Rasmussen: ObamaCare hits highest disapproval rate yet

posted at 12:55 pm on September 18, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

The bounce from Barack Obama’s speech last week to Congress continues to amplify … to Obama’s detriment.  Rasmussen now reports that opposition to ObamaCare has reached its highest level yet, at 56%, while only 43% support it.  Majorities now believe that health care would get worse and more expensive under Obama’s overhaul of the American health-care system:

Fifty-six percent (56%) of voters nationwide now oppose the health care reform proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats. That’s the highest level of opposition yet measured and includes 44% who are Strongly Opposed.

Just 43% now favor the proposal, including 24% who Strongly Favor it. …

If the plan passes, 26% of voters say the quality of care will get better, and 51% say it will get worse. In August, the numbers were 23% better and 50% worse.

Fifty-one percent (51%) say passage of the plan will make the cost of health care go up while 20% say it will make costs go down. In August, 52% thought the plan would lead to higher costs, and just 17% thought it would achieve the stated goal of lowering costs.

President Obama plans a media blitz this weekend to make his case — again – for ObamaCare.  So far, his media blitzes appear to have had the opposite reaction as he hopes.  Obama hasn’t exactly been shy about his media appearances, as Jim Geraghty notes from a USA Today report:

Obama will have done 124 print, broadcast and radio interviews by day’s end on Sunday, according to a tally by Martha Joynt Kumar, a political scientist at Towson University in Maryland. George W. Bush did 40 and Bill Clinton did 46 by the same point in their presidencies.

At times, it seems that the only strategy employed by this administration is to do the opposite of whatever the previous administration did.  That’s certainly true of media appearances, but the returns have been diminishing for some time.  Even while blanketing the media, Obama has dropped under 50% approval on a wide range of issues, including health care and the economy, two traditional Democratic strengths.

Part of the reason why this strategy has not been effective is because Obama has had nothing new to say in months.  He appears convinced that the answer to voter rejection of his arguments is to offer them repeatedly and in increasing loudness and anger.  His latest foray into prime time should have educated him to the folly of this approach.

That brings us to Sunday, when Obama will appear in five televised interviews.  Will the media press him for new arguments?  What exactly should they ask him, and what will Obama be prepared to tell them?  I have a few questions myself for the President, and any of the interviewers should feel free to use them:

  • Why did your administration continue to insist publicly that cap-and-trade would cost the average household $175 per year when an analysis from Treasury showed the cost more than ten times that amount?  Why did it take a FOIA application to release that study in the “most transparent administration ever?”
  • Why did you pick the 70th anniversary of the Soviet invasion to reverse course on missile defense in Poland?
  • You suggested that an amnesty program would solve the problem of illegal immigrant access to the health-care system in the US after your overhaul.  Do you think Americans should subsidize health-insurance coverage for people who entered the country illegally?
  • Two years ago, you told people on the campaign trail that paying for more coverage through efficiency savings in the health-care system was a myth, and that it would take higher taxes to overhaul the health care system.  Now you argue the opposite.  Why?

I’m sure I’ll add more later, and feel free to add yours in the comments.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 2 3 4

test

lovingmyUSA on September 19, 2009 at 4:34 AM

My comments wont appear…

lovingmyUSA on September 19, 2009 at 4:55 AM

OK, I give up.

lovingmyUSA on September 19, 2009 at 4:56 AM

Where is your health care proposal or are you sticking with Pelosi’s?
What will you, Pelosi and Reid do to buy the Reps and Senators that you need for your bill?
Have you read the bill?
Have you read Investor’s Business Daily and their survey of Doctors from this past week?

mdetlh on September 19, 2009 at 8:01 AM

You’re a Racist, Ed; pure and simple! Just a damn, “whitey” racist!

/sarc….

Dale in Atlanta on September 19, 2009 at 8:11 AM

Alinsky rule:

If you push a Negative long enough it will push through and become a Positive.

Maybe Alinsky was wrong about this one Barry.

GunRunner on September 19, 2009 at 12:39 PM

[AnninCA...]

While you’re at it, you could take the ManlyRash challenge; if the site isn’t “dead” in six months as you claim it will be, you agree to go away and never come back.

Bishop on September 18, 2009 at 2:39 PM

Cool, it’s now 60 days until HA will die off. Will Ann dare to accept the ManlyRash challenge?
Bishop on September 18, 2009 at 2:41 PM

So what ever did happen to ManlyRash? One day he’s every third comment, the next there’s no sign of him. Clearly I missed the showdown…

RD on September 19, 2009 at 1:04 PM

Re: pre-existing conditions.

Why buy insurance at all if they have to cover pre-existing conditions? Just wait until you’re sick then buy it. That way you’ll save thousands of dollars in premiums. Then the insurance industry will go bankrupt. Stupid.

atheling on September 18, 2009 at 2:14 PM

Kind of like purchasing auto insurance after you total out your car.

farright on September 18, 2009 at 2:23 PM

I humbly disagree that this analogy applies to the general case we need to solve. And for the following reason: People switching jobs comprise a significant % of the pre-existing condition “gotcha” cases. If someone loses his/her job from company A and isn’t rehired to company B before COBRA runs out (typically 18 months), they can be treated by the new insurer as if they never had medical insurance before in their lives.

And in no meaningful way can such a person be interpreted to have “waited to buy insurance until after they got sick” — it simply isn’t true.

The closest analogy is, the person WAS insured, had something happen to them, and then was kicked off the prior insurer’s policy for through no fault of their own, leaving them to slowly twist in the wind.

How do you propose to handle *that* situation? Another edge case is right here:

I am asking this as my granddaughter (6) has cystic fibrosis (an incurable terminal disease), and is currently on the state child insurance. I wonder if she will be able to get her own insurance when she is 21?

lovingmyUSA on September 19, 2009 at 3:26 AM

Portability across state lines would help.
atheling on September 19, 2009 at 3:49 AM

NOT good enough IMHO.

But to force private insurers to accept pre-existing conditions would be financially ruinous for them, as no one would want to pay premiums until they get sick.

Just an observation: If those same beneficiaries never moved off of their original policies (and assuming those policies were of the typical employer-based variety) then *somebody* would have to pay for all of that care. If they moved from company A to B, the costs would shift, but the total dollar amount spent would not change significantly. In total dollar terms, that’s tantamount to saying that, in the aggregate, medical insurers cannot afford to keep their beneficiaries on their policies until age 65. Which, for all I know, may be 100% true.

RD on September 19, 2009 at 1:16 PM

Violence is NOT protest or poltical statement.

It is mental illness.

AnninCA on September 18, 2009 at 2:02 PM

The Liberals are the ones fomenting violence to impose their will with ObamaCare. That aside, this comment is typical of Socialists. Violence is an imperative if one is defending their freedom. Violence either in defending one’s Country or Self from enemies both Foreign or Domestic is not only desirable, but lacking the courage to defend the future generations from Dictatorship is morally repugnant. It was for the Founding Fathers and it always be so. “War is politics by other means” -Clauswitz-

Liberalism is a mental illness.

GunRunner on September 19, 2009 at 1:23 PM

I sincerely believe it has come to this: The talking heads at the state run media networks have already huddled with Axelrod and have coordinated their softball questions so Obama is not surprised by any of them. Then they’ll play one off the other so that there will be a week’s supply of soundbites that are not redundant. Where is Charlie Gibson now that we need him? Under his desk?

kens on September 19, 2009 at 2:16 PM

Whatever happened to the WH listening to the opposition? Or for that matter, even acknowledging that we exist? If I remember correctly, there were over 50,000,000 who did not vote for Obama, and we’re still here, with our numbers growing obviously. How does a president completely ignore this many people?

bubbakeg on September 19, 2009 at 2:54 PM

even goober knows
IT’S STILL A PIG.

Reality Check on September 19, 2009 at 3:20 PM

Got a question. What do you think we should do about people that have pre-existing conditions, and they lose their insurance. …my granddaughter (6) has cystic fibrosis (an incurable terminal disease), and is currently on the state child insurance. I wonder if she will be able to get her own insurance when she is 21?

lovingmyUSA on September 19, 2009 at 3:26 AM

Don’t mean to sound insensitive my friend, but a better question to answer first is: What will the grandparents, parents, and other family members do to provide “insurance” and care giving for their afflicted Grandaughter, if she is blessed to outlive the health insurance policy gifted to her by the “state”?

Wouldn’t it be wiser now, to use the next 15 years to save and plan for the loss of insurance, rather than hope that the Fed Gov will provide a benevolent handout of taxpayer funds? Methinks the best any of us mere mortals can hope for at the end of our days, is the tender mercies of our faith and our family.

“Let’s Roll”

On Watch on September 19, 2009 at 3:52 PM

So what ever did happen to ManlyRash? One day he’s every third comment, the next there’s no sign of him. Clearly I missed the showdown…

RD on September 19, 2009 at 1:04 PM

He made a rather dumb conditional promise to leave hotair and then he chose to honor that promise rather than admit it was a dumb promise.

He had his own blog and thought he could do it as well as hotair does. He was wrong and has stated that he must reduce his participation due to job requirements.

I would add that he also quickly showed LGF traits, such as scrubbing comments without leaving a placeholder or even acknowledging that he did so. Even though he criticized such practices by others. I think the word for that is hypocrite.

When he threatened to ban me for content of which he did not approve, I self-banned.

I think the main problem with America could be plain old hypocrisy, not liberalism.

Go Sarah! in 2012.

platypus on September 19, 2009 at 4:39 PM

Damn, Oblama has big ears! Is it OK to say that now?

tbear44 on September 19, 2009 at 10:33 PM

Damn, Oblama has big ears! Is it OK to say that now?

That’s his problem–he spends too much time yammering instead of using those two God given radar sized appendages to listen to what the country wants!

chickasaw42 on September 19, 2009 at 10:47 PM

Is it possible for a man to be specific about anything when he has never had to for his entire campaign or presidency up to this point? I think Obama only knows how to speak in generalities. Is it because he doesn’t know how, or he knows that he shouldn’t?

kelbow1600 on September 20, 2009 at 12:24 AM

56%… Can 60% be far away?

MehopesNOT!

Khun Joe on September 20, 2009 at 8:46 AM

Sorry Ed- I’ve seen a sneak preview of the questions they’re asking him:

1) Puppies?
2) Unicorns!
3) Bunnies…
4) Profit!!!

Scott P on September 20, 2009 at 11:37 AM

Thanks platypus for the update – hadn’t been over to his site so it looks like I “missed out” ;-)

I think the main problem with America could be plain old hypocrisy, not liberalism.

platypus on September 19, 2009 at 4:39 PM

It seems like hypocrisy is part of the structural framework of leftist “liberalism” these days.

Of course folks like Auster claim even traditional liberalism requires the use of the “unprincipled exception” by its very nature — and he’s probably right – but I happen to believe (perhaps foolishly) that there are certain shared values and heuristics that put limits on how many, and what kinds, of exceptions we will tolerate. (I think he would disagree w/this but oh well.)

RD on September 20, 2009 at 5:25 PM

Why did you pick the 70th anniversary of the Soviet invasion to reverse course on missile defense in Poland?

What a great question. Obama snubs are never accidental. Obama must have a Book of Snubs, with a chapter for White Muslim Fighting Nations of the Imperialist Western Hegemony and how to Diss Them

The second question on amnesty is also excellent

I would ask Obama why he made his speech on amnesty to the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute instead of in the speech to the Joint Session of Congress outlining his Healthcare proposals.

Why did Obama tell the CHCI he wants amnesty so illegals can cash in on the health care when he implied to the American people he had no intention of giving coverage to illegals?

I would ask Obama why he told the Mexican President last month in Guadalajara

he was “confident” he would get Congress to enact comprehensive immigration reform that included a “pathway to citizenship” for illegal aliens.

Question: what gives him this confidence and why did he not include this information in his speech to the American public at the Joint Session?

entagor on September 21, 2009 at 3:44 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4