Will Voters Punish Congressional Republicans for the Shutdown?

Ringo Chiu/ZUMA Wire

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


It’s no secret that the government shutdown has been catastrophic for Republicans. A Wall Street Journal/NBC poll released earlier this week found that just 24 percent of Americans hold a favorable opinion of the Republican Party, the lowest rate in the poll’s two-decade-plus history. But how will GOP’s plummeting popularity affect its prospects at the ballot box? Another poll from Public Policy Polling (PPP), which was released Wednesday, offers some clues.

PPP polled voters in six key states, which will likely determine control of the Senate after the 2014 election. It found that the majority opposed the shutdown and wanted to punish the politicians responsible. As a results, Republicans are trailing in five of the six races—even though most respondents voted for Republican Mitt Romney in last year’s presidential election.

Among data geeks, PPP methods are somewhat controversial. The New Republic’s Nate Cohn recently took the firm to task, saying it has “withheld controversial elements of its methodology, to the extent it even has one, and treated its data inconsistently.” Nevertheless, even critics admit its projections have been pretty much on target.

The new PPP report cites several races where the shutdown has apparently given Democratic candidates a leg up:

-In Michigan’s open seat race Democrat Gary Peters leads Republican Terri Lynn Land 43/36. Voters are opposed to the shutdown by a 65/27 margin, and when voters are informed that Peters stood against the shutdown in the House his lead expands to 50/36.

-It’s a similar story in Iowa’s open seat race- there Democrat Bruce Braley leads a generic Republican opponent 45/41. Voters are against the shutdown 64/27, and when voters are informed of Braley’s opposition his lead goes up to 7 points at 46/39.

-In Louisiana [Democrat] Mary Landrieu leads Republican challenger Bill Cassidy 48/41 for reelection. Voters oppose the shutdown 60/30, and 47% say they’re less likely to vote for Cassidy for the Senate next year because he supported it compared to only 32% who are more likely to. 

PPP’s findings also suggest that the shutdown could play a role in the closely watched race for the seat of retiring Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.). The two top Republican contenders, Reps. Paul Broun and Phil Gingrey, favored the shutdown like most of their colleagues in the House Republican caucus. As a result, PPP found, 47 percent of the state’s voters were less likely to support Broun or Gingrey in a general election. This is good news for the Democratic candidate, Michelle Nunn. After being informed that her most likely opponents were House Republicans who supported the shutdown, 48 percent of those polled said they would back Nunn, versus 42 percent for whichever Republican survives the primaries.

The sinking poll numbers haven’t deterred Nunn’s would-be challengers. In an interview with CQ Roll Call on Tuesday, Gingrey insisted House Republicans are “not posturing” when they say they’re willing to breach the debt ceiling to win concessions from Democrats. He added that he saw the standoff as an “opportunity for a ‘Braveheart’ moment” and that he and his colleagues would not necessarily back down “for fear of losing the House and not gaining control of the Senate.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate