Guess Who's More Trusted On Social Security Now? by digby

[BurtWorm]

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2010/11/ooops-guess-whos-more-trusted-on-social.html

Houston, we have a problem. A new poll says that large majorities of both parties and the Tea Party don't want benefits cuts Social Security or raising the retirement age but do believe that raising the cap on high earners makes sense.

But something has gone horribly wrong:

Who will better handle Social Security?

• Republicans vs. Democrats in Congress:

* 31% (R) to 28% (D);
* 34% both the same


• Republicans in Congress vs. Obama:

* 33% (R) to 26% (Obama);
* 31% both the same



That's right, Republicans now have the advantage on Social Security over the Democrats and President Obama. I don't know if that's been true since the 1930s.

I guess this is a natural reaction to being bombarded for two years with propaganda about Obama's death panels and then Democrats and the president lead the charge to "reform" social security. Apparently, this has led a fair number of people to conclude that it's the oppositional Republicans who are standing up for them. At the very least, the vast majority have decided that Democrats are no longer the defenders of social security they have been for 60 years.

...

[lumberjack_jeff]

1. Of course.

When both sides are saying that it's nothing but a worthless IOU, might as well align with the ones who said it first.

[Little Star]

2. Never thought I'd see this day.

[awoke_in_2003]

3. i trust neither party...

on this issue anymore.

[bigwillq]

13. I trust neither party...

on a lot of issues nowadays. :mad:

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[somone]

5. The master chess plan calls for victory through self-defeat

It's an age-old strategy from the Ivy League that's usually not revealed to mortals.

[yurbud]

6. and a deficit commission that wants to cut Social Security

[bluethruandthru]

7. Our beloved, but ball-less Dems were soooooo afraid, once again

of the Republicans and their manufactured angst and outrage over the deficit...that they assumed the entire country was outraged and angst-ridden about it!!
So, what do they do? They start talking about "taking a look at adjustments to entitlements" which is code for cutting social security and everyone knows it.

Our Dem leaders can't do anything but react to what the repukes say ... and they always agree with them!

They should have all stood up and Loudly proclaimed that Social Security didn't cause the deficit and it won't be dismantled or touched in order to pay down the deficit.
It was raided by republicans and they need to figure out how to pay it back and then keep their mitts off of it.

[Hawkowl]

8. The Catfood Commission

The blame lies with the cat food commission. Most people don't know the difference between a conference, a department, or a commission. All they know is that a PRESIDENTIAL commission just advocated cutting Social Security benefits. That is the only thing that has seeped into our stupid, fat, angry American thick heads. President Obama+ Commission + slash SS. Now the Rethuglicans/Media whatever can hang this around Obama because he still hasn't said that it is off the table.

Heckava job Pres! Idiot.

[laughingliberal]

11. "the Rethuglicans...can hang this (on) Obama because he ... hasn't said that it is off the table"

And he isn't going to say it's off the table. He says 'we' have to be prepared to make tough choices. And by 'we' he means you and me. Obviously, there' no cat food in his future.

[Mojorabbit]

19. +10000

To put together this commission, stack it with people known to want to cut the program, have it in the papers for months and who else is going to get the blame?

[laughingliberal]

9. I'm wondering what President Obama thought was going to happen when he created a commission designed

...to cut SS and appointed one of the most insulting old asshats ever to sit in the Senate to bash seniors every chance he got?

Then again, if it was always President Obama's intent to see SS gutted (See Clinton, welfare 'reform'), this was the perfect strategy. I hope not but if his goal was not to cut SS, he sure went about it in a funny way.

[Edweird]

10. Yep. I predicted this. The r's are now able to run - and win - on 'defending SS from Dems'.

Way to go Obama.

[DavidDvorkin]

12. Shame on Digby. Very sloppy.

This was a poll of likely voters taken on the even of the election, not a poll of the general population.

We already know from the election outcome that those who voted were not representative of the general population. For that matter, the PDF file at the link provided by Digby doesn't say what likely voter screen was used.

This poll tells us nothing about whom the American people trust more on Social Security. Shame on Digby.

[inna]

15. Oh, bullshit. Thank god for Digby.

[DavidDvorkin]

18. I pointed out the flaw in her reasoning

What justifies your response?

[Johonny]

21. pretty much

[Poboy]

14. This weasel is throwing the last 70 years of Democratic philosophy

and people centered programs to the wolves.


The man is despicable.

[dajoki]

16. This is a really horrible turn of events n/t

[ProfessorGAC]

17. That's Not An Advantage, Burt

Those numbers are so close on a poll of this size sample that it basically is saying that there isn't really any preference over who would best treat SS.

The no difference number for Congress is the largest number, and the difference between no difference and R and no difference and Obama are almost staistically identical.

If this number actually reflected the 330 million of us, i'd be worried. But, the sample size is too small for me to have any concern.
GAC

[BurtWorm]

27. Excellent points, professor.

I was just thinking that any poll that showed the R's with an advantage or even in the ballpark with the D's on SS is not good news.

[MadHound]

20. Well, this is what happens when a Democratic president appoint a Catfood Commission

Frankly what I find more telling, and truthful, is the fact that nearly a third of the polled actually get it, and answered "both".

[Catherina]

22. Can't say we didn't warn people. This is no surprise. n/t

[Radical Activist]

23. A year of completely speculative fear mongering about the "catfood commission"

was bound to have an impact.

[Fumesucker]

26. Hoocoodanoed?

That putting Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles in charge of a commission to investigate ways to reduce the deficit in a time of extreme unemployment would lead to fearful speculation about cutting the safety net?

I mean how could anyone possibly have predicted that, particularly a naive rank political amateur like the president?

[Radical Activist]

29. Obama must have been naive

if he thought he had allies among the left pundits and netroots who were interested in helping to push a progressive agenda in a productive way.

[Fumesucker]

31. Neither Alan Simpson nor Erskine Bowles could creditably be described as "progressive"..

So it's hardly surprising that progressives don't trust them to act in a progressive manner.

[Dragonfli]

28. It's hardly "speculative fear mongering" the commision has been SPEAKING FOR ITSELF IN PUBLIC

And they are talking about cutting Social Security to "trim the budget" even tho the trust fund is not part of the budget, is legaly forbidden to borrow a dime and is running a surplus of Approx. 2.5 trillion dollars.

What is speculative about repeating their own words or fearing that this commision was formed to do exactly what they say they will?

[Radical Activist]

30. The commission has proposed nothing.

Its two co-chairs released a statement as a publicity stunt. That does not equate to support from the full commission, Obama, or Democrats in Congress.

The months of speculation prior to the statement from the co-chairs was speculative. And what's the result of making every effort to imagine the worst possible intentions from Obama? Well, you see the poll in the OP. Good work.

[Dragonfli]

32. You believe they will do a 180 then? Interesting, what makes you think their views are not

as stated but in fact the opposite?

Do you know something no one else appears to?

[xchrom]

24. If the deems would STOP their corporate Love Affair -

They could turn that around in a snap.

Left wing economic populism is the solution not
The problem.

[Gold Metal Flake]

25. Hey, where's the Unrec...nt guy?

Rec...nt