Rasmussen: 54% would prefer no bill to current ObamaCare proposals
posted at 7:15 pm on August 15, 2009 by Allahpundit
Ace says that’s not enough. Is it?
Thirty-five percent (35%) of American voters say passage of the bill currently working its way through Congress would be better than not passing any health care reform legislation this year. However, a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that most voters (54%) say no health care reform passed by Congress this year would be the better option…
Among those not affiliated with either major party, 23% would like the Congressional reform to pass while 66% would rather the legislators take no action.
Voters who earn less than $20,000 a year are evenly divided but a majority of all other voters would prefer no action. Middle income voters, those who earn from $40,000 to $75,000 a year, are most strongly in favor of taking no action.
Assume opposition ticks up to 60 percent, which is probably the ceiling. Would that really stop it, as Ace expects? Passing a bill with a public option would alienate the center, passing a bill without one would alienate the left, but passing nothing — while enjoying a supermajority in Congress — would be unthinkable. The obvious analogy is to the GOP failing to pass social security reform in 2005 despite controlling both branches, but this would be worse: The Democrats’ advantage is bigger, they have the media on their side, and social security was never a policy showpiece for Bush the way ObamaCare is for The One. If they can’t buy off enough progressives and Blue Dogs to pass this, either with pork or with secret promises that whatever passes will/won’t eventually lead to single-payer, the Democratic coalition will appear ungovernable and the myth of transformational Hopenchange will be shattered — which I suspect will feed a backlash even among voters who don’t want them to pass anything. No wonder that party elders are already massaging the nutroots about accepting compromise. Something’s going to pass. It simply has to. The only question is what.
Exit question: How much of a risk is there really of Obama alienating the left? Granted, the O-bots in Organizing for America who are already tired and complacent won’t take kindly to The One telling them it’s time to MoveOn.org from health care. But if the big fear is of a galvanized nutroots launching primary challenges against Blue Dogs who vote against ObamaCare (or any version of ObamaCare with a public option), then the more likely a GOP wave next year seems, the dicier that becomes for liberals. Do they really want to drag a centrist congressional incumbent to the left in a primary when the country’s trending right? Better to leave them alone and follow the Barney Frank approach of accepting a bill that’s half a loaf and then trying to leaven it afterwards until it becomes single-payer.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
I think the mods will get fed up with broken promises, especially when it comes to taxes. But, regardless, one question:
You okay with Big Pharma making a backroom deal with Obama?
Okay, two questions. Do you agree that such a deal is harmful to their consumers, while possible beneficial to their bottom line?
Spirit of 1776 on August 15, 2009 at 8:45 PM
comparing the buckling under of gm to the buckling under of Pharma is ludicrous…..drugs, inventing new ones, making life better for millions, and getting a free car….no comparison…..the govt. will stifle the drug industry.
nondhimmie on August 15, 2009 at 8:46 PM
Yes. I have been really glad to hear more than a few of the town hall protesters try to address the Constitutional issue head on. They need to ask the congress-critter:
1) Is the power of the federal government limited by anything other than money?
2) Does the Constitution serve to define how the federal government is restricted in int operation?
3) Can you cite me the specific clause, or clauses, in the Constitution upon which you find the power for the federal government to open a company in order to “provide competition” to the private sector?
4) Can you cite the specific clause, or clause, in the Constitution that give the federal government power over health care for individuals, such as mandates to buy?
And the people should have answers ready to refute claims of “general welfare” (a Madison quote or two can kill that argument) or inter-state commerce (as that only allows for regulation of the commerce, itself, not the commercial objects). After that, the Congress-critter will be left silent, since there is nothing else.
progressoverpeace on August 15, 2009 at 8:46 PM
Reconciliation, in lay terms, basically means that if a bill that passed in one chamber of congress — House or Senate — is amended or changed by the other chamber, a committee is appointed with representatives from each chamber to work out the differences between what actually passed in each chamber.
If this committee can reach an agreement, by either accepting or rejecting the various differences, the now changed bill is then sent back to each chamber for a vote of approval or rejection. If approved, you have a law, if not vetoed by the president.
If it’s rejected by either chamber, the bill is dead (but it can be revived, usually not likely).
Probably more info than you wanted.
TXUS on August 15, 2009 at 8:48 PM
And don’t think for a moment, that Obama wouldn’t turn around, after the deed is done, and put the screws to the pharmaueticals. Deals, and honor mean nothing , when it comes to Obama. It’s not about what’s best for all of us, it’s what’s best for Obama that matters.
capejasmine on August 15, 2009 at 8:48 PM
Too late. They’ve already succeeded in pitting smoker against non-smoker, fat against thin, self employed (or under employed in the case of most bloggers) against the employed with company benefits.
Distraction does work. You think they like that word for nuthin’? They’ve done it to perfection.
Jaynie59 on August 15, 2009 at 8:50 PM
Not to mention the HUGE constitutionally protected privacy issues that will tie this legislation up in the courts for a few years.
elduende on August 15, 2009 at 8:50 PM
Big time. Thanks, elduende.
progressoverpeace on August 15, 2009 at 8:51 PM
Meanwhile, the Obama’s are getting some fabulous vacation time out of this, at our expense. ;)
Wished I’d had money for one lil vacation this year.
capejasmine on August 15, 2009 at 8:52 PM
What I cannot fathom, help me out here, is how Obama in Colorado this afternoon could straight-faced invoke Fedex and UPS and the Postal Service to show how private firms can compete on a level playing field alongside government.
First…Fedex and UPS still are subject to all sorts of local laws, state laws, and federal laws, and taxes, and restrictions and regulations…compliance costs them a bundle each year, pardon the pun, and government doesn’t really have to bother with these things. And Obama answered with platitudes…not a single fact…pretty much brushed it off.
Second…the US Postal Service is about one fiscal year away from going totally defunct. Not something I’d invoke to show folks concerened about government running any part of health care/health insurtance/Obamacare, or anything, for that matter. Coulda picked a better model of successful cost-conscious federal agency. Is there one? He was in Colorado, talking to those “western folk” maybe he should have used the Indian Health Service as a glowing model of what our health care will be in a decade or less if this Obamanation passes?
Third…nobody called him on any of this nor any of the other garbage. Thought we might get close to that when the questioner asked/stated there are so much misinformation out there …but he was merely implying the Right is spreading lies.
How about a question to The One ’bout how Obama promised that ALL legislation (Bills) that would effect the debt or include spending would be open and made public for scrutiny and discussion not less than five days before a vote would be considered? A number of very expensive Bills have been passed and signed into law and they ain’t posted yet.
Lastly…Obama isn’t running for President until 2012…why is he campaigning so hard now?
Doesn’t he have a real job to go to every day?
coldwarrior on August 15, 2009 at 8:55 PM
I smell a rotting carcas… This dipshit is a one term, monumental failure. Its taken less than 7 months for the Magic Negro to fall to 47% approval…W left office in the mid 30′s…thats after 8 years and every single media outlet (except FOX) bashing him and lying about him 24 hours a day. The media kneels before the Magic Negro, they report NOTHING negative and praise him when he takes a dump…and hes already at 47%.
Roadkill….
Jackson1227 on August 15, 2009 at 8:56 PM
progressoverpeace beat me to the Constitution issue…which I really wish somebody would ask The One on live network TV.
Love to see Obama handle that one…in public…no notes…’cuz he was one of them Constitutional experts or something when he was back in Chicago.
coldwarrior on August 15, 2009 at 8:59 PM
Well put. I would just add another post office tidbit to your list, the post office is now only running 5 days/week and is closing 1000 locations. Let people think about that as health care and stew in it.
I can’t believe the moron is staying on this idiotic analogy. As impenetrably dumb as I think he is, he’s even dumber!
I liked his meandering explanations during the clown hall. He was almost mumbling, at some points. LOL.
progressoverpeace on August 15, 2009 at 9:01 PM
He addressed this [generally] during the campaign. Commented on negative rights and the [as seen by him] flaws of the Constitution. Anyway question now would get a similar answer, I’m sure.
Spirit of 1776 on August 15, 2009 at 9:01 PM
Exactly. It’ll happen, I think. Katy Abrams was so close with Specter and the NRA guy from the other Precedential clown hall started out in that direction.
progressoverpeace on August 15, 2009 at 9:03 PM
The Americans can reasonably consider saying to their Congressman and Senators:
Kralizec on August 15, 2009 at 9:06 PM
Agreed but,
SOMEONE needs to be screaming Tort Reform at the top of their lungs! The American people probably rank lawyers just above politicians and just bellow the presstitutes!
Which GOP Congresscritter or Senate Scum Lawyer will demand tort reform. The number one reform that would cut costs to the healthcare system and thus to individuals.
Limit the size of the awards and make them pay if they lose!
If the czars can limit executive compensation and bonuses the congress and senate can limit a lyin lawyers’ compensation also!
dhunter on August 15, 2009 at 9:07 PM
Thank you very much for your response. It was great information. I didn’t understand if there were any limitations during this process. With so many aspects of this bill, I would imagine they have to restrict the discussion but I could be wrong. I have to study up more.
Thanks again.
sherry on August 15, 2009 at 9:07 PM
So…which Constitution did Obama swear to protect and defend…
The real one…the original.
Or the Constitution that exists in his dreams? The new one…with penumbras, and emanations and unicorns…and not a word written by a bunch of old dead white guys way back when?
coldwarrior on August 15, 2009 at 9:07 PM
Did he really use the Fed Ex/UPS/USPS example AGAIN? He got taken to the woodshed over that the last time. Who is doing his research at the White House?
elduende on August 15, 2009 at 9:08 PM
Yep. Today in Colorado.
He also mentioned “one of the pillars on which this foundation would be built…” with regard to Obamacare.
coldwarrior on August 15, 2009 at 9:09 PM
Look, I agree with p/p’s premise. I’m merely saying that he already is on the record with an answer you will get again. So must have a follow-up question or a way to take present that answer in a way that resonates with citizens.
Spirit of 1776 on August 15, 2009 at 9:10 PM
Irony of ironies those “penumbras of rights” are going to come back to haunt him especially in the privacy issues.
elduende on August 15, 2009 at 9:11 PM
Wow they are inept. We need to fear this level of incompetence because it will manifest itself at the most inopportune times (like in the middle of a foreign crisis)
elduende on August 15, 2009 at 9:14 PM
Good gawd,so according to the ‘polling’,
ram it through!!
canopfor on August 15, 2009 at 9:16 PM
Obama is merely the President of the United States…he is not a King…he is merely a
citizenwell, he is something…but nobody should be afraid to push a follow-up question loud and clear when he does the Chicago two-step.I’ve seen one or two get close so far but Obama always quips his way to the next
plantquestioner.If we cannot do it directly, we need to keep that particular Constitutional issue at the top of the list…and loudly.
coldwarrior on August 15, 2009 at 9:16 PM
That was actually 2001 and only got air time from Hannity and Levin.
thomasaur on August 15, 2009 at 9:18 PM
Didn’t OBiden warn of this during the campaign? A foreign crisis and Pinnochio would be in over his head?
dhunter on August 15, 2009 at 9:18 PM
Where is Biden anyway?
coldwarrior on August 15, 2009 at 9:20 PM
I wouldn’t mind hearing him say the same thing again. I don’t think him saying that would go over very well, these days. I hope not, at least. I doubt many heard his original statement, and I think they should. Ordinarily, I would assume he would run away from his original, but seeing how he doubled up on the FedEx/UPS idiocy today, I think he has a special affinity for stupid arguments.
“To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted and one of the, I think, the tragedies of the civil rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that.”
– The Precedent and Traitor-in-Chief
He was only addressing the Bill of Rights, here, it seems to me. This is the general lefty attitude. To them, there is nothing to the Constitution but the Bill of Rights, and only their selected ones, at that. All someone has to do is explain to him that the main body of the Constitution consists of articles positively telling each arm of government the extent of what it can do. I have the feeling that the idiot messiah never read any of that part.
As a point of entertainment, it would also be nice to get The Precedent to have to explain a statement of his own that talks about what is necessary to be “radical”! Anytime he has to say “radical”, it’s a good thing. There’s so much lefty lunacy in his statement … it’s just crazy. I’d love to hear him say it again.
progressoverpeace on August 15, 2009 at 9:20 PM
Thanks. I should have said it was quoted during the campaign. Rush played it too, btw.
No argument. But if someone is upset with him making deals with Pharma, I’m not going to talk them out of it in favor of another.
Spirit of 1776 on August 15, 2009 at 9:21 PM
yep. These past 7 months, despite the stumbles, have been mercifully crisis free but aside from the unknowns, there are any number of ugly scenarios facing us that I know he’ll botch badly.
elduende on August 15, 2009 at 9:21 PM
my prediction.. the pressure mounts and the left have at least 2 defections. panick time.
katy on August 15, 2009 at 9:23 PM
Yeah, that’s the line – what the government must do on your behalf – that’s his fallback.
Right now, outside of the 54% percent already against it, how many see it as something the government must not do on citizen’s behalf – ie a belief that would mobilize against bill.
I do think this argument should be made, and would shore up a percentage of the 54%, fwiw.
Spirit of 1776 on August 15, 2009 at 9:24 PM
“poster contest”
You swore an oath/Healthcare is NOT a right!
katy on August 15, 2009 at 9:25 PM
“Stop the Obamanation!”
coldwarrior on August 15, 2009 at 9:27 PM
I like it.
progressoverpeace on August 15, 2009 at 9:29 PM
“socialism for me not for thee????”
elduende on August 15, 2009 at 9:29 PM
Shuldn’t “consent of the governed” play in there somewhere?
coldwarrior on August 15, 2009 at 9:29 PM
And yet the filthy liar is out there still playing the zero sum game with yet another staged town hall that even the Washington Post isn’t buying as legitimate.
The party elders may be looking for compromise but is the rat bastard traitor in the White House? I have good cause to believe he isn’t.
highhopes on August 15, 2009 at 9:30 PM
“We…the people.
Not Us, the Congress.
Not Me, the President.
We, the People.”
coldwarrior on August 15, 2009 at 9:30 PM
“Kill OBamacare before it Kills you!”
[That'll be the last one. Just pulling lines out from previous posts.]
coldwarrior on August 15, 2009 at 9:32 PM
Sure, but you will have a hard time convincing me that people on the government dole – not just welfare, but many government workers – don’t consent to [pre-existing] governmental overreach.
Spirit of 1776 on August 15, 2009 at 9:33 PM
Excellent!
“The rule of law, not the reign of empathy.”
(This one isn’t very good, but I just wanted to write out)
progressoverpeace on August 15, 2009 at 9:33 PM
There’s zero chance of him alienating the nutroots. If the Risen One tells them to move on, they’ll move on. Just like Iraq and Afghanistan.
Lehosh on August 15, 2009 at 9:34 PM
The progressive base cannot and will not abandon President Obama. He is the most progressive candidate to ever be elected POTUS and will be for at least 30 years.
If he goes down their ideology goes down. So they will do whatever they have to do to keep him propped up.
BadgerHawk on August 15, 2009 at 9:34 PM
Nice! You populist, you!
Spirit of 1776 on August 15, 2009 at 9:35 PM
I don’t know if anyone has written about this and I have heard just enough to make myself sound ignorant but apparently in the House bill there are numerous places where the income tax code is used to mandate health care. A caller brought it to the attention of a radio host (can’t remember who, thinking Boortz) and it wasn’t expanded on because the host kept saying it is illegal. I think there are a ton of things in this bill that could be tied up in court for a long time.
Cindy Munford on August 15, 2009 at 9:37 PM
Exit Q!
Will the entire Liberal Party,go down,with Team Obama,I
say,watching this wreck of this Administration since Jan
20th,their going to damn their own torpedos,and sink them
selves!!
Liberals are power drunk mad,and there back in power,and
baby,they ain’t gonna let this ride slip easily through
there fingers,besides with Hopey,its Christmas Day every
day,for Liberals to create their Utopian do-gooder ideas,
which is nothing more than a cloak,for more voters to vote
Liberal!!
And besides,theres the Kool-Aid factor!!!
canopfor on August 15, 2009 at 9:39 PM
I was driving home tonight and I saw a guy panhandleing on the corner with a sign that said…
Obama wanted change
I NEED change
HA!
katy on August 15, 2009 at 9:39 PM
Perhaps it was the trial lawyers contribution to the bill.
In a way though, going after these things will be like trying to kill a fly in sewage treatment plant…
katy on August 15, 2009 at 9:44 PM
I don’t know if anyone has written about this and I have heard just enough to make myself sound ignorant
Cindy Munford on August 15, 2009 at 9:37 PM
Cindy Munford: Cindy,nothing makes you sound ignorant,so
banish those thoughts about yourself,besides
if anyone is to sound ignorant of the Ameri
can ways,it would be me,I’m still learning!!
—hehe:)
canopfor on August 15, 2009 at 9:45 PM
HR3200 mandates healthcare or a fine for not participating (think uninsured motorists). It is part of the drive to a single payer system run by the government.
highhopes on August 15, 2009 at 9:49 PM
But he promised us that all will be well in Montana. How can you racist teabagging Brooks Brothers wearing racist protesters doubt his sincerity?
angryed on August 15, 2009 at 9:50 PM
I think it is more than Dems being power drunk mad. They’ve gone so far in supporting the filthy liar they can’t back away from him now.
highhopes on August 15, 2009 at 9:52 PM
It is Obama’s “sincerity” that scares the hell out of me.
coldwarrior on August 15, 2009 at 9:52 PM
He doesn’t have a bill. He farmed that out to the Dem congress critters just like the stimupaloosa. He says his bill this and his bill that, but will sign anything put in front of him and claim victory, a hard won victory held up by the uncooperative extremist Republicans.
Pinnochio has not had the time nor has he the inclination to get his hands dirty. He farms it out and then just sells it.
For all the glee at his epic fail don’t forget the stimupaloosa money is not meant to stimulate the economy. It was meant to stimulate liberal Democrat constituent groups. Unions, ACORN, other Community Organizations and it’s set to be spent just before the 2010 elections.
Just as any real healthCare Reforms will not be put into effect until 2013 thus presevering power for those who tear this country assunder.
The geniuses in charge did not and could not factor in the economy, however. Their pathetic attempt at spurring recovery cannot work. Governemnt takeovers and increased taxes cannot generate investment, production or consumption, instead, only hinder it.
The socialists will strangle the economy and somehow have to blame the Republicans or evil capitalism. That gets harder to do by the day.
dhunter on August 15, 2009 at 9:53 PM
I don’t think this poll is really legimitate, since only a small population would ever be so involved they know what’s in all the bills.
But, whatever.
AnninCA on August 15, 2009 at 9:53 PM
Take head all politicians these 54% are the people most likely to VOTE.
thmcbb on August 15, 2009 at 9:55 PM
What the poll really tells us is two things: Most Americans are satisfied with their current health care, and most Americans no longer trust President Obama when he says he can cover more people for less money with no reduction in quality.
BadgerHawk on August 15, 2009 at 10:02 PM
I still would have like to have heard more about this but the host kept saying it would never pass because the tax code can’t be used as punishment. It appears to me that it happens all the time. The tactic of them writing bills in a manner that the average citizen is unable to comprehend might just take a beating this time. A significant number of people that are smarter then congress members (hard to imagine I know) are worried enough about this power grab to read it thoroughly. It won’t be Congress’s finest hour.
Cindy Munford on August 15, 2009 at 10:02 PM
Who says so………
……….. Obama, Pelosi, Ried, Soros?
As far as I’m concerned…….
…….. they can stick this legislation up their collective as%es until they choke, all 1000+ pages of it!!!
Seven Percent Solution on August 15, 2009 at 10:05 PM
Seven Percent Solution on August 15, 2009 at 10:05 PM
Agreed, but Pinnochio WILL sign anything and then blame the delay and any shortcomings on the Republicans.
He’s nothin but a salesmen, someone else is doin the work and pullin the strings. This won’t work in the foreign policy arena, one could say it’s not working so well since the election!
dhunter on August 15, 2009 at 10:22 PM
Rasmussen is a respected polling outfit. Their methodology is peer reviewed.
You on the other hand “don’t think” that this poll is really legitimate.
Have you looked at the internal components of the polling results? Do you have a specific complaint about the sampling distribution?
Once again, Ann; critical thinking is hard work.
You need to work harder at it.
massrighty on August 15, 2009 at 10:46 PM
The Democrats will take a huge hit either way. You think people are mad now…
ddrintn on August 15, 2009 at 11:18 PM
It’s a shame that the debate has been framed in such a way that people believe Obama IS the healthcare. Obamacare as a term is part of this strategy by the media and conservative activists to personalize the healthcare issue to Obama as a person, rather than a discussion about healthcare issues. I’ll give Hotair credit for at least presenting the conservative side of the issues involved a good half of the time. Same for indy progressive outlets. But in the MSM the debate has been more about what people think about Obama, than an analysis of the current shortcomings of the healthcare system and a comparison of the proposed solutions.
And, the question remains. What does it mean that most Americans believe the system needs reform, even if they believe Obamacare is hugely problematic. What kind of solutions does the public want?
CrankyIndependent on August 15, 2009 at 11:29 PM
Read that back to yourself-WTF?
CWforFreedom on August 15, 2009 at 11:30 PM
Government run government has to ration government yet the same government wants to govern your health care!
http://cbs2chicago.com/local/Chicago.city.closed.2.1129409.html
“The City of Chicago will basically be closed for business on Aug. 17, a reduced-service day in which most city employees are off without pay, according to a release from the Office of Budget and Management. City Hall, public libraries, health clinics and most city offices will be closed.”
I must be blind. Did I see that “health clinics” will be closed so as to . . . Save $$$$ ?
Say it ain’t so! BTW – Isn’t Chicago Barry’s home town? Hummmm? Don’t put it past him to be behind this for some evil purpose!
Hal-9000 on August 15, 2009 at 11:31 PM
Well Nate Silver has a pretty good analysis of Rasmussen’s Likely Voter models, some of Ras’s recent polling results and raises some good questions about some of the results he’s seeing. Before folks cry bias, Silver conceedes that it’s not only likely that the GOP will take back seats in 2010, it’s historical as that tends to happen after one party has won the whitehouse (9/11 not withstanding). All that said, his article’s pretty convincing.
CrankyIndependent on August 15, 2009 at 11:34 PM
Um, hate to break it to you CrankyIndependent, but Obama’s what it’s always been about. That’s the way he’s wanted it. “Conservative activists” had little to do with that. The media? Oh, yeah.
ddrintn on August 15, 2009 at 11:35 PM
Rasmussen’s also been quite accurate, though.
ddrintn on August 15, 2009 at 11:37 PM
No question about it. By running on personality, consistently refusing to answer hard questions and smiling and laughing whenever someone challenged him, Obama is definitely in part to blame for the personalization of the debate. But that’s also the media’s fault, they used that framing of him when they gave him favorable media coverage and they are doing the same as they tear him down via their presentation of the healthcare debate.
Scott Rasmussen is a smart, smart man. I think he does excellent election polling. But I think his issue polling is problematic. For one thing his polling questions are clearly biased towards a conservative conclusion. He’s not push polling by any means, but that’s not the only way to frame questions in a way that elicits the response you want. For example he’ll bring out common conservative memes and frames them as a question. Things like “do you trust the government or yourself more to make healthcare decisions.” I’m paraphrasing, but those kinds of questions that cast the issue as “who’s better you or Uncle Sam” instead of “here are two healthcare reform ideas, which do you prefer more?” Indeed, I can’t recall the last time Rasmussen ever polled two different healthcare reform ideas to see which people preferred (even as he conceedes that strong for some form of reform remains high). Instead his questions tend to ask a “hypothetical program vs nicely stated aspect of the status quo.”
CrankyIndependent on August 15, 2009 at 11:45 PM
The media aren’t doing anything to tear down Obama in the health care debate. Most of what I’ve been hearing and seeing from the MSM are reports of unruly, irrational mobs attempting to drown out any rational discourse on the subject, while Obama floats above it all armed with his nonpareil proposals. In that, of course, the MSM refuse to do their jobs and really look at the bill itself. They don’t want to do that in any case.
As for polling, most of the polling organizations are subject to criticism here and there. But the trends don’t look favorable for Obama and the Democrats however you slice it.
ddrintn on August 15, 2009 at 11:54 PM
How many positive stories on single payer healthcare have you seen on TV. I have not seen one.
CrankyIndependent on August 15, 2009 at 11:55 PM
There’s a good reason for that: single-payer is a dirty word to the majority, and it is anathema to suggest that Obama’s proposals would ever lead to such a thing. That’s “fear-mongering”.
ddrintn on August 15, 2009 at 11:58 PM
Exactly. Why is it a “dirty word” to the majority. You only see one type of story in the American media, yes even CNN and MSNBC about single payer, horror stories. Lots of people don’t think single payer is horrible in the nations that have it. Majorities even based on polling on the issue. But anectdotal experiences within a huge system are propogated as “single payer.” Even if you think it’s a bad idea you can’t claim the presentation of single payer or universal systems in general has been positive or even balanced.
CrankyIndependent on August 16, 2009 at 12:02 AM
Same could be said for all the “horror stories” about US health care. The majority seem happy with the care they receive, though.
I think people are suspicious of Utopian schemes. It’s not as if this country has been completely laissez-faire in its health care over the past 50 years. There is a dishonest denial among single-payer advocates about the inevitable trade-off that comes with a single-payer system. There’s the illusion that we can have it all, with no pain, with everyone getting exactly the care they need, with no higher taxes and no increased deficits and no chronic debt such as afflicts the NHS. People don’t really buy that.
ddrintn on August 16, 2009 at 12:10 AM
One thing Obama has been very stupid about is being unnecessarily vague about his tax policies. From day one he should have talked about raising taxes on the wealthy. Should have been part of every townhall, should have been every speech on this issue from the jump. People are not thrilled with the top 5% right now. The bank bailouts and other corporate welfare makes tax cuts for the wealthy a particularly popular idea right now, even Rasmussen has shown a majority of folks think thats a good way to pay for healthcare.
But by not emphasizing that Obama makes it look as if this will pay for itself. No one buys that. No one buys that it won’t add to the defecit and if there hadn’t been a useless stimulus plan passed he would have a hell of a lot more credibility on that front. All his mistakes aside, the media are not helping.
CrankyIndependent on August 16, 2009 at 12:18 AM
Obama could confiscate the assets of every person in the country with a net worth of over a million dollars, and it wouldn’t pay for his schemes. Plus, it would have to be a one-off deal.
ddrintn on August 16, 2009 at 12:21 AM
I would agree on the idiotic stimulus plan, but if you’ll remember back in February the media were in their usual Obama Cheerleaders mode: this dynamic young president had to have his legislative victory. They were unhelpful in that they weren’t really willing to delve too deeply into what a bloated monstrosity the “stimulus” was. Same with the House health care bill.
As for tax policy, “soak the rich” has a definite populist appeal, but it’s lousy for economic growth.
ddrintn on August 16, 2009 at 12:29 AM
Waterloo?
Remaining with the Napoleonic period I would prefer a Jena or Austerlitz for the present rulers of our nation. If they were on the losing side, of course. It would be more exciting to watch.
IlikedAUH2O on August 16, 2009 at 1:04 AM
Looking at these polling numbers, it simply has to include many that voted for the Wise One. Guess they’ve changed their minds now that they’ve figured out they aren’t getting a free lunch.
Thank you, a$$hats!
Dr. ZhivBlago on August 16, 2009 at 4:04 AM
THE GERMANS TRIED TO DESTROY AMERICA, THE JAPANESE TRIED THE SOVIET UNION TRIED THEY ALL FAILED. THANK YOU US MILITARY. SORRY BUT OBAMA WILL INDEED DESTROY AMERICA. WHY YOU MIGHT ASK. BECAUSE HE IS A RACISTS.THS BLACK MAN IS MORE RACISTS THAN ANY OTHER RACE. WANT PROOF:
1. ASK REV, WRIGHT
2. ASK THE MAN THAT REFERS TO CAUCASIANS AS “WHITE FOLK”
3. ASK THE MAN THAT REFERED TO HIS WHITE GRANDMOTHER AS A RACIST
ENOUGH SAID
rone5847 on August 16, 2009 at 8:30 AM
No bill IS better thats why. Like any law, once they get their foot in your door, they are coming all the way in.
Look at anything thats been passed. Recent stimulus should be quite a heavy example on peoples mind right now of how ineffective this current admin is. If it were a good idea, Bush would have done it over 8 years and why does it take and all Democrat system to jam this down our throat? If you all want to be walking zombies with no personality and be told everythign and handed everything, well move to Canada.
Government-run anything is bad let alone our healthcare. It will be a disaster!
johnnyU on August 16, 2009 at 8:55 AM
its also quite clear Obama didnt take care of his relatives when he had the power then. He’ll treat this the same way. You do not want Governmentized Healthcare!!!
johnnyU on August 16, 2009 at 8:58 AM
Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Biden & gang… Socialist to the core.
Keemo on August 16, 2009 at 9:03 AM
Just remember then, that polls about the Iraq war are bogus too. Technically, the only people who hold an informed opinion are people on the ground in Iraq. Which is probably not too far away from the truth. But then, other than a few left wing activist “veterans” with an axe to grind, people on the ground in Iraq said it is a noble mission.
And now consider the implication:
An entire generation of America grew up being lied about the Iraq war by people like, well like you, Ann.
Are you atoning for something by pointing out that opinion polls are objects of activist manipulation?
jeff_from_mpls on August 16, 2009 at 9:59 AM
Use the method the scientoligosts did against the IRS lot’s and lot’s of lawsuits and busted the legal budget of the IRS,same deal bust the feds budget and lawyer base by suing the hell out of all of boma’s crap.
Col.John Wm. Reed on August 16, 2009 at 10:51 AM
Even after the subsidies I think people will scream about what they could have to pay for coverage. I found the limits on what a person/family would have to pay in Section 243(d)(1) on page 137 of http://docs.house.gov/edlabor/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf and the federal poverty level at http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/09poverty.shtml
Make 200% of the poverty level ($21,660 for 1 person, $44,100 for a family of 4) and you have to pay up to 5% of income for health insurance ($1083 for an individual, $2205 for a family of 4). Make 400% of the poverty level ($43320 individual, $88200 for a family of 4) and have to pay up to 10% of income ($4332 for an individual, and $8820 for a family of 4) for health insurance.
The bill also mandates that you buy coverage (page 167), and that the most expensive coverage can cost no more then double the least expensive policy (therefor, a single 60 year old 4 pack a day smoker pays twice what a single healthy 18 year old pays for insurance = increased rates for young health people). People MAY want insurance, but they WILL scream at what they have to pay for it. I think when Obama say “affordable” they hear “free”.
4of8 on August 16, 2009 at 12:02 PM
its also quite clear Obama didnt take care of his relatives when he had the power then. He’ll treat this the same way. You do not want Governmentized Healthcare!!!
johnnyU on August 16, 2009 at 8:58 AM
Here’s where you get the chance to EXPLAIN that ridiculous bullshit.
And when will you ask your congressman to repeal Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security?
bschmalfeldt on August 16, 2009 at 1:09 PM
The networks, news media, The Communist Party, the Unions, Acorn, every thief and liar can’t get the mis-information across.
W A T E R L O O
Draft Joe the Plumber, he had it right all along.
bluegrass on August 16, 2009 at 5:28 PM
When they refund the taxes they’ve confiscated from me for more than 20 yrs plus interest.
Fighton03 on August 16, 2009 at 9:40 PM
A better and more modern schooling would be to reacquaint obambi or the congresscretter with Heller vs DC. The interesting thing from that ruling was a grammar lesson on explanatory clauses and their effect on the meaning of the sentence. The so called general welfare clause is an explanation of the why the federal government needed the power to tax (a hotly debate topic as I recall).
“The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; “
Fighton03 on August 16, 2009 at 9:50 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »