Poll: 82% Of Obama Voters Who Voted For Brown Overwhelmingly Supported The Public Option

[WillyT]

<snip>

The Research 2000 Massachusetts Poll was conducted for three organizations -- the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Democracy for America, and MoveOn.org -- on Tuesday, January 19, 2010 after polls closed in the special election for Senate.

500 Obama voters who did NOT vote in the special election were asked one set of questions. 500 Obama voters who DID vote -- and voted for Republican Scott Brown -- were asked another set of questions. Each has a margin of error of 4.5%.

2774 Obama voters from 2008 who voted Tuesday were reached -- of which 2274 (82%) voted for Democrat Martha Coakley and 500 (18%) voted against her.

<snip>

Link: http://act.boldprogressives.org/cms/sign/mapollresults

*************************************************************************************

<snip>

A poll was conducted immediately after the election last night of 1000 registered Massachusetts voters who voted for Obama in 2008. Half of the respondents voted in the MA special election for Republican candidate Scott Brown; half of the respondents did not vote at all. The poll definitively shows that voters who stayed home and voters who switched party allegiance share very common frustration and anger at an economy that continues to work better for Wall Street than Main Street.

There's a real populist anger out there. Voters worry that Democrats in power have not done enough to combat the policies of the Bush era. Both sets of voters wanted stronger, more progressive action on health care reform, as well. In summary, the poll shows that the party who fights corporate interests—especially on making the economy work for most Americans—will win the confidence of the voters.

* 95% of voters said the economy was important or very important when it came to deciding their vote.
* 53% of Obama voters who voted for Brown and 56% of Obama voters who did not vote in the Massachusetts election said that Democrats enacting tighter restrictions on Wall Street would make them more likely to vote Democratic in the 2010 elections.
* 51% of voters who voted for Obama in 2008 but Brown in 2010 said that Democratic policies were doing more to help Wall Street than Main Street.
* Nearly half (49%) of Obama voters who voted for Brown support the Senate health care bill or think it does not go far enough. Only 11% think the legislation goes too far.

<snip>

Link: http://pol.moveon.org/brownpoll/results.html

Or: http://pol.moveon.org/brownpoll/

:shrug:

[frazzled]

1. I'm getting so tired of reading about this (fake) poll

C'mon folks. It was a private poll commissioned by MoveOn.org (hey, I'm a member of MoveOn; have been since 1997, but that doesn't prevent me from calling bullshit on their push poll. Read it and see.)

[WillyT]

3. You Have A Better Exit Poll ???

Oh, that's right... the geniuses at the networks and the party poo-bahs didn't think to do that because this was gonna be a walk for Coakley.

WRONG!!!

So as soon as somebody you trust funds an exit poll of the MA Special Election, I'll be all for looking through it. Until then... this sounds about right to me.

:shrug:

[frazzled]

8. I don't believe there were any.

And that is really a shame.

[jtuck004]

2. Sounds a bit like what Howard Dean was trying to tell Chris Matthews

[grytpype]

4. I hope Brown gives them the public option they want.

Otherwise, heh, they are going to look really retarded.

[WillyT]

5. It's Not About That... It's A Protest Vote... A Shot Across The Bow...

And they are not the only ones feeling that way.

I would never vote for a Republican, but then I'm not required to vote for a Democrat either. Hell, although I have the right, I'm not required to vote at all.

:shrug:

[grytpype]

14. Profound retardation.

[W_HAMILTON]

16. I don't think so.

I am starting to believe more and more that the only vote at the federal level that we can't "protest" is the presidency, and that is due to the importance of being able to select Supreme Court nominees.

The Senate has been an abject failure. The system truly needs to be reformed. Until it is, does it matter if we have 60 votes? Or 50 votes? Or 45 votes? What would have been the difference in this healthcare debate? We have an overwhelming majority, and we can't even get a disappointing, pared down version of HCR passed.

In regards to the House, they are essentially made useless due to the obstructionist Senate. It's a shame.

So, while I would never protest a presidential vote, the Democrats unfortunately have demonstrated that it does not matter about supporting them when it comes to the chambers of Congress. As long as we keep a Congressional-veto-stopping amount, I'm not sure that things would change much from what they are now. Maybe I am disillusioned, but it is the Democrats we currently have in power that have caused this.

[Chulanowa]

6. It's the double plus secret backwards strategy!

Only by electing conservative troglodytes can we get liberal legislation! The more red-baiting predator capitalists we have in office, well by gum the closer we'll be to finally achieving a slew of plublically-funded options for medicine, education, elder care, you name it!

Why, just look at how much we accomplished between 2002 and 2008! It was a fucking left-wing wet dream! But now.. .man, I dunno about these Democrats, I think we need way more Republicans to really get the progressive reforms we need. They're the party of Teddy Roosevelt, after all!

[dkf]

7. You can call them stupid and curse them.

It would be better to fix the problem though don't you think?

[Chulanowa]

9. Considering they are the problem?

Do you mean "fix" in the Bob Barker PSA way?

[dkf]

10. Fix it by doing what was promised. Or at least looking like it.

[Chulanowa]

11. And it's all supposed to happen in a year

Even in spite of opposition to everything from the pack of rightards sitting in the Legislation, and their useful idiots among the Democratic "base."

Somehow he's supposed to not only match, but surpass every other first-year presidency in history or else he's "doing poorly" by your math. Why the fuck is that? Please, do explain to me why this president has such a higher bar to leap for your standards than any president prior?

Is it just a knee-jerk reaction to Bush being so godawful?


Or was Rush Limbaugh right, and you were just hoping for a magic negro, some magical dude who, through the power of melanin (sort of like the Force, only that's midichlorians) manages to fix lifetimes of problems in ninety minutes or less?

[rpannier]

17. The Administration made this their center piece legislation

Then they turned it over to Congress to write the whole thing.

Very little was heard publicly from this administration as the Baucus lead committee strolled through their process.

If the Bill was that important to them, why didn't they take a more publicly active roll in getting it out there?

He is the President. He has the largest podium in the country to make it happen.

Unlike the former President, he can string two sentences together.

The Admin shares the blame for Insurance Reform (because that's all it is) looking like a fiasco. A super majority and they can't get it done.

And people (here) wonder why many other people think the Democrats are inept at governing.

[kenny blankenship]

19. It's simpler than that. If you can't deliver the big promised item, get it over QUICKLY

and make sure every person in the country, including gradeschool children and rest home patients, including the moms and dads who tune out politics 364 days a year because of overtime, deadlines, and carpools, including the junkfood eating idiots who can't name the 3 branches of government, or find the United States on a map of the western hemisphere, KNOW WHO IS TO BLAME FOR THE FACT THAT WE WON'T GET HEALTHCARE. Otherwise YOU get the blame.

"Oh, but that would be partisan." Sorry but as long as one side plays the game, you have to play it too, or YOU WILL LOSE by default.

[Chulanowa]

22. We've been here before

I don't know how old you are - were you around in 1993?

In 1993 a task force appointed by the president, headed by Hillary Clinton, wrote up a Health Care reform bill that contained pretty much everything the administration wanted from a health Care bill. Over a thousand pages of what were, for the most part, pretty good ideas were presented to Congress. The bill had lots of outspoken support from President Clinton who, in 1993, was still riding high on popular opinion.

Now since this was a comprehensive and good reform bill being presented to a strongly Democratic legislature, with the vociferous backing of the Big Dog himself, of course it got passed, right? Evidently the key to getting good legislation through is to stand behind the bill through and through, right?

Heh. Nope. The bill was fucking eviscerated, mostly by Democrats in the legislature. Beholden to corporations and insurance companies, and with most of the rest wanting some glory for themselves, they went at it like piranhas on a cow carcass. The republicans did their part, pounding the drums of war about the executive branch trying to nullify the Legislative by "writing law" like that on top of their usual red baiting. In 1994, the Republicans swept both the House and the Senate, and have been merrily raw-fucking the nation ever since.

So... Yeah. That's what happened in 1993-94 when the Administration at the time did exactly what you want this administration to do.

But who gives a fuck about that shit, right? I mean, hey, History? pffft! Parallels in the modern day, whatevs! The legislature failing to legislate well, who cares?!

It's just more fun to blame Obama, after all.

[rpannier]

23. I was there

That was 94
Clinton had all ready made a few missteps and putting his wife as head of the committee didn't help

Your use of history is skewed at best

Since 94 we have
-Massachusetts has passed their own state run insurance program -- which is popular in the state (not existent then)
-People are apprehensive about health insurance and the cost (In 94 people had more faith in the Health Insurance industry and the costs were not what they are today)
- The economy is in worse shape and people are more distrustful of corporations
- There's more information out there about insurance abuses and people are more aware
- More than 50% of the public has supported a government run insurance plan to compete (still do)


It doesn't change the fact that he has shown little leadership on the issue
He made people leery when he gave Lieberman and Nelson what they wanted
Didn't articulate his vision
He appeared to be someone who was willing to pass anything to get a bill through
Supermajority and zilch

So yeah, I blame Obama and Burns and Pelosi and Reid and the Blue Dogs and Lieberman and Nelson...

[Chulanowa]

27. My view of history isn't skewed; it just doesn't jive with your ignorance

The failure of HCR is the Legislation's fault. Plain and simple. It was in '94, and it is today.

Obama could have shown all the leadership he could muster, and it STILL would have failed... because of Burns and Pelosi and Reid and the Blue Dogs and Lieberman and Nelson - and of course, you left out the republicans, big surprise.

This is because, at the end of the day, it's Congress and the Senate that determine what law is made and passed. And our Legislation happens to be pocketed by corporations and packed full of "moderates". I for one, don't mind that obama didn't waste his breath

[rucky]

20. It's not a strategy at all.

Most voters don't vote strategically. They react to what's in front of their faces. Brown won because he defined himself more clearly.

[depakid]

12. No surprise there-

as the breakdown of the numbers continues, more little tidbits like this are going to show up (in addition to the tidbits we've already seen re: banksters, etc).

[WillyT]

13. Morning Kick !!!

:kick:

[NNN0LHI]

15. Funny they never mention that The Public Option would cost each person about $800.00 per month

Mention that and then they don't want one so bad. Now if its free they would love one.

This poll leaves that detail out.

Don

[rpannier]

18. I have friends in Mass

They like the Health Care they have with the state and they say it is rather pricey.

[Bluenorthwest]

21. What people do not want is mandated purchase of for profit

products. Which is why they voted for the candidate that not only opposed mandates but mocked them as an absurd idea only needed if the products were so bad people had to be forced.
That was his position, he won against his rival who held the position he now supports, the absurd one, the one he openly mocked. This is what you want to forget.
Also, we have peer Democracies, all of whom deliver better than this, for far less than this, because there it is a crime to profit from the delivery of basic health care and insurance. Our 'plan' makes profit the most important thing. You leave out that important detail.
Obama said mandated purchase of insurance was like trying to solve homelessness by passing a law that says everybody has to buy a house. And yet now....

[Political Heretic]

24. My understanding is that there were no exit polls. So I'm a bit suspicious of the veracity of this

Forgive me because its late, and I'm drugged (must take prescription pain killers peridoically ever since major back surgery) - but I don't see anywhere that I can look at the methodology for this poll.

Always look at the methodology. Always.

Check for:

Sample size
Definition of statistically significant
Margin of error

There should be more listed but my mind is slipping..

[WillyT]

26. I Believe That Because There Were No Exit Polls, This Poll Was Commissioned...

I can't testify to the veracity of the methodology, but it feels about right.

I would love to see more polls commissioned on this election, and I'll bet there are more that a few journalists and academics working on it right at this moment.

We'll see.

:shrug:

:hi:

[Political Heretic]

28. Without transparent methodology, its bullshit. "feels about right" is meaningless.

[Orsino]

25. No, they didn't. n/t

[ProSense]

29. So they expect Brown to support the public option?

:rofl: