Deficit Chickens - Grasping Reality with Both Hands

Brad Delong:

Duncan Black:

Eschaton:* That Nasty Deficit:* So the "centrist" Dems who are usually given lots of friendly ink over the endless kvetching about the deficit are going to prove, for the trillionth time, that they don't actually care about the deficit but instead only care about marginal tax rates for rich people. That won't stop reporters from writing about their "deficit concerns," though with any luck they'll all be chucked out of their jobs.

Commenting on Greg Sargent:

The Plum Line - More House Dems balking at ending Bush tax cuts for rich: More House Dems balking at ending Bush tax cuts for rich Even as President Obama is mounting a strong stand in favor of letting the Bush tax cuts for the rich expire, and even as he's signaling that it will be a major campaign issue, more and more vulnerable House Dems are bolting in the other direction.

Here's a quick rundown of Dems in tough races who are coming out against ending the tax cuts for the rich:

• Rep Jim Himes of Conneticut says he supports a termporary extension, because earning $250,000 annually "does not make you really rich."
• Rep Bobby Bright of Alabama came out against ending the tax cuts, because "a vast majority of my constituents ... don't believe in tax increases on anybody at this point in time."
• Rep Ron Klein of Florida wants a one year extension of the tax cuts, including those for the rich, because "right now, our top economic priority has to be job creation."
• Rep Gerry Connolly of Virginia says the tax cuts should remain because the recovery remains "fragile."
• Rep Gary Peters of Michigan wants the cuts to continue lest we "jeopardize economic recovery."
• Rep Harry Mitchell of Arizona says he "strongly" opposes letting the tax cuts lapse because "we need to encourage investment, not discourage it."

Along these lines, a question for you readers. Most polls show public support for letting the tax cuts for the rich expire. But these are national polls and don't tell us what's going on in these marginal districts. What I'd be interested to know is if there's any evidence that supporting the President on this is as toxic in these districts as these Dems seem to have concluded it is. What is it like on the ground? Is this really all that risky a position to support?