonne | December 15, 2010 12:46 PM | Report abuse

Breaking News!

"Among House Democrats, there seems to be a growing sense of resignation..."

Posted by: shrink2 | December 15, 2010 12:46 PM | Report abuse

Republicans hate misfortunate people. they hate the poor. the comments on the tax rates that have been left on this blog prove that.

Uninformed, irrational hatred is no basis for public policy.

Perhaps this is a function of years of using amassed wealth as a weapon against the liberals. Even if, at the start, the garden variety republican wasn't actually envious, at this point, after years of brainwashing the disdain is palpable.

Facts don't matter. The good of the country doesn't matter. All that matters is that the people whom the Republicans dislike be punished.


See how east that is?

Posted by: mikefromArlington | December 15, 2010 12:49 PM | Report abuse

OT but...if you're in the area!

Hey friends!

We're still fighting for change here in Northern Virginia and we need your help!

We're holding another last minute phonebank tomorrow night (Wednesday), 6-9 pm, to make more calls to repeal DADT and pass the DREAM Act).

Sign up to attend if you're able to come out, even for a couple hours! I'd love to see your smiling faces :)

Alexandria Democratic Committee Office
618 N. Washington Street, Alexandria
6-9 pm

RSVP: http://bit.ly/h5W9fq

Posted by: mikefromArlington | December 15, 2010 12:51 PM | Report abuse

I really admire Liam-still's approach. by asking his specific question we'll learn, well, nothing.

Why? Because in order to answer the question, one must agree with its premise.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | December 15, 2010 12:52 PM | Report abuse

Republicans hate the working class blue collar workers. They believe they are over paid. They believe their life style is too extravagant and their wages should be lowered to compete better with China and other countries where labor standards are basically non existent. And, with the help of the Chamber of Commerce, they are electing more and more Republicans to help destroy this country at the seams, starting with the working class.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | December 15, 2010 12:55 PM | Report abuse

I don't understand why the liberals HATE FoxNews

What is wrong with opposing viewpoints?


The Conservatives complain about the other networks - but they don't go into the area of HATE - it is bizarre.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | December 15, 2010 12:55 PM | Report abuse

OT, brilliance @benen:

Consider a hypothetical. Imagine if an important court case came before a federal judge nominated by President Obama and confirmed by a Democratic-led Senate. Then imagine we learned that this same judge owns part of a political operation that attacks the same law about which he/she was hearing arguments.

Making matters worse, that Democratic judge admits to having campaigned for the seat on the bench, earning it through 20 years of active service to the Democratic Party, helping the various campaigns of Democratic candidates.

And then to top it off, imagine if that judge's ruling, an obvious example of judicial activism, was premised on a bizarre legal analysis that no one of any ideology was prepared to defend.

Is there any doubt at all that, if this scenario actually happened, the right would be apoplectic?

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_12/027097.php

Well? Where is the MSM frame? Absent. IOKIYAR.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | December 15, 2010 12:55 PM | Report abuse

The Chamber of Commerce's main goal in the interests of those paying dues is to break the backs of the American work force and lower wages.

Make no mistake.

The Chamber is un-American to its core.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | December 15, 2010 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Greg, just wanted to say thanks for continuing to highlight this issue

Posted by: dansachar | December 15, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

Mitt Head Romney plans to pay for the Bush Tax Cuts for The Super Rich, by making those who were laid off by the Super Rich, do without unemployment compensation.

Marie Antoinette Romney says: Let them eat mud cakes.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 15, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

"Of course not b/c the White House doesn't want to hear the answer to that question and most definitely doesn't want it reported in the Washington Post."

This would make sense if the WH controlled the questions that Gallup asks. Since the WH doesn't....

Posted by: CTVoter | December 15, 2010 1:03 PM | Report abuse

The real question should have been:


Do you want to watch Obama flounder over the next two years???


This is like a bad sitcom which should have been cancelled already.


It must be painful for the liberals to watch the incompetent Obama try everything he can think of - only to fail time and time again - proving how unfit to govern the democrats are.


DeMint is going to ask to READ THE BILLS - and that should grind out the lame-duck.


The liberals are being silly about the lame-duck to begin with - and the liberals are being disrespectful of the election and disrespectful of the American People.


So, it is right and correct to READ ALL THE BILLS, and slow the liberals down.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | December 15, 2010 1:05 PM | Report abuse

I like how polls get trotted out, when they support the position that our leaders have staked out.

Apparently the polls showing how little support there is for the Afghan War policy, have never been provided to our leaders!

Posted by: Liam-still | December 15, 2010 1:09 PM | Report abuse

The Chamber is un-American to its core.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | December 15, 2010 12:59 PM | Report abuse

That was the pre-election White House drivel. Now the Chamber of Commerce our friend. Know where Obama is right now? Apologizing to the COC's board members and begging their forgiveness which they may grant ... assuming certain conditions are met.

Posted by: wbgonne | December 15, 2010 1:09 PM | Report abuse

"This would make sense if the WH controlled the questions that Gallup asks. Since the WH doesn't...."

The WH controls the Gallup polls and the results of Pentagon surveys. Please try and keep up ;)

Posted by: ashotinthedark | December 15, 2010 1:10 PM | Report abuse

I sincerely wish you were right. Michigoose. I honestly do. but I read the comments here and I read the responses to my posts.

I suppose I could slice out some of the more egregious examples of hate filled liberal spewage here, but I doubt it would change your mind.

As I've noted elsewhere liberals really do suffer from epistomological closure. they believe what they believe and everything in life can be explained by their dogma.

And their dogma holds that the rich in America got that way by stealing from the poor.

In addition liberal dogma holds that all money is rightfully the possession of the state and that any effort to allow mere citizens to retain what they earned has a "cost" to the state. We work for the state. the state will decide when we've made enough money. All the rest will be returned to its rightful owner: the state.

Sorry, but I read what the liberals write here. The lack of facts and the blind clinging to dogma are on display here daily.

May you be successful in your attempt to shake the pagoda tree. May you enjoy the confiscation of the fruits of your labor when the tax man comes calling.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | December 15, 2010 1:12 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, the White House has no influence on the stories that are reported. My guess is that, if the White House WANTED to know the answer to Liam's question there would be polls asking that question. Just a hunch.

Oh, and you can believe that the Marine Commandant is off the reservation if you like but I doubt it. DADT is a toy the WH is using to keep a large number of Liberal Opinion Leaders from bolting before the Tax Capitulation becomes law. As soon as the Tax Capitulation passes watch DADT fade away into the holiday mist.

Anyone wanna bet?

Posted by: wbgonne | December 15, 2010 1:15 PM | Report abuse

"...polls showing how little support there is for the Afghan War policy..."

shhhh, unmetionable. The war that shall be forgotten until our loss attains plausible deniabilty (victory is declared) can not be criticized, lest you be interrogated as to why you support a Republican for President.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 15, 2010 1:16 PM | Report abuse

According to TPM, The Republicans are going to shut down the government soon. They are sticking to their guns.

This is what Democrats get, for lying down with dogs. They better not start whining then, about getting up with fleas all over them.

Imagine our President signing a bill to extend the Bush Tax Cuts, that did not work, and right after that; the people he struck the deal with, taking him "hostage" again.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 15, 2010 1:17 PM | Report abuse

"Liberals hate successful people. they hate the rich. the comments on the tax rates that have been left on this blog prove that."

You know what proves that even more? The fact that the story you are commenting on has a poll indicating most Democrats approve of this tax deal. A deal that keeps the income tax cuts and estate tax cuts.

Liberals can't wait to line their pockets with all the rich people's money that they will get thanks to this bill.

Posted by: ashotinthedark | December 15, 2010 1:19 PM | Report abuse

"...taking him "hostage" again..."

Some people do like that kind of thing, but we discussed Stockholm Syndrome last week and we were accused of supporting a Republican for President.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 15, 2010 1:22 PM | Report abuse

"Yeah, the White House has no influence on the stories that are reported. "

Well, if that's your original point, you did a poor job expressing it.

So the WH, according to you, controls the questions that Gallup asks, the questions that Pew asks, etc, etc, etc. Funny, when McClatchy's poll numbers were just what you wanted, you had not skepticism whatsoever about the results. Any poll result that contradicts what you wish to be true is now dismissed as just another propaganda tool by the all-controlling WH.

Closed mind?

Posted by: CTVoter | December 15, 2010 1:23 PM | Report abuse

All, check out Jim DeMint's fascinating justification for asking for the entire New START treaty to be read on the Senate floor:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/12/jim_demints_justification.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | December 15, 2010 1:23 PM | Report abuse

"Closed mind?"

No, open mind. And open eyes, too. Because I'm not blinded by partisanship. I am not invested in the Tax Capitulation passing b/c it will boost Obama's standing. Can you say the same?

Posted by: wbgonne | December 15, 2010 1:27 PM | Report abuse

@wbgonne:

"No, open mind. And open eyes, too. Because I'm not blinded by partisanship. I am not invested in the Tax Capitulation passing b/c it will boost Obama's standing."

1) You should review the definition of partisanship.

2) You may not be "invested in the Tax Capitulation passing b/c it will boost Obama's standing," but it seems that you do oppose it, at least in part, because of that potential to positively boost the President. Your animosity toward the President is starting to overwhelm all else.

As CTVoter pointed out, you've attacked Washington Post, suggesting that they fabricated polling data, because it's not consistent with your opinion. Now, you're suggesting that Obama has a hand in how these polling organizations question poll participators, and has some Machiavellian or Orwellian control over public perception.

I'm sorry, but what you've suggested sounds unhinged.

Posted by: associate20 | December 15, 2010 4:05 PM | Report abuse

By the way, of the Gallup data, it's worth keeping this in mind:

"These results are from a Dec. 10-12 USA Today/Gallup poll. The question asked Americans about 'the agreement on taxes reached by President Obama and Republican leaders in Congress last Monday,' and did not specify or list the details of what is in the agreement."

As I pointed out yesterday, USA Today, in discussing this same polling data, stated that their limited questioning (i.e., only asking about "taxes" and not unemployment benefits, tax credits, etc.) about the proposal may be the reason that the proposal has polled lower, though still a plurality, in their polls.

USAT said:

"Another nationwide survey released Monday, taken by the Pew Research Center, shows higher public support for the bill, 60%-22%. A possible reason: The USA TODAY question asked simply about 'the agreement on taxes,' while the Pew question described the deal as one that would extend tax cuts and unemployment benefits."

Posted by: associate20 | December 15, 2010 4:30 PM | Report abuse

"what you've suggested sounds unhinged"

What's "unhinged" is adding a billion dollars in debt when the country is already broke and the GOP intends to launch an all-out assault on the Welfare State and the government itself. What is "unhinged" is for Democrats to blindly follow orders and cheer for legislation that they NEVER would have permitted if offered by a Republican President.

And I didn't accuse the Washington Post of concocting polls. Greg's MP statement that 87% of Liberals supported Obama was linked to a poll. I looked at the poll and there was nothing there about Liberal support. And I didn't accuse the White House of concocting polls either but please don't suggest that the WH didn't put a full-court press on to get this monstrosity passed. Exactly what that entails is unclear for now but what is certain is that Obama never bothered to do this for anything else, suggesting that this bill -- a Republican bill that will starve the government and inevitably lead to grave cuts in government services -- was what really mattered to him. Yet Democrats blindly support it all.

And you can stuff that where the sun don't shine, Pal.

Posted by: wbgonne | December 15, 2010 6:48 PM | Report abuse

@wbgonne:

I'm sorry that you think that there are currently greater threats to Social Security & Medicare/Medicaid than continued high unemployment and the loss of revenue it entails.

"What is "unhinged" is for Democrats to blindly follow orders and cheer for legislation that they NEVER would have permitted if offered by a Republican President."

I'm not sure which debate you've been following, but Democrats virtually never "blindly follow orders." And if you think that what Democrats have been doing over the last few weeks is "blindly follow[ing] orders," I think it's fair to ask if you even been paying attention to what's been going on.

If you were paying attention, you would know that Democrats, despite their misgivings, have come to support this bill, not because they "blindly follow orders," but because of the benefits to the middle class (i.e., a host of tax credits, unemployment benefits, continued middle class tax cuts), as well as the empirical evidence (confirmed by Progressive think tanks & independent evaluators) that this package, in its totality, will boost hiring.

In short, Democrats are supporting this, not in spite of the middle class, but BECAUSE of the middle class. I'm sorry if your top priority is something other than keeping food on the tables of the unemployed and ensuring that middle class families are able to get some help with sending their kids to college, or God forbid, get a little extra money back to help with day-to-day family expenses.

Posted by: associate20 | December 15, 2010 7:27 PM | Report abuse

Hooey. And you know it. Dismissed.

Posted by: wbgonne | December 15, 2010 7:38 PM | Report abuse

@wbgonne:

"what you've suggested sounds unhinged"

Oh, by the way, you excerpted the above from an earlier post of mine. You may want to familiarize yourself with the word suggestion (and its synonyms: intimate, imply, etc.) when you're looking up partisanship.

Please dont spew your vitriol at me because of what you've suggested with your own words on this site.

Your words speak for themselves. If you don't like what you've intimated, perhaps you should be more discerning in what you post.

Posted by: associate20 | December 15, 2010 7:41 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company