The Village (And "Progressive" Bloggers) Insist Dems Dump Their Base

DemfromCt (by contrast Nate Silver has a very cogent critique of WaPo analysis of its poll) appears to endorse the Village view that even though the public option is favored by no less than 55% of Americans (51% support mandates, though it would not occur to the Village to ask how people feel about HCR if mandates are removed), it is the public option that must go. And when you present the ACTUAL public option presented in the proposals on the table now, support for a public option rises to 76%. But that does not matter to the Villagers, of the Media and the blogger variety (I'm referring to DemfromCt, who disingenuously and inaccurately describes the support for the public option as less than perceived. Why is DemfromCt playing with facts on this?):

[I]t is the public option that has become the major point of contention . . . If that single provision were removed, opposition to the overall package drops by six percentage points, according to the poll. Without the public option, 50 percent back the rest of the proposed changes; a still sizable 42 percent are opposed. Independents divide 45-45 on a package without the government-sponsored insurance option, while they are largely negative on the entire set of proposals (40 percent support and 52 percent oppose). Republican opposition also fades 20 points under this scenario.


The decision to back away from the provision might hurt Obama among his base, but not dramatically so, as 88 percent of liberal Democrats support the reform plan as is, 81 percent without the public option.

See the game? A 7% drop among Dems is nothing. But a 5% rise among independents is a HUGE deal. It is is the old Villager game. And now apparently a "progressive" blogger game too. we'll see how that game plays out for Dems in a mid-term election. I predict badly.

Speaking for me only

< These Are Not Your Father's MTV Music Video Awards | WaPo Poll: 76% Support Public Option As Currently Proposed >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    2010 (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by Addison on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 08:19:12 AM EST
    If you have 55% support to do something as beneficial as this, you do it.  If you had 45% support, and you could still do it, you should do it.

    Because the elections won't be for another year, and the polls are only about today (insofar as they are about anything).

    Good policy lasts, poll numbers don't.

    I haven't closely followed progressive (or any) blogs/news on this as I've been out of country for a few months (and will continue to be), but that anyone is basing their views of what should be pushed as good policy on (a) pretending the majority supports something other than what they supports AND (b) tying a temporary, crazies-driven poll from 9/2009 to what will happen in 11/2010, well, I don't know what to say.

    Of course (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 08:23:49 AM EST
    My post is about how the Village and the new Village of the "progressive" blogs always call the same play - Dems crapping on their base.

    Because we all know that a demoralized base is wonderful in any election, but ESPECIALLY in mid-term elections.


    Independents First! (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Addison on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 08:35:55 AM EST
    But even on the terms of the "Independents Uber Alles" electoral strategy it makes no sense. We're not trying to coax Independents now. We're trying to get them to vote Democratic over a year from now.

    Who knows what will happen over the next year to shift Independents this way or that, but we can control whether we have a good health care policy to talk about or a bad one next fall. What's the argument in October 2010 when a terrible health care bill gets passed? "You stupid Independents stopped us from passing the good one" or "But didn't you see the polling, it was dangerous politically!" or something like that? That's hardly a winning message. But that's all the Democratic majority will have to work with.

    The Village is useless. They've already written their articles for the next year and just want to make sure things go as planned so that they'll have extra time in whichever Northeastern luxury port/island they have a vacation home in. So if some progressives are following in lockstep with Village reasoning, then I guess I should've gotten into making Broder Idols when I had the chance so at least I could afford a nice restaurant now and then.  


    Of course (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 08:37:52 AM EST
    What matters is what voters think about pols on an election day. Not on any other day.

    But that's what's crazy about paying so much attention to town halls. The town hall that matters is on election day.


    Enablers (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by mmc9431 on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 08:24:44 AM EST
    I wondered how some of those in the progressive community would handle the disappointments that Obama,( like every other politician) would deliver. There was a cult mentality throughout the entire election cycle. Pertinent questions were allowed to be left unanswered. And any policies that were in conflict with the progressive agenda were ignored.

    The wondering is over. They've become the very thing that they railed against during the Bush years. A group of blind apologists and enablers.

    Exactly (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 09:10:31 AM EST
    I've seen this for quite a while. I saw a mirror image of the Dems last year that the GOP had in 2000---all concerns are to be ignored because of the desperation to win. Anyway expect the D party to be in the same shape the GOP is right now pretty soon. I dont think that people voted to continue the Bush agenda of bailouts and cronyism but that seems to be what we're getting.

    Agree and disagree (5.00 / 4) (#20)
    by MO Blue on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 09:26:39 AM EST
    And any policies that were in conflict with the progressive agenda were ignored.

    IMO more often than not policies that were in conflict with the progressive agenda were not just ignored but removed as an intricate part of the agenda.  They suddenly became bad policy. People did a complete 180 on issues. The exact same thing is going on with HCR.



    I love how sucking the life blood out of the (5.00 / 3) (#12)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 08:52:55 AM EST
    base won't hurt Obama dramatically so.  I don't know what these people live on.  Their self perceptions of how Rockstar they are?  If we ran around undermining the needs of our friends and family in this manner we wouldn't be invited to Christmas.  The masses are nothing more than a larger group of mortal people trying to make it in a very very very tough economic time full of hardships.  The public option would be a precious peace of mind when so little else is out there.  It would be an affirmation that this country once again cares about its people.  But it won't dramatically hurt Obama to just tell his base to go screw off.  Besides, his base is going to feel better about him soon when he and the progressive caucus bring the war in Afghanistan to a close :)  And after the second Wall Street collapse when "playas" finally lay in weeping puddles of human flesh begging for financial regulation....everybody is going to feel a lot better about everything then.

    The Independents are going to be (5.00 / 6) (#13)
    by inclusiveheart on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 09:01:19 AM EST
    the least receptive people to the idea of mandated premiums.  I predict that Obama - and the Democrats in general - will lose them in greater numbers than 5% on that issue alone.

    exactly (5.00 / 4) (#14)
    by ruffian on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 09:06:55 AM EST
    Also, the polling math theory in the post does not take into account the changes in approval that will come when people absorb the ramifications of the mandates with no public option. They may not think the PO is important on its own, but when they judge the impacts of the mandates without it, that will change.

    The affordability factor will kick in (5.00 / 2) (#18)
    by inclusiveheart on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 09:15:56 AM EST
    big time.  What people will get for their money will start to really take the center stage.  The fact that there is little accountability for the private insurers will start to emerge as an issue.  I think the Democrats could easily find themselves in the hole for decades to come over this plan.  It is such an obvious attempt at corporate welfare and the GOP will fan those flames - of course if they do pass the plan "as is" without the public option and all now, the GOP will NEVER repeal it - they will just use it effectively against the Democratic Pary.  It won't be good.

    Repeal it? Of course not! (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by oldpro on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 11:12:25 AM EST
    It's their legislation.  No rollbacks when you get what you want.  But as you say, they'll use it against the Democrats...bigtime.

    No kidding huh? (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 11:28:46 AM EST
    The Indys are the last people giving anything away for free.  Republicans will give the lives of others for free, Liberals used to save lives for free, but Indy voters aren't going to be forced to pay for the promise of nothing and think highly of anyone involved in that B.S.  There are some leftwing bloggers out there smoking too much of something.

    Calculated Strategy (5.00 / 4) (#19)
    by mmc9431 on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 09:21:30 AM EST
    Obama and his group have always thought that the reason they're sitting in the WH today is because of the Independants and moderate Republican's. This is the group he strongly courted throughout the election cycle. It shouldn't come as a surprize that he still thinks that way.

    I think he feels he can turn on his charisma again and the Democrat's will forget all the lost opportunities and rally behind him and the party in 2010. It's a calculated decision that I think is going to blow up in their face.

    Throwing the Dem base under the bus (5.00 / 2) (#26)
    by MO Blue on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 11:35:30 AM EST
    Good policy?

    A new Monmouth University poll of the New Jersey gubernatorial race underscores the big problem that Democrats are facing in this blue state: A lack of motivation for their own voters, compared to an energized GOP base.  Poll: Turnout Is Key In New Jersey Gov Race -- And GOP Is More Motivated For Now TPM

    DemfromCt is selling falsehoods (3.50 / 2) (#1)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 07:59:21 AM EST
    regarding the public option and the WaPo poll. Why he is doing so only he can explain. But from the article he is relying on:

    "The public option that has become the major point of contention, with support for the government creation of an insurance plan that would compete with private insurers stabilizing in the survey after dipping last month. Now, 55 percent say they like the idea, but the notion continues to attract intense objection: If that single provision were removed, opposition to the overall package drops by six percentage points, according to the poll."

    That is, that support for the public option IN THIS POLL is unchanged from its previous poll.

    But DemfromCt wants to justify the jettisoning of the public option for some reason. And thus he speaks inaccurately about what the poll says.

    I wonder if this is jsut the shilling for Obama we will be seeing from the "progressive" blogosphere on this issue? Probably.

    I would have expected him (none / 0) (#3)
    by andgarden on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 08:03:51 AM EST
    to have more integrity than that. The other possibility is that he just wants to be a pundit, and he's misreading the data to conform to the "public option must go" beltway chatter.

    I expected better (none / 0) (#4)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 08:08:21 AM EST
    Now I  know better when reading him on polling on the public option.

    Mind you, I have never cared much for his polling analysis (he knows this as we have had friendly discussion about it.) To wit, he always places too much trust in the results and treats them as gospel when in reality, most polling on issues is just plain crap.


    The fix is in. (none / 0) (#2)
    by kempis on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 08:03:45 AM EST
    There will be no public option. The insurers and PhRMA don't want it, and everyone from President Obama to President Snowe doesn't want to piss off the insurers and PhRMA.

    That does not mean that we should stop fighting for it. If anything, we should be as loud as tea-partiers, only armed with facts about how the public option would work and why it is necessary.

    It would be a wonderful thing if David won this round with Goliath. I don't think it can happen, but supporters of the public option should go down fighting. And when an industry-friendly bill passes without one, we should raise holy hell.

    Not to mention (none / 0) (#5)
    by Wile ECoyote on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 08:17:43 AM EST
    the malpractice lawyers don't want change either.

    Red herring (5.00 / 3) (#9)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 08:33:41 AM EST
    No one has said they would accept health care reform IF tort reform is included.

    It is a lead pipe (none / 0) (#21)
    by Wile ECoyote on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 09:36:37 AM EST
    cinch this site would not support HCR if tort reform is included.

    It is a lead pipe cinch (none / 0) (#22)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 09:41:09 AM EST
    that I, speaking for me only, have said AT THIS site, that I would support tort reform in exchange for Medicare For All.

    With medicare for all, (none / 0) (#23)
    by Wile ECoyote on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 09:48:30 AM EST
    the feds would make lawsuits illegal much like in the military medical landscape.  Tort reform without even asking.

    Well, okay. If they insist (none / 0) (#15)
    by Cream City on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 09:07:01 AM EST
    then I'm out, with the public option.


    A Dumpee

    Can I just... (none / 0) (#16)
    by Dadler on Mon Sep 14, 2009 at 09:10:01 AM EST
    ...take a dump on the Village instead?