Home Run! CNN/ORC Poll: 14-Point Jump In Health-Care Reform Support Among Viewers
CNN/ Opinion Research Corporation poll out tonight shows a double-digit jump in support for the reform plan among viewers. Great results, Mr. President. Way to go!
Interviews with 427 adult Americans who watched the presidential speech conducted by telephone by Opinion Research Corporation on September 9, 2009. The margin of sampling error for results based on the total sample is plus or minus 5 percentage points.
Survey respondents were first interviewed as part of a random national sample on September 5-8, 2009. In those interviews, respondents indicated they planned to watch tonight's speech and were willing to be re-interviewed after the speech.
Some questions were asked of each respondent both in the pre-speech questionnaire on September 5-8 and on tonight's questionnaire. Where applicable, results for tonight's respondents from both the pre-speech survey and the post-speech survey are reported.
18% of the respondents who participated in tonight's survey identified themselves as Republicans, 45% identified themselves as Democrats, and 37% identified themselves as Independents.
About one in seven people who watched the speech changed their minds on Obama's health care plan. "Going into the speech, a bare majority of his audience — 53 percent — favored his proposals. Immediately after the speech, that figure rose to 67 percent," says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. "But the real question is whether those conversions will last. Bill Clinton got similar numbers after his 1993 address to Congress, but five months later a majority of the country no longer supported his plan."
Fifty-six percent of people questioned say they had a very positive reaction to the speech, with 21 percent indicating they had a somewhat positive reaction and a equal amount suggesting they had a negative reaction. The 56 percent who said they had a very positive reaction is lower than the 68 percent of speech watchers who had a similar reaction to the president's first address to a joint session of Congress in February.
More than seven in ten say that Obama clearly stated his goals, with one in four saying he didn't express his goals clearly.
Three out of four say it's very or somewhat likely that the president will pass most of his proposals on health care reform through Congress, with one in four saying it's unlikely.
Seven in 10 say that Obama's policies will move the country in the right direction, up 10 points from before the speech.
The CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll was conducted just before and just after the president's speech, with 427 adult Americans questioned by telephone. The survey's sampling error is plus or minus 5 percentage points.
The sample of speech-watchers in this poll was 45 percent Democratic and 18 percent Republican. Our best estimate of the number of Democrats in the voting age population as a whole indicates that the sample is about 8-10 points more Democratic than the population as a whole.
"CNN/ Opinion Research Corporation poll out tonight shows a double-digit jump in support for the reform plan among viewers. Great results, Mr. President. Way to go!"
Obviously some C&L readers were too busy posting last night to answer their phones when CNN called.
"The deal has to be negotiated in the real world, not on some idealized Aristotelian plane. We understand that. A 100-percent deal may be impossible."
Famous "Reality Based" Commentator
they read the fine print of what is being proposed, or failing to read, the provisions of the fine print come home to roost.
Where is linky to survy?
How were the questions asked?
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
1. No Public Option
2. Gift to Insurance Companies
3. Obama wants to keep Insurance Lobby on Dems side
4. Obama lectures Liberals & Progressives
5. Obama praises Bush administration initiatives
6. Obama's plan penalizes poor people who cannot afford insurance in the first place
7. Obama plan does not address the real structural problems in the health care system
8. This plan is nothing but insurance giveaways to the industry which is the problem
So, Obama supports this rackateering Insurance Company industry and you all buy into it.
My criticism of Obama's AWFUL HEALTHCARE PLAN comes from a leftist point of view and not from the right wing Fascist view as well. Obama was clear last night which was a good thing. He said some nice things but I am not confident any real change will take place. Obama is more like Bill Clinton than FDR. Obama is a centrist and pragmatist in the pay of the finance class over the liberal/progressive base which helped elect him and other Democrats. The Democrats are run by conservative Democrats who may as well be Republicans. You can have Max Baucus and Kent Conrad but the Democratic Party is self-destructing that it needs little help from the GOP Fascists to show how incompetent and spineless they are.
Good day.
I'd just add that he is not a centrist, he's rightwing corporatist. And, from my point of view, being a prgmatist is hardly something to boast about; all it means is that his principles are so rubbery that he is, effectively, unprincipled.
Insurance companies provide a "legitimate service" according to President Obama. Such a view demonstrates the lack of clear analysis and remedy.
Rahm Emanuel's brother Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel co-authored a book about healthcare reform. I suggest liberals and progressives go buy and read it and understand that the elements of this bill have been a done deal long ago and what you are being told comes from deceit as Obama and his cohorts lectures you liberals and progressives.
I hope you understand that Obama was admonishing you liberals and progressives last night at the same time he was taking an idea from George W. Bush. Obama is HOSTILE to the Public Option and the Left....he was yelling at progressives and liberals at the same time saying that the "public option is only a means to an end."
I know the right wing are despicable and outrageous as well as criminal in some cases. Just because the right wing shows awful behavior does not make Obama's plan for "reform" anything liberals or progresives should or can be proud of whatsover.
up to now i thought the 'plan' was being written/negotiated/compromised by members of the house and senate. it's also reviewed by the CBO. this is compromise and shouldn't be talked about in absolutes. this is a difficult time to pass anything of this magnitude. obama and his cabinet know that. with the BUSH legacy (deficit) and the economy people are very concerned about a "government program". i don't agree about the 'hostile' regarding the public option. bipartisanship is more difficult than calculated. the opposition was ready for this battle way before president obama was on the scene. bottom line i heard the speech differently and 'the plan' isn't done/agreed on yet.
appears to largely reflect the consensus among most of the commentors here. The so-called reform appears to be a wishlist of everything the gangsters who run the insurance rackets and the GOPers/Bribe-O-Crats want...that is if they can't kill reforms althogether. What Obama and crew do not seem to be willing to accept is that any system that is insurance based is no solution at all, it just perpetuates a parasitical and predatory racket that provides no benefit to society. If the concern were the well-being of everybody and the best economic well-being of the nation, the insurers would not even be involved. We would be planning their phase out as an element of our society and would be going single payer of full blown social medicine in the fashion of what members of Congress enjoy.
I walk away from this thinking that Mr.Obama thinks the lot of us a pretty stupid. He's in for a surprise come 2012.
Hey, check out the new book by T.R. Reid about healthcare in America. Reid compares the global health problems against the lack of healthcare for all Americans. I may go buy it today. I have been holding off on it so far.
The Healing of America: A Global Quest for Better, Cheaper, and Fairer Health Care
T. R. Reid (See All Contributors)
Hardcover, 288 pages
Penguin Group (USA) Incorporated
August 20, 2009
David Swanson also wrote a new book as well.
Daybreak: Undoing the Imperial Presidency and Forming a More Perfect Union
David Swanson (See All Contributors)
Paperback, 384 pages
Seven Stories Press
September 01, 2009
The Democrats ignore the left once in office because they think the libs have nowhere else to run to....
That is why I joined the Green Party and of course some in here have mocked my decision to leave the Democratic Party in December of 2008. I joined the Green Party because I did not want to be an unaffiliated voter. There is actually no such thing as "independent" but there are millions and millions of unaffiliated voters in the USA. Most of the people I know who are not registered with a political party do not usually vote and in fact despise politics and politicians that they stay home on election day. The people I know who are not registered to vote with any political party are also very apolitical as well.
I think the Greens are going to see their ranks growing in the coming years. Just a hunch.
http://www.gp.org/states.shtml
http://www.gp.org/index.php
The Green Party appeals to Labor: Democrats have failed working people -- help elect Greens to Congress
GREEN PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES
http://www.gp.org
WASHINGTON, DC -- Calling organized labor's support for Democrats an "investment that hasn't paid off," Green Party leaders appealed to unions and all working Americans, calling for support for the election of Green candidates to Congress in the 2010 election.
Sanda Everette, co-chair of the Green Party of the United States, retired teacher, former delegate to California Teachers Association and National Education Association meetings: "Unions, progressive organizations, and progressive Democrats will all benefit from the election of Greens to Congress and state legislatures.
Everette says that: "Labor's investment in the Democratic Party hasn't paid off. Instead, unions have lost power and membership over the past half century. In the past decade, union locals have endorsed Green candidates. If national union leadership joined us in our efforts to seat a few Greens in Congress, we'd see an end to politics limited to two pro-corporate parties."
http://www.gp.org/press/pr-national.php?ID=247
All these claims for the Greens and against the Dems are all crap. It will take generations (if ever) before the Greens will be elected to the Presidency... and we don't have that much time.
We need to Infiltrate the Democratic Party and Transform it into something actually Progressive. The last election was a step in that direction. But we can't rest on our laurels like we did after Moderate Bill was elected. That was how the GOP got their foothold.
We need to stay active... always.
No one said there would be a point of light where it all changed for the better. The Powers of Greed and Hate are very Powerful... and they will stop at nothing... including paying Agent Provocateur Tolls to post in here.
~albabe (The Writer/Artist Formally Known As Al Gordon)
http://www.comicon.com/gordon/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Gordon
Okay....That is your view!!!!!
It is not mine....Keep on Keeping on with these corporate Democrats and it will be YEARS BEFORE another LBJ or FDR comes around!!!!!
You are in dreamland thinking that the grassroots will change the present state of the Democratic Party.
It is your right to be gullible.
I'd rather lose with the Green Party than keep on losing with the corporate Dems.
One can also say that change from the bottom up can come little by little with the Green Party.
I am glad you are satisfied with the neoliberal Democratic Party of 2009 known as the Emanuel-Corporate Dems.
Enjoy the lip service the Dems keep giving you.
Without Ted Kennedy alive any more you can forget about any real opposition to the corporate interests.
Good day!
I will sleep good again tonight knowing that I do not compromise my moral values to the bankrupt Democratic Party which does NOTHING on behalf the UNIONS and other liberal organizations like NOW and oh yeah, as of late, the selling out of Van Jones. The Dems are spineless and I am not going to be part of that type of party. Sorry.
I am not a corporatist, sorry.
Obama's speech was a diaster on many levels. As typical, people read into what they wanted to hear. But if you read the fine print, he's basically giving Max Baucus the go-ahead, which he confirmed today when he met with the convervative Democrats (NOT the liberals), and they all left the meeting smirking and high-fiving it with the prez. They got their corporate big bucks, we're stuck with mandates and "triggers". Screw them, this was my waterloo and I am finished with them.
First of all, this isn't "Obama's Plan." That's a BS Right Wing Talking Point... I assume you know there are 5 plans from 5 committees... so your cover of pretending to be all Anti Corporatist is already blown.
I'm not a big Obama fan... but Right Wing has been sucking good and hard at the Corporate Teat since the late 1800s... all the while pretending to be for "We The People."
Whenever the GOPers are in Power, our Civilization takes more than a few giant steps backward... So, with much hope, this may be a step forward... maybe not. Maybe it's the same old, same old... but the GOP has done a sum total of Zip in terms of Health Care... ever.
The GOP is against this plan... and please tell me for what reasons? Not enough of a giveaway?
~albabe (The Writer/Artist Formally Known As Al Gordon)
http://www.comicon.com/gordon/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Gordon
behind the link in the first sentence after the ninth word...it's blue.
me-oww!
was something to behold. It was like an online town hall meeting.The President made a great speech and I am unsurprised by the polling results.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
"18% of the respondents who participated in tonight's survey identified themselves as Republicans"
Really??? I know the Republican brand is tarnished, but is this an accurate reflection of the nation as a whole for folks identifying themselves as Republican? If so, boy is this a party in trouble. If not, the poll results are suspect.
18%. That's about right.
The generally accepted view is that there is roughly 20% of the general population that now identifies itself as Republican.
These are the oft mentioned...20%ers.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
Democrats were more likely to watch than Republicans. Those who watched were already predisposed to be more favorable to health care reform.
What is likely to be suspect is the interpretation of the results, which, given the sample, is suspect.
"The deal has to be negotiated in the real world, not on some idealized Aristotelian plane. We understand that. A 100-percent deal may be impossible."
Famous "Reality Based" Commentator
in what you say. I've no doubt Fox News is busy polling to show the very opposite. CNN however is more likely to have a less biased viewership including, most importantly, people who might be persuadable. That is a key difference.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
should take of how his or her contituents feel about having a true public option in the bill.
"The deal has to be negotiated in the real world, not on some idealized Aristotelian plane. We understand that. A 100-percent deal may be impossible."
Famous "Reality Based" Commentator
to never believe anything that you hear and only half of what you see. He was a proud libeal who fought the rethugs at every step of his life.
I should add that my dad was also a proud liberal, he just didn't have good sayings to use as did my uncle.
"Let's talk dirty to the animals"
And if this event was not unlike a high school pep rally there is a reason for that too. The blue dogs needed to see where the party as a whole is headed and what kind of support there is for true reform. In that regard I think the mission was accomplished.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
Which is why this
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/09/analys...
is interesting.
O-bought-ma talks the talk, but walks PUKIE!!! Just like all DINOs. Snow the peóns with gibberish, lies, distortions,.............we all know the game. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, swims like a duck, looks like a duck, well, usually IT'S A DUCK. 'A rose by any other name still stays a rose, smells like a rose, blooms like a rose, etc.
your commenting!
tear down any proposal from this administration:
I hope we DO lose every issue. I hope that the country falls into total collapse.
Then we can finally move forward to the long overdue purge of the elites in this country.
"The deal has to be negotiated in the real world, not on some idealized Aristotelian plane. We understand that. A 100-percent deal may be impossible."
Famous "Reality Based" Commentator
Is that your serious face? ;)
the Liberal elites?
Hasa Diga Eebowai
This is my mystery comment of the moment. It is not mine.
Could it be Rush?
"The deal has to be negotiated in the real world, not on some idealized Aristotelian plane. We understand that. A 100-percent deal may be impossible."
Famous "Reality Based" Commentator
in the past but I have come to appreciate your subtle snarkiness.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
Me too. How can you stay angry at someone so cryptic?
"I hope we DO lose every issue. I hope that the country falls into total collapse."
"Then we can finally move forward to the long overdue purge of the elites in this country."
Except total collapse isn't always followed by a desirable outcome. Sometimes it only gets worse. World history provides lots of examples. Given enough pain, people will change. However, sometimes those changes go horribly wrong.
whats-his-face on The Ed Show
The GOP is in DEEP SHIT.
NO BILL!!
Call your Congressional Reps and tell them NO.
Call the (xxxxxxxxxxx) Caucus and tell them...Fuck you, Eat Shit and DIE.
You vote for this big bag of shit..we will make you pay.
(Update) Yet another mystery comment, not my own.
"The deal has to be negotiated in the real world, not on some idealized Aristotelian plane. We understand that. A 100-percent deal may be impossible."
Famous "Reality Based" Commentator
what the?
Hard to tell what yer gettin at there, ricky.
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=...
"The deal has to be negotiated in the real world, not on some idealized Aristotelian plane. We understand that. A 100-percent deal may be impossible."
Famous "Reality Based" Commentator
I thought you was a might...twitchy...
Has some nefarious ideologue removed the batteries from your remote and left the channel on Fox? For pity's sake man! Throw your shoe! Throw your shoe!
Hasa Diga Eebowai
.
"The deal has to be negotiated in the real world, not on some idealized Aristotelian plane. We understand that. A 100-percent deal may be impossible."
Famous "Reality Based" Commentator
Typical tin can. Empty inside but makes loud rattling sounds when it rolls down the street.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
candidate obama voiced his intentions last year. we all know the best of intentions can lead to the road to hell. now president obama is trying to work with the house and senate for compromise. let's not forget the CBO. president obama does not have full control of this issue. "we the people" have been asked by president obama to be part of the process he can't do it by himself. this is part of the "change" that i believe people forget. this is NOT a feel good liberal issue. health care insurance cost reform has become an economic necessity. health care insurance premiums will double in price in less than 10 yrs. a family of four will be paying a premium of $25,000. health care insurance companies aren't efficient and concerned about health care. they're concerned about profit and shareholders. there needs to be competition.
He is driving the GOPhers to distraction while being a cool calm collected leader. . .
Reminds me of "Dog Whisperer" Cesar Milan saying about pack leader - calm and assertive.
Obama reminds millions why they voted for him.
The numbers in the survey reflect a return of many from the left who were shouting ultimatums and screaming for a "line in the sand"
The president made me proud last night. I don't agree with everything he says or all of his plans. I wish he was more progressive and more liberal but we didn't elect Kucinich (my first choice)
"I know that there are people who do not love their fellow
man, and I hate people like that! " ~ Tom Lehrer (1928 - )
He made a good case that Americans don't need a paradigm shift to get affordable health care. This has clearly pissed off both extremes of the spectrum.
The rackateers in the Insurance industry are surely pleased....The insurance industry happen to be on the criminal fringe in my opinion.
Consult the Interviews and articles by Wendell Potter.
If this bill passes the way Obama described in his speech, what would the penalty be for people who don't buy health insurance? Assuming the worst, is it really saving money to fill up jail cells with the uninsured?
State and local governments have had to lay off record numbers of correctional officers from our record busting prison employment rolls, causing the release of record numbers of felons who commiteed victimless crimes against their bodies.
These spaces are available now and must be filled.
"The deal has to be negotiated in the real world, not on some idealized Aristotelian plane. We understand that. A 100-percent deal may be impossible."
Famous "Reality Based" Commentator
Can someone offer a serious answer?
I heard this morning/last night on the news that it does not mean you get in trouble for not buying insurance. No source or anything but it was once of the questions asked by Maddow/Schultz/Olbermann. :)
of Obama's speech I disagree with the most. It is also the only part which deviates from what he campaigned on in a major way.
"The deal has to be negotiated in the real world, not on some idealized Aristotelian plane. We understand that. A 100-percent deal may be impossible."
Famous "Reality Based" Commentator
I disagreed with this also. I have felt the same way for years about mandated car insurance.
This morning though I realized that in a way it does disguise a tax increase as an insurance requirement. Given that there's no way you can pay for this without raising money from the public in one way or another.
.
"The deal has to be negotiated in the real world, not on some idealized Aristotelian plane. We understand that. A 100-percent deal may be impossible."
Famous "Reality Based" Commentator
stop the wars in afghanistan and iraq. and, after the $100b/yr in proposed health reform, you'll still have an extra $80b to spare.
booosh tax cuts.
But... that wasn't what Obama suggested. Centrism is having the effect of watering down policy options being proposed to the point where they're useless
the only thing i would add to your definition of centrism is that the act of watering policy options down to uselessness is the goal.
... maybe more "pragmatism."
I always viewed pragmatism, which implies lack of ideological allegiances, as a bad thing when it comes to politicians. Politics implying ideology and all...
They could have given you all Cadillacs (saving GM) and healthcare, for the $2 trillion bu$h
spentblew in the 2 wars."If the US government enforced its banking laws like it did its park regulations, we wouldn't be
in this damn park in the first place." OCCUPY.!!
I have a huge problem with this. I found POTUS's comparison of this to mandatory auto insurance disingenuous at best and intentional obfuscation at worst. Owning an auto is a choice. If I decide not to own an auto then I do not HAVE to buy auto insurance. However, being forced to buy insurance, under penalty of a fine, simply because I am alive is in my opinion an affront to freedom.
we need universal coverage.
Insurance works on edging bets: i.e. the insurer bets that you will not need to exercise the care you're paying for, and thus they make money.
The problem with health care is not IF you will need care, but WHEN you will need care. That is why the current system works the way it does: If you are healthy, you are likely to work and thus pay your insurance. If you are seriously sick, you most likely are out of a job, and thus out of your insurance coverage... then the insurer no longer has to worry about you.
That is why the current system does not work to provide health care to our citizens (it does work as a profit making industry though). That is why a health care system centered around profit making as its main value proposition will never work. That is why I was so deeply disappointed with Mr. Obama for not grasping that very basic concept. At least how he articulated his speech...
His paycheck depends on him not 'grasping' it.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
as its main driving force will never work. I often wonder why health care couldn't be set up like the original utility set-ups. Public utilities were created in order to get services to all communities with a limit on profit margins and mandatory re-investment into the system to ensure that the system was not only maintained but also R&D was continously performed.
also, it is not a legitimate premise, because driving an auto is a privilege and not a right. Privileges are justifiably subject to conditions such as licensure or requirmemts for insurance. Healthcare is not a privilege, it's a right, and to attempt to treat it as a privilege or further abuse the right by attempting to subject it to conditions as one might a privilege is wrong. If Obama does not understand this, it is worrisome.
or in federal legislation have they give recognition to health care as a right?
Obama has stated that he believes it should be a right. And when he related to the Progressives that the public option is only a small part of the Health Reform debate, he was alluding to the fact that the door has to be opened first, then more work can be set upon to gain full recognition of healt care as a right. It will be an even bloodier fight.
On the flip side, the repubs will try to say the federal government can't go there because the 10th Amendment makes it, as well as Medicare, unconstitutional. That is a losing arguement but makes for a lot of noise that the MSM picks up on and runs with it.
I'm not sure, but the number $3,800 occurs to me.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
was for a family of 4 Making $66,000.
family of four.
"The deal has to be negotiated in the real world, not on some idealized Aristotelian plane. We understand that. A 100-percent deal may be impossible."
Famous "Reality Based" Commentator
the families I talked to that currently don't have insurance.
again, over 66,000 though
of $3200 per month is not affordable at 66,000. Another example was $3800 a month. I'm not sure what income that becomes affordable .. not for anyone I know.
The $3800 was per year *average* plan, which was why it was set as the penalty.
You become Mitch McConnell's love slave.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
In that case, the bill may end up penalizing the working poor.
For those who can't afford insurance, there may be a safety net in the sense that if they can show they indeed can't afford health insurance, the governemnt will then not fine them and subsidice the cost. The subsidy involves the government paying directly to the private insurers in the "exchange."
Unless I am missing something, it looks as if the insurers are being rewarded with an even larger customer base. And those customers who can't pay, the insurers then get the government to pay for them. It hardly looks as if the insurers are being penalized, the opposite seems to be the case if this is in fact what is going to be proposed.
Of course we need specifics, since there were not that many in last night's speech (and probably there should not have been since this was an exploratory speech by Obama).
When you fill up jail cells with uninsured, they become insured.
The plan is ingenious!
... that GOP's toady and his brain fart may end up providing the final nail in the coffin for that bunch of degenerates.
Obama gives great speeches, of that there is no doubt. The style was great, I just did not care that much about the substance (apparently that is a crime for some people).
I am hoping that at least the Dems can use the patent hostility of the GOP during the whole speech (never mind their lack of respect) as the PR tool they need to diffuse the GOP's spin machine on health care reform.
And have had those numbers significantly in our favor for some time. Who was he talking to? The opposition is truckloads of PhRMA/Insurance/AMA money. What does a speech do to counter that?
Obama successfully addressed the BS "issues" from the Right: killing grandma, illegal aliens, etc. But I didn't hear him taking on the issues the Moneyed Right really cares about: delaying implementation; drug companies making back door deals to guarantee profit; imposing a deficit neutral ultimatum on health care while continuing the more expensive Bush tax cuts; castrating or eliminating the public option. He seemed to be siding with the special interest Right rather than against them.
But hey, I hear from the previous thread that health care stocks are up.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
they are "Business Partners".
.
explain the public option as we now understand it.
It is an option...or a threat? If the option is SO sucky, that it's not really an option, is it an option.
Don't be so quick to be happy about this.
The "public option" is going to be a sucky plan for the poor, that no working person will sign up for, because it will have minimal coverage.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
But we gotta keep the pressure up to make sure this public plan DOESN'T suck
it's gonna be 4 years before it's put into place, right?
Then we have that time to make sure it's not gonna screw over the poor people.
That's my point. Fighting for what? This is more of the same...everywhere at once approach that the President has used during the whole summer.
His approach is..."throw shit against the wall and see what sticks".
By being committed to nothing...he pisses off all sides and can't get ANYTHING passed.
And...what good is an option four years in the future. This is more....kick the can down the road bullshit.
A lack of spine, a lack of leadership...ALL deliberate...to keep the masses at bay...and the corporate donations flowing.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
robert reich on waiting years:
"any controversial proposal with some powerful support behind it that gets delayed -- for five years or three years or whenever -- is politically dead. Supporters lose interest. Public attention wanders. The media are on to other issues. Right now the public option is very much alive because so many Democrats care deeply about it, with good reason. But put it off for years, and assign it to the lawyers and lobbyists I just mentioned, and you can kiss it goodbye for ever."
Mr. Reich is totally correct.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
what the hell do we do now?
Throw in the towel?
no, we demand exactly the opposite--we demand change now. put it off and watch it whither and die.
thanks Samson...I'm just havin a shitty day...and I'm kinda fed up with shit right now, and I have a short fuse.
... sorry about the shitty day dude.
and that is a lot of what reich was talking about in his blog post...
short fuses don't bother me t'all, hope your day gets better
Hope it snaps you out of you shitty day blues.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcxYwwIL5zQ
"The deal has to be negotiated in the real world, not on some idealized Aristotelian plane. We understand that. A 100-percent deal may be impossible."
Famous "Reality Based" Commentator
that some of us deem deeply flawed, is somehow twisted into a desire for defeat. That is nonsense IMHO.
When I was first learning to play the piano (for example), I never got the impression my teacher wanted me to give up my dream to master the piano because he pointed the obvious: that after my first lesson I had a lot of work to do in order to learn to properly play the instrument. In fact the people who cared enough, were the ones pointing out where I was messing up and what I was doing wrong.
gets passed.
Yeah, people shouldn't jump the gun on the "happiness" but also the same is true for the critics. As we still do not know which one of the "public" options the Dems are referring to.
I don't know if their lack of specifics on what they understand by "public option" is deliberate. Since the blue dogs have their very own definition for it, which is anything but "public." Yet some of the other proposals for that option actually make some sense. All bearing the same name.
The lack of definition is deliberate.
It is a strategy to confuse, obfuscate...and then steal.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
we also need to wait and see what exactly is the "public option" being passed.
Ohhh...so we're waiting. I see.
So the speech that was supposed to clarify the debate...left the biggest issue, the one the public cares most about, unclarified.
I see.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
I disagreed with Obama's speech, among other things, for his lack of concision and details on what kind of reform he wants to have done. In fact, he was supposed to have done that in the town hall speech he gave a while back.
Now, that still does not imply that in order to cast a proper critical view of the reform itself. We don't have to wait until the actual "public option" is made concrete in its specifics.
Those are two different issues, IMHO.
Now, that still does not imply that in order to cast a proper critical view of the reform itself. We don't have to wait until the actual "public option" is made concrete in its specifics.
Yes we do. Without concrete facts...then opponents frame the debate.
That's how we got into this mess...and lost universal healthcare from the get go...and are winding up with the bastard son of the public option.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
as described in Section C of HR 3200 is only a pool of insurance that you can opt to buy. It is not an option to join Medicare (as the name "public" would hopefully imply...kind of like Bushco's "Clean Air" initive, it's named in the finest of Orwellian traditions). It is "competitive"(Obama's words) only from the insurance industry's perspective, because it is going to be held at artificially high prices, as established by the going prices for current insurance premiums (which is playing fast and lose with the meaning of the word "competitive"). In other words, the public option prices will not be allowed to undercut the insurance industry's prices. So, the only alternative is going to either be government subsidies for the poor, or shitty coverage. It will not be "competitive" by any rational definition of the term, and probably qualifies as being price-fixed...something that is illegal at law under all other instances of the practice. More, it is certainly not going to be competitive for the tax payer, because the tax payer portion is going to be artificially inflated, nor will it be competitive for the economy, because it will maintain an industry that is predatorily parasitizing approximately one-sixth of the wealth of this nation - consumimg wealth created by others instead of creating wealth to the benefit of all (recall that one of the lame rationalizations that Obama advanced for preserving the inssurance-based status quo was that he didn't "want to distrub an industry that represents 1/6 of the economy").
In general, if this faux reform is what is represented by HR-3200, there is no reform at all. To wit: from my reading of the bill(still studying it) every consumer-friendly protection that is contained in the bill is later negated with loop wholes, which allow the insurers to escape their obligations. There is nothing about this bill that is not biased towards greatly favoring the insurance industry. After you wade through the thing, it 1,000+ pages of a give away program that does nothing but codify, expand and make mandatory a transfer of wealth into the hands of the insurers.
My opinion might change by the time I get through tudying it, but as I read and digest each page, the likelihood of that happening is steadily diminishing. Compare this bill with HR-676. Short sweet, to the point, no loop holes hidden throughout a voluminous quantity of pages.
I'm still trying to figure out what we do get (assuming public option is not there/functionally ineffective)
... what do you think of the Medicare reforms, esp. to Part D?
maybe i'm mistaken i understood the 'option' in public option is just that........it's optional. if you have health care insurance that your "pleased" with you can keep it. like medicare the public option strategy is have government involved with offering the administration of insurance/payment for services. MEDicare spends about 4% for administration and private insurers spend about 30plus%.
much of the administrative cost within private insurers is to implement Deny..Delay and Defend. this allows the for-profit system to reduce pay out and make money from investments. i'm not sure what the "public option" totally entails because negotiations/compromises aren't finished. this is a very complicated and tough battle. the opposition was prepared for this battle before obama was on the scene. the for-profit now enjoys/reaps profit from being able to ignore anti-monopoly laws/regulations. they have taken advantage of this and now a lot of damage is being shifted to tax payers as "hidden taxation". at this point some of the basis/structure of the "public option" is to create a large paying pool with government insurance administration with lower overhead. private insurers will need to lower premium prices so that businesses and individuals don't transfer to the "public option". this is very likely a transition to a single payer system down the road.
427 adult Americans questioned by telephone
... we read your entrails?
insulating people against a president who is now fighting against his own campaign promises?
... the media likes to conduct polls.
But since we don't teach people how to properly evaluate polls, most of these things are useless.
That's the point
Mr. Obama promise a health care reform involving universal coverage and/or single payer?
copyright laws of all English speaking countries. Reading Evet entrails requires reader to comply with terms of agreement and subjects misusers to same penalty as imposed on misuse of major mascot logo of large southern state university athletic program.
"The deal has to be negotiated in the real world, not on some idealized Aristotelian plane. We understand that. A 100-percent deal may be impossible."
Famous "Reality Based" Commentator
no cloning without the written consent of the copyright holder.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
and recorded in the history of our immediate universe here and you would still avoid the point.
Whats the use?
or quit posting. I bet on the former.
"The deal has to be negotiated in the real world, not on some idealized Aristotelian plane. We understand that. A 100-percent deal may be impossible."
Famous "Reality Based" Commentator
so, in a sampling of less than 500 people, obama's approval numbers on not-yet-determined proposals for a nebulous idea of health reform went up... so?
does that mean that we will get a public option? how is an employer mandate or an indiv mandate going to be addressed? what about the trigger option?
sure, i am pleased as punch that obama's political ticker has gone up, yip-the fuck-ee, but until that translates into meaningful health reform (not a golden dildo for health profiteers) you'll have to excuse my lack of enthusiasm for obama's political standing.
............is not walking the walk. I don't put much credulence in words, and I pay attention to what they say and compare it with what they do. If it's not the identical, same thing, they're liarsPUKIES.
Do you suppose that is one of the many reasons the Tower of Babel was enough to mention in the bible??? It's only one paragraph.
is this the first article Susie has posted with something positive to say about Obama?
;-)
The first.
I am shocked, I tell you, shocked.
"Let's talk dirty to the animals"
It is part of the distortion of the political discourse to be distracted by polls of small groups being asked yes or no questions.
So now rather than finding important details of the proposal we talk about home runs and how well the speech was delivered.
The corks are popping at Corporate HQs I have little doubt.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
.
C & L HQ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKY2O4KFmMU
"The deal has to be negotiated in the real world, not on some idealized Aristotelian plane. We understand that. A 100-percent deal may be impossible."
Famous "Reality Based" Commentator
n/t
Show me where in the text of the speech he says he will limit the profits of the insurers.
The public option is there, but generally unavailable and guaranteed to be crippled at that.
I didn't need to listen to him to know he could give a good speech.
I needed to read the text to see the push back against the corporations. I read it, I didn't find the push back.
Someone tell me what I am missing.
----
Must hear clips from the work of the late (d 1988) Australian sociologist Alex Carey
CORPORATIONS AND PROPAGANDA
The Attack on Democracy
Part 1 - history through WWII
Part 2 - history after WWII
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
from "thePrez" last night that would cause the least anxiety in any health-insurance-parasite exec.
Their stocks are rising this morning, after the Speech, which i think is instructive,...
they are having low single digits increases, and almost the whole DOW has been going up recently.
Thus we can't make a correlation just yet. If the rises would have been in the upper single digits, I could buy that. But 1ish % is noise really.
There was no pushback. Worse, his whole speech seems to be a regurgitation of HR-3200, as I rwad the bill thus far, including the verbiage about malpractice "reform". Outstanding oratoy, bent to the promotion of the Dark Side, IMO.
i would fucking love to have single payer.
i agree, an indiv mandate WITHOUT a public option is very bad, because it forces people in shitty private coverage.
but you keep your insurance death panels, you keep paying the insurance companies for denial of care, you keep supporting making a cool 30% profit off of sick children, you go ahead and sheep-it-up. just stay the fuck out of my way.
[It's silly to argue with commercial spammers. This guy will never be back to see everybody's clever retort. And he doesn't care about them, either. We'd prefer you flag these posts, so we can remove them-Sitemonitor]
Isn't it funny how some people view the intervention of government, which is directly accountable to its citizens and has no profit motive, as a very bad thing when it comes to health care.
And yet they have no problem with private insurers, whose only motive is profit, to interfere with their health care.
its funny, in an infuriating way
i think decades of norquistian rhetoric has taken its toll on people's ability to think clearly
and you're banging against the bathtub, how could you think clearly.
"The deal has to be negotiated in the real world, not on some idealized Aristotelian plane. We understand that. A 100-percent deal may be impossible."
Famous "Reality Based" Commentator
brain damage.
... so tell us, have you asked any Canadian or Briton about how long they have to wait to get health care?
And lastly, what is a Brittan?
Guess that's somethin like...oligarh
awesome becky-speak referral
... he's missing the "y" ;-)
the 'y', LOL
which makes me wonder... that used condom flopping around in beck's head couldn't think of something for 'y' to stand for? he just throws it in at the end, as if there's nothing that begins with 'y' in the dangerous world of fascist communist progressives.
That's truly sad when I can't even get that right...
will this day never end?
I'm ready for a damn beer already.
for the sake of concision.
"The deal has to be negotiated in the real world, not on some idealized Aristotelian plane. We understand that. A 100-percent deal may be impossible."
Famous "Reality Based" Commentator
Thu, 09/10/2009 - 10:14 — Tyler Durden
... so tell us, have you asked any Canadian or Briton about how long they have to wait to get health care?
And lastly, what is a Brittan?
__________________________________________________________
A fan of:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unBACOHFXes
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
.
... you gotta start putting warnings on your links.
Not cool, man, not cool ;-)
n/t
you have no idea what your talking about. next!
They asked the GOP repeatedly, and got the SAME answer every damn time..."NO!"
So then...take your weak-ass, debunked, rightwing talking points and shove them kindly up your own arse.
Ask me. Wait times for medical treatment are often shorter in Canada because you don't have to wait for a insurance company bureaucrat to approve it. There aren't any bureaucrats who get bonuses for cutting off people from health care in Canada.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
President Obama's medical exchange:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9e3dTOJi0o
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
It will vanish in a week, after the next round of puke/hip propaganda.
and figure out they have enough fodder from last night's GOP "performance" to bury them?
Assuming the get a spine transplant in the next few days....
nevahapun...
Is that most right wing idiots didn't watch the speech. I know I sure as hell don't watch Beck or Hannity or O'Reilly b/c I can't stand them. Take these poll #s w/a grain of salt.
like I always...well like I occasionally say...polls schmolls.
They'll complain and scream all the way as if reform isn't what they want, knowing full well that even if the bill passes they're gifted with a huge mandated set of new customers.
I like the idea of a Liberal party like the Greens.
However, what happens when Green Party leaders decide they want to have a chance to win election to get the chance to do the stuff we want? I submit that they will need to compromise with the Political Donor class (D.K. Johnston) and end up no better than the Democrats. I have had hopes looking at the funding of Howard Dean's 2004 campaign and the '08 Obama fundraising but it sure looks like big money still wins. I have two suggestions I think are more effective than surrendering into the Green Party.
First, I suggest if you are activist enough go to your local Democratic Commitee Meeting and stage a quiet takeover.
Second, I strongly suggest you start wearing out your representatives with requests for Public Campaign Financing. Under the current system Americans are getting what they pay for and so are the moneyed interests. We want our representatives solely beholden to the voters. As long as representatives can buy elections through campaign funding moneyed interests can buy our government.
Perhaps the Greens can tap into liberal money streams and prove me wrong (which would be fine) but I'm playing the odds. Until we own our representatives they work for whomever pays the bills and it ain't us.
Comments are closed on this entry