Democrats Get Lowest Rating From Voters in 35 Years

[ElChupacabra]

You are kidding right? The single biggest issue that destroyed the democrats in the 2024 election was the border enforcement issue.

I thought it was the economy:

Immigration was an issue with particular groups:

Source

I will give you half credit on that one. They are in bad need of a leader. However they have a message, it was simply rejected. "Orange man bad" is not working for them.

Indeed, which is why they need an actual message and an alternative platform. They have not done so thus far.

I imagine that the democrat party hierchey is frightened at the prospect of Mamdani becoming mayor in NYC, just as they were frightened at the prospect of Bernie Sanders getting the nomination in 2016. The point is that for the democrats to gain from a populist movement as Trump did, it will have to be similar in one aspect. The movement Trump tapped into took on the DC establishment in both parties and returned the GOP to what it initially claimed to represent. The democrats need a similar movement to take them back to what they once claimed to represent, specifically working-class Americans rather than the elite. They have been running away from that. They should seek to go back to the JFK era.

I largely agree here, and I think their efforts to just resist the change in politics is going to hurt them more than help. There are lessons to be learned from Mamdani's primary victory regardless of how one feels about him as a candidate. His approach and messaging is what pulled him well apart from an establishment candidate like Cuomo. I suspect Mamdani will be able to rally all of the people who are done with the establishment candidates in a similar way Trump did.

Democrats need to learn from the approach Mamdani took and craft that into something other candidates can use, and it's nothing magical, just creating a campaign that listens to the people and champions their issues. Where I do agree with conservatives is the Democrats have gone way too abstract on issues, and that's not to say all were bad ones to stand for. The problem is their more abstract issues did not only fail to address practical issues, but also relegated to party to cater to well heeled groups.

 

[Chomsky]

I was a registered Independent during many recent years and, like you, my vote was always consistent - just opposite of yours.

Yep. "Independent" status only means one is not a registered member of a political party. It does not mean one is devoid of lean or partisanship.

 

[ElChupacabra]

Immigration is fine and necessary. However, let's cease lumping illegal immigration in with legal immigration. One is good. the other is very bad.

This administration's been busy curbing legal immigration as well, so they have a different take on this.

 

[Chomsky]

It's always been a democrat party idea. Some republican administrations simply went along with it. Reagan was talked into signing a comprehensive immigration bill into law with the promise of continued funding for strong border enforcement. The amnesty part of the bill was granted, however the continue funding of strict border enforcement never came. Reagan later expressed regret that he signed onto it. That bill is what led to the democrats turning California into a blue state. The democrats pushed a comprehensive immigration bill again in the George W Bush era. Bush and a gang of eight including republicans in the Senate like Lindsey Graham, John McCain, and even a young Marco Rubio were ready to go along with it, however Americans virtually melted down White House and congressional switchboards in opposition and Bush wisely backed off of it, as the voters did not trust comprehensive immigration bills after Reagan was double crossed.

Of geezus, Republicans' and now MAGA's lack of accountability & taking responsibility is ridiculous.

Reagan knew what he was signing, and what was and was not in the Amnesty Bill.

That the GOP faithful believed Reagan's line of bullcrap explains why the same crowd believer's Trump's.

 

[element94]

Not going so well for Democrats

https://www.wsj.com/politics/elections/democratic-party-poll-voter-confidence-july-2025-9db38021

Not going well for the United States of America.

 

[Chomsky]

That’s fair. I probably over-reacted a bit.

I was just surprised to hear someone declare my post the stupidest one of the month purely on the basis of not maintaining an active WSJ subscription.

I’ve seen some unusual bars being set in my years, but that was a weird one. Nothing against WSJ, I’ve been a subscriber roughly 70% of the last 15+ years. I just prefer to send dollars to NPR and PBS these days. They need it more.

And IMHO - in the bolded - you had every right to be "surprised" . . .

 

[MAGAnificent]

This administration's been busy curbing legal immigration as well, so they have a different take on this.

All free nations restrict legal immigration at some level. US policy is about average. It takes 5 years to become a US citizen in most cases. In Germany it takes 8 years. However, there are many legal avenues for legal residency. Just to not assume that any nation, including the US will make it as simple as filling out an application and waiting for approval and citizenship through the mail. It's not like applying for a passport or a driver's license.

 

[Chomsky]

Reagan had no reason to go along with it given his victory was a strong repudiation of the Democratic Party agenda the preceded him. The conservatives of old didn't paint themselves into the jingoistic corner current conservatives are because they understood the importance of immigration to this country. The question has always been about how it's managed.

It's absolutely hilarious to see MAGA insisting Reagan was a naive victim of "the Democrats". It's exactly the same passes they give Trumph today, especially blaming people Trump hires. Many MAGA are blaming Pam Bondi for Trump not releasing the Epstein Files!

I swear, it's something in their DNA . . .

 

[Chomsky]

One would think on aggregate, Trump would be faring as well as he was early in his administration when his immigration policy poling was above 50% unlike now.

View attachment 67581889

Dems hate Trump, as a general principle. And now he's hemorrhaging Indies in his deportation policies.

That's where Trump's sliding poor numbers come from.

On the flipside, MAGA loves his deportations.

 

[Roadvirus]

Democrats need to stop supporting men in women's sports & stop propping up Socialist radicals like Mamdani.

 

[trixare4kids]

they offer nothing to you and your ilk, I agree. We're not going to apply policies that you want.
However, they have value to real American patriots.

Yeah, their dismal poll numbers certainly disprove your thinking.

 

[Desert Storm]

Not going well for the United States of America.

You sure??

 

[Chomsky]

I thought it was the economy:

Immigration was an issue with particular groups:

Source


Indeed, which is why they need an actual message and an alternative platform. They have not done so thus far.


I largely agree here, and I think their efforts to just resist the change in politics is going to hurt them more than help. There are lessons to be learned from Mamdani's primary victory regardless of how one feels about him as a candidate. His approach and messaging is what pulled him well apart from an establishment candidate like Cuomo. I suspect Mamdani will be able to rally all of the people who are done with the establishment candidates in a similar way Trump did.

Democrats need to learn from the approach Mamdani took and craft that into something other candidates can use, and it's nothing magical, just creating a campaign that listens to the people and champions their issues. Where I do agree with conservatives is the Democrats have gone way too abstract on issues, and that's not to say all were bad ones to stand for. The problem is their more abstract issues did not only fail to address practical issues, but also relegated to party to cater to well heeled groups.

I actually agree with the other poster.

The economy/inflation may have technically been the #1 issue on voters' minds. But there was little that could be done to change that. It was largely a matter of personal perceptions.

However Illegal Immigration was an issue that the Dems could have nullified. Doing so, would have quite possibly allowed them to prevail in the close election.

Probably the more accurate way to state it is:

"Immigration was the pivotal issue"

 

[trixare4kids]

From the people who want America to round up legal residents for the crime of being brown.

Offensive comments like yours are at the heart of why the Democratic Party numbers are in the skids. You lot never seems to think beyond their next race baiting comment. There are plenty of brown faces who voted not for Kamala but for Trump.
When the voters hear the Democrats in power talk like you do instead of discussing actual policy that can be helpful for them and the country it becomes a turnoff.

 

[Chomsky]

You sure??

I can't speak to the "purchase" or "investment" components of this "deal", as I have no prior reference to previous or usual purchase or investment.

However I'm always perplexed as to how raising taxes on Americans is celebrated as a "good thing".

Europeans pay no tax, but Americans pay 15%, and this is good? A "win"?

 

[VySky]

Expected. The party is a dumpster fire

 

[phoenix2020]

You sure??

Yes he’s sure. As you pointed out, Donald’s trade deal imposes a 15% tax on Americans buying European goods in exchange for them promising to maybe spend some money on US goods on an unspecified timetable. Basically it’s the exact same thing China did to Donald in is first time where they agreed to make a promise they knew would expire once he’s gone in exchange for him hurting ordinary Americans. It’s a typical Trump deal. I can see why he bankrupted canisos.

 

[noonereal]

Why do you not support the real journalism of NPR?

Please quote me where I said I didn't.

Another waste of time fallacy post. Happy with your post?

 

[noonereal]

“Real journalism” applied to poll results is time savings device for those without the time nor ability to interpret source data directly and prefer that a third party distill the highlights to them in narrative form. In this case, I prefer the raw PDF with the actual numbers, and you prefer that Aaron Zitner go through the numbers and write you a textual summary of those he found most interesting or relevant for you to be aware of. That’s fine. I don’t judge you for preferring Aaron’s interpretation of the poll over the poll itself, and only ask that you don’t judge me for preferring the poll instead of Aaron’s article.

Another fallacy.

Goodbye

 

[gbg3]

Yet . . .


View attachment 67581885

Enten did one of his animated reports on this generic ballot info not long ago. He showed past leads Dems had in the generic ballot when they did well and those when they didn't. Then he went down another path with the upcoming election - to enforce his point. I can't remember what the other path was and I'm too lazy to try to look for the video but he is not of the opinion that this lead is something Dems should consider good news. He does not think they are currently facing a good situation going into 2026. I might get motivated to look for it later. I think I posted it once before.

 

[gbg3]

The lowness of the Democratic party rating comes from their reputation as not fighting hard enough. The base wants a straight and clear messaging and action against the rise of fascism and extreme wealth imbalance. This is one reason that AOC is well-regarded by the base; she speaks in direct, clear language against the bad actors on the far right.

I think you're right as far as the base of the Dem party. But I question whether fighting harder will help the party's reputation with anyone beyond the base. I think you might be overestimating how many voters have the same "bad actor" view the base has and how many voters outside the (angry) base are actually looking for MORE resistance from the left.

 

[aociswundumho]

They have been running away from that. They should seek to go back to the JFK era.

JFK was pro-growth and supported middle-class and corporate tax cuts. He also supported the 2nd amendment - not completely - but way, way more than modern democrats.

 

[gbg3]

And regardless of polling regarding the party as a whole, voters will be faced with a Democrat and a Republican. Trump is underwater on every issue, including immigration. So, if we're to conclude anything from polling at this stage, it will the Democrat against Trump. Voters don't have to approve of a party to vote for its candidates, or more accurately, against the opposition.

Yes, but that "underwater" is far less underwater than Biden was or than even the Dems are now, when voters are asked which party they think is better at handling several of the important issues. Let's say a poll shows 52% of people polled disapprove of Trump's handling of border. If the next question is which party is better with securing the border, few or no polls would say the Dems.

So, I wouldn't get too excited about something like a 55% disapprove, 45% approve poll result - unless you add the full context to see if it's still worthy of feeling good about.

Wishful thinking or biased viewing of what polls actually say - can create a situation where a party becomes blind to weak spots they need to correct.

 

[LongIslandGirl]

In my opinion, the further the Democratic Party leadership goes towards platforming and normalizing the more radical left-wing people and ideologies of that side of the political aisle then the more it ends up pushing people to, dare I say, demagogues like Trump, and then the response from that same leadership somehow ends up going even further to the left which then entrenches even more people and in their minds justifies the demagogue's words and fears. They (the Democratic Party) can't answer what they deem to be far-right radical by doing the opposite and going full force into far-left radical themselves. They have to answer radical with practical if they want to change the narrative and attract voters. You would think that they would have seen that writing on the wall a little more clearly after the 2024 election results, but they seem, at least to me, to want to keep going further to the left as a response. I think that's a big mistake.

 

[Chomsky]

Enten did one of his animated reports on this generic ballot info not long ago. He showed past leads Dems had in the generic ballot when they did well and those when they didn't. Then he went down another path with the upcoming election - to enforce his point. I can't remember what the other path was and I'm too lazy to try to look for the video but he is not of the opinion that this lead is something Dems should consider good news. He does not think they are currently facing a good situation going into 2026. I might get motivated to look for it later. I think I posted it once before.

Raw polling numbers do not directly translate to election results, due to differences in the electoral landscape.

We see this when Dems win the popular Presidential vote, but lose the Electoral College.

So it's of course the actual elections, that count.