WSJ poll: 10-point swing in favor of public option since August
posted at 8:43 pm on October 27, 2009 by Allahpundit
Verrrry curious given that most of the other numbers on ObamaCare are either flat or getting worse. Support for the plan is negative at 38/42 (last month it was 39/41), many more think the quality of health care will get worse than get better (40/21 versus 36/19 last month), and 47 percent think costs will go up versus just 13 percent who think they’ll go down. Obama’s handling of the issue stands at 43/48, which is also a slight decline from last month. So … what gives?
The sample is 43/31 in favor of Democrats if you include leaners, which is the same 12-point margin they used last month when they found a narrow plurality opposing the public plan. If you read Jay Cost’s post last week about polling on this subject, you know that the choice of words — a “government-run” plan versus a plan “administered” by the government — may affect the response, and that support plummets if you ask a follow-up question about employers possibly dropping private insurance if the public option is available. But even so, those considerations were present in September too; they don’t explain why support would be spiking now. Maybe the news lately about Reid’s option with an opt-out or Snowe’s option with a trigger is softening opposition? The point of Cost’s post is that the fewer teeth the public plan seems to have, the more comfortable voters feel with it; it stands to reason, then, that as you add caveats to it a la Reid and Snowe that appear to make it optional or conditional, voters would feel even more comfortable. Even if those added options or conditions are mostly illusory.
Or maybe support for the public option really is cresting and I’m just trying to spin myself here. It’s worth noting that the Dems have actually gained on the generic ballot since last month, up from 43/40 to 46/38. And while 23 percent said they trust Washington to do what is right most of the time, that isn’t translating into some Beck-ian groundswell of support for a third party. Note the trend, or lack thereof:
Third parties are actually slightly less popular now than they were a week before the Democrats swept to victory in the ’06 midterms? Why?
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
RUPERT!!!
MeatHeadinCA on October 27, 2009 at 8:44 PM
Bull Sh@t
jp on October 27, 2009 at 8:45 PM
I question the timing.
SouthernGent on October 27, 2009 at 8:46 PM
Meh.
And that’s a real word, so say the geniuses over at the OED.
progressoverpeace on October 27, 2009 at 8:47 PM
Nearly half the people they polled are democrats. The poll deliberately steered clear of independents. Enough said.
Rational Thought on October 27, 2009 at 8:48 PM
I agree Rupert covering for the “citizen of the world”
PappyD61 on October 27, 2009 at 8:48 PM
Did you mean the competition option or the consumer option?
d1carter on October 27, 2009 at 8:48 PM
The people polled probably misunderstood, thought they were voting for Pubic Option.
That, or this poll is contrived BS.
fogw on October 27, 2009 at 8:49 PM
And those that favor the Public Option think it means free healthcare.
ctmom on October 27, 2009 at 8:51 PM
Even more curious after news that even the House doesn’t have enough votes for a public option.
I call BS.
obladioblada on October 27, 2009 at 8:52 PM
Nah. Those who are insured right now but support the public option don’t entertain the possibility that they may one day be forced on the p.o. themselves, or that they won’t be taxed out the gills to pay for it. Idiocy, in other words. How Obama Got Elected.
ddrintn on October 27, 2009 at 8:53 PM
The truly important aspect of the Fannie Med break-down is on a state-by-state basis, anyway, since the creation of a Fannie Med and forcing mandates on people will be a likely trigger for secession. It doesn’t matter what New Yorkers think about Fannie Med and mandates because New York is left and has no thoughts of seceding, but what does matter is what percent of Arizona or Texas or Oklahoma are opposed and what are they willing to do if the feral government tries encroaching on their state well in excess of the Constitution and imposing federal health insurance and mandates on them.
progressoverpeace on October 27, 2009 at 8:53 PM
Dey gonna git dem some Obama Money.
OhioCoastie on October 27, 2009 at 8:56 PM
There is no ‘option’ in the ‘public option’. They will try to force it on all of us in due time.
thomasaur on October 27, 2009 at 8:57 PM
Well he cannot even get all the votes he needs when he has a majority.
This is not the type of bipartisan agreement I was thinking of- Barack Obama
bluemarlin on October 27, 2009 at 8:57 PM
Time for more Tea Party’s.
Knucklehead on October 27, 2009 at 8:57 PM
-
Well, they did say that states can opt-out…
-
RalphyBoy on October 27, 2009 at 8:57 PM
Does anyone remember the good old days when the Main Stream Media picked our candidates for us……..
Good times! Good times!
Seven Percent Solution on October 27, 2009 at 8:58 PM
Well he cannot get all the Democrats onboard with him either.
This is not the type of buipartisanship I was talking about – Barack Obama
bluemarlin on October 27, 2009 at 8:59 PM
Dire Straits on October 27, 2009 at 9:00 PM
Something is fishy here…it makes no sense.
AUINSC on October 27, 2009 at 9:00 PM
Sorry for the double, I did not think the first went through.
bluemarlin on October 27, 2009 at 9:00 PM
Good gawd, these idiots are thick…now we have to have remedial tea parties…
Kill the Bill
tastes like chicken on October 27, 2009 at 9:01 PM
BS, what’s the partisan breakdown on those polls?
Sekhmet on October 27, 2009 at 9:02 PM
Would you be for free health care under a public option or are you a racist?
jukin on October 27, 2009 at 9:02 PM
Then again, as Rush said today… There will be a penalty for opting out. Then he talked about the highway funding blackmail used in the 55 mph wars during the Carter years.
-
We all know that opt-out means; pay the taxes to cover the bill and then buy your own coverage…
-
No thanks.
-
RalphyBoy on October 27, 2009 at 9:03 PM
a minor burp in a long process, they’re still farting around with States opting out, whatever that means
John the Libertarian on October 27, 2009 at 9:04 PM
They didn’t ask me.
deedtrader on October 27, 2009 at 9:05 PM
This country is so F***ED
angryed on October 27, 2009 at 9:05 PM
Murdock committing commercial (Fox News/WSJ) with that garbage.
suzyk on October 27, 2009 at 9:06 PM
Yeah. They’re thinking of the public school paradigm for the opt-out scheme. Go to a private school, if you want, but you’re still paying property taxes to pay for the schools, whether you have kids in school or not.
progressoverpeace on October 27, 2009 at 9:07 PM
GIMME MY OBAMA MONEY!
daesleeper on October 27, 2009 at 9:08 PM
Somebody’s messing with the polls. Kinda like a headline on Drudge…..
WASHINGTON TIMES: Top donors offered ‘wide range of perks’ since Obama took office… Developing…
Everything about anything that Obama is doing nowdays is B_ll freakin’ Sh!t
Liar lair…. ok I feel better now.
I trust nothing about him or Washington. Nothing!
Now I reeeeally feel better.
katy on October 27, 2009 at 9:08 PM
O approval rating up….51%
RNC to give DEDE 300,000.00…….a world of commies
nondhimmie on October 27, 2009 at 9:08 PM
They’re wearing us down, as usual, with their relentlessness.
We’re increasingly tired of fighting them, and may let them win by virtue of our battle fatigue. Conservatives don’t have the fighting stamina of the lefties, they know it, and they play time against us.
petefrt on October 27, 2009 at 9:09 PM
Mathematical garbage. Polls from whatever source are designed to influence not inform and the WSJ is no different. Motives . . . that’s a separate issue.
rplat on October 27, 2009 at 9:10 PM
They are going to pass something and then its over. However they dress it up to look and sound better, after the nose is under the tent, they’ll wash off the makeup and lipstick and the monster will be there.
I don’t think it can be stopped. jmo.
Itchee Dryback on October 27, 2009 at 9:11 PM
What!!
Somebody polled are drinking Change and
smoking Hope!!
Wait a tic,that doesn’t sound right!
Piff,10 point jump!!
canopfor on October 27, 2009 at 9:13 PM
No words. Simply no words.
Weight of Glory on October 27, 2009 at 9:14 PM
A poll just came out saying that the country was 40% conservative 36% Ind.and more than half of them leaning conservative and just 20% liberal and this WSJ poll uses 43/31 in favor of Dem.I smell a big fat liberal Rat.
thmcbb on October 27, 2009 at 9:20 PM
THE POLL HAS A D+12 SAMPLE.
It’s ridiculous.
You can’t do all this analytical comparison stuff, Allah, because modern polling firms WEIGHT the #$%@ out of everything (see NBC D+17 polls!).
You just can’t.
Fact is, the public option, when explained in the totality (where a govt insurance plan will be the only plan in X years) by all accounts, has somewhere around 35-40ish total support, and 45-50ish total opposition. that’s the important part.
no parsing, etc. just frame it as “if eventually most people are covereed by 1 giant govt health plan, what say you, yay or nay” the nays win out ALWAYS.
pay no attention to these changes (most within the margin of error); the WEIGHTED SAMPLES kill it!
battleoflepanto1571 on October 27, 2009 at 9:21 PM
They are going to pass something and then its over.
Itchee Dryback on October 27, 2009 at 9:11 PM
Itchee Dryback: Its over when its over,meantime,
the violin isn’t ready to be played,
thank gawd!!Ahem:)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rSd15MWgmg
canopfor on October 27, 2009 at 9:21 PM
The only poll that matters will be the November 2010 poll.
docdave on October 27, 2009 at 9:23 PM
The NBC/WSJ poll finished 13th out of 20 last election.
I’d take what they say with a grain of salt.
dave c on October 27, 2009 at 9:23 PM
If Rasmussen were to report it this way, then I might believe it. Judging from the poll sample, it’s b.s.
kingsjester on October 27, 2009 at 9:23 PM
If the public were FOR the public option then Nancy Pelosi wouldn’t be out there trying to change the name of it.
Nothing to see here.
HondaV65 on October 27, 2009 at 9:23 PM
I think they might pass it anyways. Also, pay attention to the Dollar. The Fed is doing their part of the literal Faustian bargain.
The conspiracy is real. Beck’s just barely beginning to get it.
True_King on October 27, 2009 at 9:23 PM
As if the only way you benefit from a well-funded public school system is actually going to one of the public schools…
crr6 on October 27, 2009 at 9:24 PM
Don’t believe that polling garbage . . . it an NBC/WSJ poll and their results are always suspicious.
rplat on October 27, 2009 at 9:26 PM
Since no one in Washington or elsewhere has a clue what any other these “options” or “opt ins” or “opt outs” or “plans” or “co-ops” involves, polling their opinions is like asking Jivaros what they think of Psychiatry.
Jusy because they say they like “headshrinking” doesn’t mean they actually understood the question.
GI/GO.
profitsbeard on October 27, 2009 at 9:26 PM
Do you think Ddemocrats and Lieberman would be bailing on them if they really believed that poll? I do not think so, maybe Lieberman but I bet Snowe would jump in to make her history. I think this is the outlier for sure and is not taken seriously by the insiders.
bluemarlin on October 27, 2009 at 9:28 PM
if i understand the asterisk on the question the sample size is 500 not 1000. so your error is substantially higher than the 3.1% advertised
second, it is dangerous to interpret deltas. for example, the 48% favorable rating is within the error range for the data since July. the 42% may be a little lower than the rest, but then again probably within the error range
the short answer this is well tailored survey for the idiots in the press to agitate for the start of single payer.
but a full view of the survey shows something for everyone.
basically, a worthless poll. (well, peter hart and his cohort are making money off it, and the press gets to write some drivel, so i guess not entirely worthless)
r keller on October 27, 2009 at 9:28 PM
Am I reading it wrong? It only looks like a 5+point swing since august. Fuzzy math I guess
Kevin43 on October 27, 2009 at 9:28 PM
The information,must have come from the Czar of Polling,
from the Ministry of Propaghanda and Ministry of Question
ing Scrutenizer Department!
canopfor on October 27, 2009 at 9:29 PM
OK my new Blog post is up… Those who (Heart) Mao
doriangrey on October 27, 2009 at 9:29 PM
I just think it’s the criminal use of the word “competes.” A government-run public plan would eliminate all competition and they want to make darned sure it does by removing the anti-trust exemption for insurance companies.
Connie on October 27, 2009 at 9:31 PM
I honestly think most Americans have enough knowledge of the bills, economics, the Constitution, the increased taxes and fees, and the loss of freedom they will experience to really make an informed decision. Those opposed are far more passionate about it than those that support it which, IMO, means that those opposed have more information about the negative consequences of O-care. Many Dem voters support it because they’re freeloaders and to them it’s just more free stuff.
DerKrieger on October 27, 2009 at 9:34 PM
As if the only way you benefit from a well-funded public school system is actually going to one of the public schools…
crr6 on October 27, 2009 at 9:24 PM
crr6: Its working out well in Chicago,just look at the
magnificent specimen of articulation that is now
missing as the Leader of the Free World,
your,leader,HopeLess/ChangeLess!
canopfor on October 27, 2009 at 9:35 PM
I posted weeks ago that the “powers” need to start calling this option what it really is…. the “government” option. Pelosi is starting with the semantics game. We missed the opportunity!
PaCadle on October 27, 2009 at 9:36 PM
Some thing is not right about this poll it,s smells.Just went to Rasmussen .Rep hold the generic lead over dems 42/38.Obama approval 51% unfavorable 49% favorable public option health care 51% not in favor 32% in favor of it.Like i said something smells big time about this poll.
thmcbb on October 27, 2009 at 9:53 PM
I think I will stay focused on the Rasmussen polls that suggest an entirely different perspective. I learned a while ago the WSJ is barely reliable, in terms of its news content and certainly the libtarded op-ed positions…..can you say “I love amnesty” and “I love the porkulus bill”.
David in ATL on October 27, 2009 at 9:59 PM
This says it all about Obamao and his crew of Dem-enablers:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LO2eh6f5Go0
onlineanalyst on October 27, 2009 at 10:14 PM
Uh, are the Dems really gonna run and pass a bill that has less than majority support just this month, and may change again in the next?
Apologetic California on October 27, 2009 at 10:15 PM
This picture of Obama looks like a damn horse’s face (ass).
Winebabe on October 27, 2009 at 10:21 PM
If you look at almost all of the earlier polls, the public option has gotten the support of a majority of the registered/likely voters or people polled, even though ObamaCare/Congress’ bill doesn’t. Aspects of the health care plan, like the elimination of pre-existing condition requirements, get the support of 65%-70% even though the entire plan doesn’t get that level of approval.
Jimbo3 on October 27, 2009 at 10:49 PM
Wait until they find out they have to diet, excercise, quit smoking…
TN Mom on October 27, 2009 at 11:16 PM
Oh come on, if you look at the Rasmussen polls the generic ballot has the Republicans ahead about 5 points and people hate Obamacare. I guess it just depends on who you ask and how you ask it.
Jimbo:
No, the public option does not get the support of a majority of registered voters, if it did this whole thing would have been over with months ago and Obama would have signed the bill by now.
The truth is polsters rarely just ask people, do you want government run health care? Do you want the government selling insurance? When they do ask question like that, they get a NO. They rarely ask Do you want to pay higher taxes to pay for it, when they do, they get a NO. They rarely ask, Do you want to see cuts in medicaid and medicare to pay for additional entitlements, when they do they get a NO.
The idea that this kind of program gets the support of 60% to 70% is absolutely delusional. Even the latest WaPo poll that supposedly showed support for such a program had the numbers at less than 48% when the polsters ask them straight up if they supported any of the programs they had heard talked about in the Senate. Believe it or not people are worried about the fact that 45 cents of every dollar we spend is borrowed.
Now, if you ask people if they would like free health care and free drugs and no one ever has to pay for it and we will all die if we don’t get it right now, people tend to feel differently. Amazing, isn’t it?
Terrye on October 27, 2009 at 11:37 PM
From Rasmussen:
Terrye on October 27, 2009 at 11:40 PM
Another quote from Rasmussen:
Republican congressional candidates remain ahead of Democrats in the latest edition of the Generic Congressional Ballot.
Terrye on October 27, 2009 at 11:41 PM
Not so much conservatives, but the fence-sitters who want to be fair and balanced to both sides…yeah, they’ll give in if it looks like they may be taxed only 20% more rather than +21%.
They’re simply the more cautious sheep who aren’t quite sure the wolves with the fleece thrown over their backs are their friends or not…but, hey, they haven’t actually been eaten yet so there’s always Hope!
These “moderates” are the shrewd types who want the best for themselves and think “Liberty” simply means the maximum number of freebies that they can get from the Gov’t. with the least amount of forfeiture on their part.
Dr. ZhivBlago on October 28, 2009 at 12:15 AM
LOL. You’re close, though. We all suffer from massively over-funded, out-of-control public school systems that indoctrinate the kids unlucky enough to have to go to them, where they learn precious little but get filled to the brim with leftist idiocy. Home schooled kids outperform public school kids all over the US, and that is with amateur parents teachers. Further, the education departments at universities are the worst of all and jokes of the highest sorts. Education grads score lower on their GREs than anyone. They even score lower on the math than English grads!
But, we need to have a place for the marxist idiots like Bill Ayers and others, who are not qualified to do anything that involves having to talk to adults. Yeah, great to extort the money from everyone to run such an awful system …
And it’s also nice that the public school systems have been the lever that government has often used to shape society in the insane way that elitists think it should be. Public schools do more damage now than almost any other institution, and they have locked the middle class into the indoctrination routine of the left. But you love that, because you are the sort of leftist scum who wants to have captive children to use and abuse because you can’t sell your cr@p to thinking adults.
progressoverpeace on October 28, 2009 at 12:39 AM
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=34142
They won’t cut anything, well maybe taxes.
This little quote from Pat sums it up. Republicans have talked about cutting the size of gov, but what do you expect them to cut? Its the same reason the Republicans have been unable to really capitalize on Obamacare, they have entered a situation where they attack Obamacare from the POV of medicare. They have mobilized one entitlement group against another entitlement, but they haven’t attacked the idea of the entitlement itself. Allah said something similar a few weeks ago. This is a great way to win a short term victory (defeating Obamacare) but is it a pyrrhic victory? The republicans appear cycnical while disingenuoisly defending one entitlement from another, and that tranlates into 3rd party candidates as the “real conservatives”.
snoopicus on October 28, 2009 at 8:24 AM
Terrye, take a look at the polls in this link: http://www.pollingreport.com/health.htm.
They all (with one exception, I believe) show support for a government-run public health care option in the high 50%s or better. You’re point about how much detail the question provides is correct, but you’re simply wrong. When people have been asked whether they support a government-administered program that competes with private insurance companies, they have been in favor of it.
In case the link doesn’t work, here are some samples:
CNN Poll:
Now thinking specifically about the health insurance plans available to most Americans, would you favor or oppose creating a public health insurance option administered by the federal government that would compete with plans offered by private health insurance companies?”
Favor Oppose Unsure
% % %
10/16-18/09
61 38 1
8/28-31/09
55 41 4
ABC/Washington Post Poll:
“Would you support or oppose having the government create a new health insurance plan to compete with private health insurance plans?”
Support Oppose Unsure
% % %
10/15-18/09
57 40 3
9/10-12/09
55 42 3
8/13-17/09
52 46 2
6/18-21/09
62 33 5
Kaiser Poll:
“Now I’m going to read you some different ways to increase the number of Americans covered by health insurance. As I read each one, please tell me whether you would favor it or oppose it. Here’s the (first/next) one: [See below.] Do you favor or oppose this?”
Favor Oppose Unsure
% % %
“Creating a government-administered public health insurance option to compete with private health insurance plans”
10/8-15/09
57 39 5
9/11-18/09
59 36 5
Quinnipiac University Poll:
“Do you support or oppose giving people the option of being covered by a government health insurance plan that would compete with private plans?”
Support Oppose Unsure
% % %
9/29 – 10/5/09
61 34 6
7/27 – 8/3/09
62 32 6
6/23-29/09
69 26 5
Jimbo3 on October 28, 2009 at 9:33 AM
Oops. Should have been “your point”, not “you’re point”.
Jimbo3 on October 28, 2009 at 9:34 AM
What those in favor of the “public option opt out” don’t understand, they MIGHT be able to opt out of the coverage. They can’t opt out of paying higher taxes.
PappaMac on October 28, 2009 at 9:37 AM
The Administration has done a good spin job on this. Give them credit. They have co-opted conservative, free-market rhetoric and repackaged the government plan as a “public option” that would “provide needed competition” to the private insurers. And the state-run media have obliged by not poking holes in this argument. The Administration was losing the argument while it was about death panels and rationing. Now that it seems to be about competition, it is winning.
Conservatives had better face up to this and start taking on this competition argument. My suggestion would be to start making the comparisons with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Cal it “Fannie Med” and keep pointing out that we already have a gigantic example of a “public option” actually destroying competition, taking over the market, and then crashing it.
rockmom on October 28, 2009 at 11:52 AM
You have demonstrated more political acumen in a single post than the entirity of the Republican Party bosses could demonstrate in a book.
snoopicus on October 28, 2009 at 12:50 PM