The same people who are running the ad asking "Is Harry Reid strong enough" have now asked that question in a poll.
It turns out Nevadans think the answer is no.
The purpose of the poll is to make Reid reject his customary tendency to pander to the right while taking the left for granted and convince him to do all he can to get a strong public option in the Senate health care reform bill.
Not only would that be good policy -- evidently it would be good politics: Nevadans favor "offering everyone a government administered health insurance plan," 54 to 39.
Independents -- that cherished and much-courted group of voters who politicians and their consultants seem to love above all else -- favor the public option by roughly the same margin as the state as a whole -- 55 to 39. Among Democrats, i.e., Reid's base (presumably), support for a public option is overwhelming, 84 to 12.
The poll, conducted by Research 2000 for the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, also contains the usual familiar findings -- more people disapprove of Reid then approve of him, and if the election were held today he'd get beat by a dust mop, a potted plant, Sueny Talklowdian, etc.
But it's when the poll asks questions that other pollsters have not that the results get truly brutal for Reid.
Among all Nevadans, 52 percent described him as a weak leader, and only 24 percent said strong. Even among Democrats, 47 percent said weak and 39 percent said strong. Ouch. That's going to leave a mark.
More than half -- 54 percent -- of all those surveyed also said Reid is "ineffective" in the Senate, while 23 percent said he was "effective." Even among Democrats, a soul-crushing 51 percent said ineffective, and only 39 percent said effective.
Asked if Reid should be the Democratic nominee for Senate in 2010 or if it is time for someone new to represent the party, a minority of Democrats -- 38 percent -- agreed that the majority leader of the Untied States Senate should be their party's nominee. Only 13 percent said it is time for someone new, but 49 percent weren't sure.
Among Nevadans with an unfavorable view of Reid, 47 percent think Reid is "too far to the left" while 41 percent think he's "not progressive enough." Among Democrats who view him unfavorably, a whopping 92 percent think he's not progressive enough, and only 6 percent said he is too far to the left.
"The numbers say it all," said PCCC's Adam Green. "If Harry Reid starts acting like a strong leader and passes the public option, he solidifies his standing with Democrats and Independents and has a chance to survive 2010. If he continues to be weak -- refusing to unify the Democratic Caucus behind an up-or-down vote and allowing the public option to be watered down to nothing -- Democratic senators will likely be looking for a new Majority Leader in 2011."
The pollster, Research 2000, is the same outfit that polls for the Reno paper and Daily Kos.
...and now the Republicans are trying to tie the $250bn medicare "doc fix" payment schedule to the neck of the health reform legislation! Asshats!
It was the Republicans in 2002 that passed the legislation that lowered medicare reimbursement rates to doctors, but they overrode their own legislation in 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006....then the Democrats overrode in 2007, 2008 and 2009 with the result being a cumulative 2010 cut of 21.5% with a further 5.5% cut each year through 2014.
How are these yahoos going to provide Medicare B and D in a few years?! Law doesn't allow Congress to raise premiums on 75% of medicare users ("do no harm" legislation), and they are unwilling to control costs.
Both sides are playing with fire, and we are heading to a conflagration!
Are there any grown ups in Congress? Why do we elect people that put Party first and nation 2nd?!
Posted by: dave404 | 10/21/2009 at 02:51 PM
Re: Forced Private Health Insurance
Democrat Sen. Reid (NV) has the power, when bringing together different health-care proposals for a vote, to either help or destroy future home ownership for millions of Americans. The costs of government-forced Expensive Private health Insurance will cause many home buyers not to qualify for home mortgages. All current health care proposals mandate Taxes, Costs, Surcharges and Penalties on the middle class; that lost income will no longer be available to middle class Americans to qualify for mortgages to buy homes or other kinds of property: middle class home buyers stabilize the housing market. Mandated Expensive Private Health Insurance costs will cause more homeowners difficulty paying their mortgage and credit cards.
Historically, fewer home buyers has lowered home selling prices and caused a reduction in property taxes forcing local governments to ask federal agencies for money; increasing federal deficits: stagnate or declining home sales over a long period, like the present, generally have caused higher unemployment in construction, manufacturing and financial institutions dependent on a stable housing market.
Reid should consider the collateral economic damage he may cause to mortgage lenders and Americans by imposing forced private health insurance.
Posted by: Ross Wolf | 10/22/2009 at 01:19 PM
Ross,
Most people legally in the United States (90%) have health insurance and I'm not sure the other 10% would qualify for a mortgage in the next three years even if they wanted too.
I know guys with buckets of money in various investments, some liquid some not, who have perfect credit and THEY are finding it neigh on impossible to get a mortgage!
One of my buddies is asking for smallish mortgage on a home he owns outright and the lenders are saying "no" despite the fact that he has more money in his local credit union account than the size of the mortgage he is seeking- and the mortgage he is seeking is less than 60% of the appraised value of the home!
Until all the cash buyers are out of the market, lenders are just not lending in any substantial way.
Posted by: dave404 | 10/22/2009 at 05:26 PM