New Poll Confirms Country is Clearly Progressive

[Joanne98]

New poll out indicates that the country is clearly, massively, overwhelmingly progressive. While they talk about cutting so-called entitlement programs in Washington, the American people have completely different priorities.

Cenk Uygur's diary :: ::
When asked what's the first thing they would do to balance the budget, Americans had an unmistakably clear answer -- raise taxes on the rich. It came in number one by a mile, with a whopping 61 percent.

If that wasn't progressive enough, cutting defense spending came in number two, with 20 percent.

And if all of that wasn't clear enough, when asked about cutting Medicare, only 4 percent were in favor of it. Only 3 percent wanted to cut Social Security as a way to balance the budget.

I thought the country was center-right? That's what all of the pundits tell us 24/7 on television. What happened now? Do those answer look center-right to you? They look decidedly center-left to anyone with a pulse.


http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2011/1/4/933292/-New-Poll-Confirms-Country-is-Clearly-Progressive

[abq e streeter]

1. SHHH.......... Please; you'll disturb their agreed upon storyline

[whosinpower]

2. 61 percent!?!

A pretty big group of sanctimonious liberal naysaying fringe group....eh Obama?

[still_one]

5. If this is true it is a pretty self-destructive group for not voting in the midterms, because if

they all voted, the repukes would not have made the gains they did

[whosinpower]

15. If Obama had not taken the public option off the table

And did a backroom deal prior to the Health reform law being formed that made sure the public option STAYED off the table......perhaps those folks would have happily voted for him. And to add insult to injury - force BY LAW, that americans must buy into privately held health insurance even if they have no job, are losing their home.....yeah that will surely get votes....guess that did not work so well after all.

Abandon your base....but then criticize that they abandon you?

Democrats held majorities in the house and the senate, and controlled the White House. Voters desperately wanted health care reform THAT WOULD NOT BANKRUPT THEM IF THEY GOT SICK. THAT THEY COULD AFFORD. THAT THEIR PREMIUMS WOULD GO DOWN. THEY WANTED THEIR HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUMS TO GO DOWN. And even Obama understood that competition on a level playing field would be the only way to force health care costs to go down. He abandoned that principle and would not even allow single payer, universal health care to be part of the discussion.

I was not a bit surprised that the dem's suffered loses. Not pleased about it....but not surprised.

[still_one]

17. No argument on your point, but effectively allowing the repukes to take back power will not help the

cause

[whosinpower]

19. The cause was sold out long ago

Corporatists control both parties. The tea party used the anger to their advantage, and Obama gave hope a sour taste.

It is hard enough for a politician to gain a voters trust. He had that in record numbers, in America and abroad. Once lost.....it is very hard to regain. 61 percent want the wealthy to pay more in taxes...will he regain their trust...or will he institute austerity measures? How can a person trust him when he does a backroom deal with the GOP without even including democrats at the table?

We shall wait and see. I still have hope.....flavoured with a bitterness that those 61 percent truly have no voice at the table at all. Do they have a voice at all? I wonder.....

[olegramps]

53. The working class has absolutely no representation in Congress.

Unfortunately, the working class bought the management's propaganda hook, line and sinker that unions were their enemy and they would be taken good care of. When the workers finally woke up it was too late. The also sold the workers the swill that tariffs were bad for the economy and even convinced the gullible workers to voted for right to work laws. Now the workers no course when they see their jobs outsourced, pensions cut and their health care canceled. There is little hope for any recovery since the country has lost it manufacturing base. Sorry, but the workers screwed their own selves. Free trade is the latest swindle that has only served to enrich the wealthy class and drive wages to the lowest possible point that most desperate workers will accept.

[Lord Magus]

37. Guess what. Obama wasn't on the ballot.

Get a clue.

[whosinpower]

46. Oh I see

The republicans made huge gains in the Senate and took over the house......because their policies are just SO much better and sound and the American public loves them more.....is that it?

[Lord Magus]

56. No.

The Republicans made huge gains because many liberals foolishly didn't vote because they were unsatisfied with anything less than perfection.

This election proved that not all low-information voters are on the right, because vast numbers of Democrats held the manifestly false view that the 111th Congress had accomplished less than the average Congress.

[whosinpower]

73. Then there was the Big Pharma backroom deal as well

And the big pharma deal?
http://www.latimes.com/features/health/la-na-healthcare-pharma4-2009aug04,0,3660985.story

snip - Reporting from Washington — As a candidate for president, Barack Obama lambasted drug companies and the influence they wielded in Washington. He even ran a television ad targeting the industry's chief lobbyist, former Louisiana congressman Billy Tauzin, and the role Tauzin played in preventing Medicare from negotiating for lower drug prices.

Since the election, Tauzin has morphed into the president's partner. He has been invited to the White House half a dozen times in recent months. There, he says, he eventually secured an agreement that the administration wouldn't try to overturn the very Medicare drug policy that Obama had criticized on the campaign trail.

"The White House blessed it," Tauzin said.

snip - If a package passes Congress, the pharmaceutical industry has pledged $80 billion in cost savings over 10 years to help pay for it. For his part, Tauzin said he had not only received the White House pledge to forswear Medicare drug price bargaining, but also a separate promise not to pursue another proposal Obama supported during the campaign: importing cheaper drugs from Canada or Europe.

[Lord Magus]

75. If a lobbyist says it, it must be true!

[vaberella]

51. That's not what happened. where did you get that information.

When the PO was mentioned automatically Landrieu and Lincoln and about 5 other Conservadems AUTOMATICALLY went on Television to stay that if the PO was on the table they would NEVER vote for HRC. This is well documented. So I don't know what kind of wishy-washy story you're selling but that's not it. If you want to say single payer was off the table then fine. But don't go around selling BS on the PO.

[whosinpower]

67. NY times reporter COFIRMS Obama made deal to kill public option

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/miles-mogulescu/ny-times-reporter-confirm_b_500999.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/13/health/policy/13health.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1

snip - Several hospital lobbyists involved in the White House deals said it was understood as a condition of their support that the final legislation would not include a government-run health plan paying Medicare rates — generally 80 percent of private sector rates — or controlled by the secretary of health and human services.

“We have an agreement with the White House that I’m very confident will be seen all the way through conference,” one of the industry lobbyists, Chip Kahn, director of the Federation of American Hospitals, told a Capitol Hill newsletter.

[Lord Magus]

68. An NY Times reporter also CONFIRMED that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

But I suppose if a lobbyist said something, it must be true.

Obama didn't kill the public option. The Senate killed the public option.

[whosinpower]

72. Daschle too?

http://oneutah.org/2010/10/06/tom-daschle-lets-cat-out-of-bag-tries-to-put-it-back-in/

snip - Now, former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-SD) has written a new book that confirms the story that the Senate Finance Committee and the White House secretly took the option off the table in July 2009 as a result of an “understanding” with the hospital association, and with AHIP. The AHIP deal was first uncovered in August 2009 by New York Times Washington reporter David Kirkpatrick.

[SpartanDem]

58. Maybe the base is uninformed?

Somebody in that scenario without a job would eligible for Medicaid they would pay nothing. Nearly a year later I still see people saying that insurance companies will get 30 million new customers when that is patently false. Half of newly 30 million will be through a big expansion of Medicaid eligibility. If people didn't go to the polls, because they had misconceptions about the bill like you do that says more about the base than it does the president.

[Chemical Bill]

69. You assume that votes are counted. n/t

[rapturedbyrobots]

76. you assume that people vote in their own economic interest

it does not surprise me that people who want these things are still fooled into voting for a neoliberal. and yes...obama is a neoliberal...and no...he will not get you these things. on social policy he may be progressive, and on foreign policy a little less hawkish than the neo-cons, but on economic policy he is 110% neoliberal. some might consider that a good thing. but it doesn't look good for those popular fiscal policies.

[NYC Liberal]

39. 75-80% of liberals approve of Pres Obama's job performance.

FYI

[vaberella]

52. It was at 85%, like only two days ago. n/t

[Lord Magus]

57. There's some variance depending on which poll you look at.

Since the don't all use the same sample or word their questions the same way. Regardless, the vast majority of liberals feel Obama is doing a good job.

[rapturedbyrobots]

77. of liberals or democrats?

the two terms are NOT interchangeable. i don't know what poll you're referring to so i can't say which, but just want that distinction to be clear.

on the other hand. only 31% of voters identify as democrats (29%) for republicans. so when you read this poll, remember that's 75-80% of less than a third of the voters. just a point to keep in mind when interpreting the polls.

any data on how many voters identify as 'liberal'?

[dkf]

3. What rate would the rich need to be taxed at to balance the budget?

How realistic is it to think they can pay the entire shortfall?

My take on it is that the public wants their benefits but doesn't want to pay for it.

[unblock]

9. realistically, i think we all know the no one item will cover it. however,

note that they're not clammoring for a tax CUT for the rich.

of course there's going to be a bias to protect your own benefits and have someone else pay, but if you were to listen only to the m$m, you would think that the public wanted tax cuts for the rich so the rich would get the economy going and blah, blah, blah.


in fact, there are compelling reasons to think that a tax HIKE would lead to massive hiring, because higher taxes lower risk. but you'll never hear that on cnbc....

[whosinpower]

27. A tax hike to the rich would lead to more hiring

Much more than a tax cut.

Reason number 1 - if given a choice whether or not to pay taxes - most people prefer NOT to pay taxes. If the tax rates were high enough - the wealthy would actively look for ways to invest it instead of just sitting on it. Right now, there just is not adequate incentive for them to invest it....and they can sit on it for free. Or thumb their noses at the IRS as the couple of trillion sit in offshore bank accounts.

Use it or lose it. That makes me wonder if a radical idea would be to somehow put a timeframe on how long a dollar is worth a dollar....like an EXPIRY date or something.

[unblock]

29. you're talking about a wealth tax

from a purely incentive aspect, the combination of a high tax on wealth and a low (or no) tax on income would provide a tremendous disincentive to hoarde wealth. private art collectors would be strongly encouraged to open up their collections to public viewing to offset the wealth tax, for instance.

it would also strongly encourage long-term investing, as profits later are subject to less taxation than profits now.


the real problem is enforcement -- income inherently involves a counter-party (who may even have a direct financial incentive to report your income to the taxation authorities) and so it's vastly more difficult to conceal income than it is to conceal wealth.

[dkf]

30. Why would higher taxes lower risk?

What risk are we talking about?

[unblock]

33. risk in the sense of variance of profit

let's say i'm contemplating opening a new branch. i might hire and incur other expenses but i might generate plenty of revenue. i'm not completely convinced i'll make a profit, but i'll surely get more market share.

at a 10% tax rate, a $1,000,000 pre-tax profit nets me a $900,000 gain, but a $1,000,000 pre-tax loss costs me $900,000 (i save $100,000 in taxes by writing off the loss).

at a 90% tax rate, the same scenario nets me only $100,000 gain or $100,000 loss. so my the bottom line consequence of my business decisions becomes much more predicatable at a higher tax rate. i.e., variance is low, risk is low.


so in that case, at a 90% tax rate, i can try it. if it fails, it doesn't cost me much, and i can get out for little net loss. if it succeeds, true, it doesn't net me much gain either, but it does build market share which in turn can lead to longer-term advantages as well. moreover, i can keep it going long-term and gain big time if tax rates ever do fall back down.

[dkf]

36. Lol...brings it closer to zero you mean?

That is funny!

[unblock]

43. in the example is chose, yes; but there are other examples

where the profit/loss scenario is not centered around break-even.

[truedelphi]

34. Do you not understand that many of us could care a bit less about the payments to us,

being done in, as long as we get what we paid into the system BACK.

I spent my entire life paying into the Social Security fund. Now that the Uber Rich have made off with Eleven trillion dollars and counting, why should my payments into Social Security (along with everyone else's payments,) vanish? Just to help Wall Street out via some mad sort of privatization of Social Security.

Why not tax the rich? If it takes 60 percent to do it, so be it. They have scammed us again and again, and remember when they scam us, it continues to flood their wallets. For years afterwards.

While the people of middle income have lost their sons and daughters to Iraq, people like Richard Blum (Di Feinstein's fair husband) have made millions on the war. And this week, he plans on yet another plunder - this one aimed at allowing the "regents" at the UC system to hike up their benefit packages. Or else he threatens a lawsuit.

Well, my feeling is let those regents have their scam of an increase, since it is legally mandated. But their salaries aren't mandated, we should then roll back their salaries. Let them make $ 14 an hour and see how they like it.

[still_one]

4. If that is true, then it is even more of a condemnation against progressives for allowing the

repukes to take back the house by such a wide margin

Why didn't they vote? One thing about the repukes is that they are honest. They tell you outright that they will screw the middle class and poor over the rich.

If they really wanted to preserve social security and medicare the results in the midterm would not have been so drastic

We almost lost the Senate

[WingDinger]

8. At least he is reading Reagan's recipe for poisining the electorate mind.

[w4rma]

13. DLCers confuse the voters into thinking that Democrats and Republicans are the same.

So people whom are progressive on economic issues then vote on the fad of the day or social issues.

[still_one]

18. That doesn't say much for critical thinking /nt

[w4rma]

23. Most Americans have no critical thinking skills. (nt)

[namahage]

24. Didn't know Ralph Nader was a DLCer. n/t

[ClassWarrior]

45. Self-identifying progressives voted. Unfortunately, swing voters were unmotivated...

...by the failure to embrace progressive values by the Administration and many of the elected Dems.

NGU.

[lyonn]

6. Could it be that the R-Wing MSM can't stop the brain from working?

The Tea Baggers ranted for a year or more about cutting spending. Did they not realize what the R's cut? It certainly isn't the congress critters pay or their staff. A cop, nurse, road crews, etc., hell yes, cut their pay and get rid of unions!! Being factious of course.

Dontcha love GM's stock prices? Yes sir, Obama sold our stock and made us money. Today is my day to allow myself to feel good about our future. This evening my brain could hit the skids and it could all turn around. But, it looks like the political news is good for the Obama crowd for a change.

[DavidDvorkin]

7. If only they had voted, despite the imperfections of the Democratic Party.

[ClassWarrior]

10. The self-identifying progressives voted. The swing voters didn't.

NGU.

[onenote]

11. that same poll shows that more people belong or want to belong to a country club

than don't want to belong to a country club.

In other words, I'd be a bit careful about reading sweeping conclusions about how progressive the country is into one question out of a 10 question poll that covered such weighty topics as "which fantasy world would you most like to visit?" (Narnia was the top choice).

[onehandle]

12. But the poll last November confirmed that the voters are clearly stupid.

So that poll is meaningless.

[NYC Liberal]

14. Well all all those "progressives" either voted in the teabaggers this past election,

or did nothing while others did.

:crazy:

[Perky]

16. Then where the fuck were they on November 2????

Progressives who are either too lazy to get off their asses and vote are not progressive. they are just in the way.

[NorthCarolina]

20. Who here on DU was "really" unaware of this fact before now? nt

[whistler162]

21. Actually new poll shows that those interviewed for new poll

are progressive.

But thanks for the laugh!

[NorthCarolina]

22. The MOST compelling statistic from that poll (for me) though is

"Four percent would cut the Medicare government health insurance program for the elderly, and 3 percent would cut the Social Security retirement program, the poll showed."

Now, since majority rules which group is most likely to get their way on Medicare & Social Security? The 3-4% of America that approves of cuts, or the 96-97% that oppose?

Will Obama champion for the 3-4% of Americans, or for the 96-97% of Americans?

[WiffenPoof]

25. I'm Baffled By Those That...

can't understand why progressives didn't show up at the polls. Are you kidding me? The reason(s) are posted here ad nauseam. The President abandoned his base....the progressives. Fool me once...

-PLA

[Lord Magus]

38. It's not that the reasons are mysterious.

It's that the reasons are stupid.

[WiffenPoof]

62. I Agree...That's Why I Voted n/t

[NYC Liberal]

40. No, it's that those who didn't are fucking morons.

I hope the people who didn't vote are happy with our new House controlled by teabaggers.

The vast majority of liberals and an even higher percentage of Democrats approve of how Obama has done his job. People were pissed off at both parties in Congress because there was so much bickering and bitching instead of productive debate. But if you are a progressive, the solution is NOT to allow teabaggers to take over.

[WiffenPoof]

63. Yep.....n/t

[totodeinhere]

49. And so since we didn't get everything we wanted from Obama, we aren't going to vote and let an even

worse alternative win? That just doesn't make any sense. If they were unhappy with Obama, think what they must feel about the Pukes who are infinitely worse than Obama. Yet by not voting they let the Pukes win. So as far as I'm concerned, if the President abandoned his base that is no excuse whatsoever not to vote.

[WiffenPoof]

64. I Agreee

That's why I voted.

-PLA

[ClassWarrior]

65. Of course it doesn't make any sense. Maybe that's your first clue that it's wrong.

Progressives voted in 2010 in force. It was the swing voters who didn't show up for us this time.

NGU.

[WiffenPoof]

26. If It Is True...

that this country is more progressive than conservative, then there can be only one reason why most think otherwise. It is basically because the Dem Party is completely clueless when it comes to messaging. This is particularly true of this Administration.

-PLA

[FiveGoodMen]

28. But its government is Fascist

And the country has nothing to say about it.

I don't doubt these polls but what difference does it make.

All those in power push us continually to the right.

[nemo137]

31. How many of those people, however, base their voting on fucking someone over?

How many of them vote for the GOP because they don't want all those brown people taking their money, or the thought of gay people squicks them out? The country, especially the older, whiter portions of it, is nowhere near progressive.

[Ter]

32. Cherry-picking questions

Where are the questions on guns or the death-penalty, which clearly are in the Republicans favor?

[namahage]

41. There weren't any.

http://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/2011/02/60-minutes-poll-201102?currentPage=all

The N.F.L. may not play next season, because team owners and players have not agreed on a new collective-bargaining agreement. What would an N.F.L. lockout mean to you?
("Who cares?" beat out "They'll figure it out and play," 49% to 31%.)

Which statement best describes your thoughts about Hollywood’s latest movies?
("Too many remakes/sequels" just barely edged out "Trailers are better than the actual movies.")

Our country is trillions of dollars in debt, and the number increases every day. Which denomination comes after a trillion?
(60% didn't know or got it wrong, with 12% answering "a gazillion". This 60% includes 44% of the respondents with college degrees.)

Out of the following subjects, which one should be mandatory throughout a child’s education?
(Manners was #1, followed by the value of a dollar, interpersonal relationships, and personal hygiene.)

Which one of these fashion items would you most like to see fall out of style for good?
(Bow ties barely edged out suspenders, but far more wanted to keep all the items on the list.)

If you could snap your fingers and magically fix one troubled part of the world, which one of the following would you choose?
(Washington D.C. beat out the Middle East, Haiti, Sub-Saharan Africa, and New Orleans.)

To balance the federal budget, which of the following would be the first step you would take?
(Not surprisingly, "make someone else pay for everything" beat out the three "take something away" options, with particular disfavor of "taking MY shit away".)

Which one of these fantasy worlds would you most like to visit?
(Narnia, closely followed by Neverland, Hogwarts, Wonderland, and Middle Earth. 13% didn't want to visit any of them.)

Researchers are claiming that someday it may be possible to have a terrible memory wiped from your mind. Is there a moment in your life that you would want removed from your thoughts forever, or would you want to keep all your memories no matter what?
("Keep them all" overwhelmingly beat "Remove one bad memory," 86-13.)

How do you feel about country clubs?
{Evenly split between "Would never join" and "Would join one if I could.")

[glinda]

35. Massive urgent need to change the voting methods needed!

[vaberella]

42. Congress has always for the past 40 years proven you wrong! n/t

[impik]

44. Yea, so progressives, they gave the keys back to the assholes who destroyed the country

[vaberella]

50. Don't fight it. Logic, on DU, doesn't compute at times. n/t

[ClassWarrior]

60. Blame swing-voters. The so-called "mushy middle." They're the ones who didn't turn out.

Self-identifying progressives voted. Unfortunately, swing voters were unmotivated, thanks to the failure of Administration and many of the elected Dems to embrace, promote and support progressive values.

NGU.

[Freddie Stubbs]

47. The poll was a random sample of adults (didnt determine if they were registered or eligible to vote)

[Kingofalldems]

61. Nice try. Fail.

[Freddie Stubbs]

70. Wow. That was a fact-filled, convincing argument

[Kingofalldems]

71. The headline said people not voters

Nice try. Fail---another one of your strawmen.

[Freddie Stubbs]

74. Politicians listen to voters, not non-voters

Which is why this poll is bunk.

[lonestarnot]

48. K & R!

[mtnsnake]

54. This country is clearly progressive?

Using "clearly" as the key word, I'd say that notion is clearly laughable.

[SpartanDem]

55. That doesn't mean a damn thing it when comes to voting

many poor social conservatives have never had an issue voting against something they agree with they man agree with economically.

[BklnDem75]

59. It's a 60 Minutes/Vanity Fair Interactive Poll

I repeat, it's a 60 Minutes/Vanity Fair Interactive Poll. It's so scientific, I voted twice on two different pc's and it still counted towards THIS poll. If anything, this poll only proves more Progressives read Vanity Fair online. What is Cenk Uygur smoking?

[Agent William]

66. 95% of the country could be progressive, it still wouldn't

Derail the right wing agenda in the US, or here for that matter...

I do feel warm inside knowing that the majority of Americans think as I do. I suspected it all along, and this poll confirms that.

:hi:

[ItNerd4life]

78. Another bogus political poll. What about Fiscal Responsibility?

That is what most voters wanted in the last elections. Nothing in this poll asks a question related to that.