Some Evidence on the Reid Question

Facts matter: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter. Support our nonprofit reporting. Subscribe to our print magazine.


On Tuesday, I suggested Markos Moulitsas should spend a few extra bucks next time he surveys Nevada and ask Harry Reid-haters exactly why they hate Reid. A commenter named “kos” (the genuine article?) suggested that Mother Jones cover the cost. Thankfully, neither Kos nor MoJo nor yours truly will have to write a check after all. That’s because on Wednesday, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC) released the results of its latest Nevada survey, which offers support for the idea that at least some of the opposition to Reid comes from Democrats who think he’s not liberal enough. Here’s the most important data:

Among Independents who have an unfavorable view of Reid, 55% say it’s because he’s not progressive enough while only 40% think he’s too far left. Among Democrats with an unfavorable view, a whopping 92% say he’s not progressive enough.

62% of Democratic voters are not sure Reid should be the Democratic nominee in 2010, or think it should be someone new.

Seventy-two percent of Republicans with an unfavorable view of Reid think he’s too far left, but that’s no surprise. If Reid can hold Democrats and Independents, he’ll win Nevada in a walk. And the data from this survey, at least, suggests that Reid should be moving left—not right, as Chris Cillizza has suggested. It looks like the Las Vegas Sun‘s J. Patrick Coolican (who somehow emailed these survey results to scoop [at] motherjones [dot] com before I got PCCC’s press release) was right.

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

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