Tweet
FDL/SurveyUSA, 1/16-1/18, 600 likely voters, margin of sampling error ± 4.1%
If there were an election for US House of Representatives today, and the only two candidates on the ballot were Democrat Tim Bishop and Republican Randy Altschuler, who would you vote for?
Likely Voters Republicans Democrats Independents Tim Bishop (D) 47% 19% 70% 36% Randy Altschuler (R) 45% 74% 25% 61% Undecided 8% 7% 5% 4%
Representative Tim Bishop (NY-01) holds a very small lead against potential Republican challenger Randy Altschuler, 47% to 45% in a new SurveyUSA poll sponsored by Firedoglake.
Bishop’s is one of the suburban districts that Democrats will struggle to hold in 2010, and securing them will be key to retaining a Democratic majority in Congress. Altschuler is a well-funded challenger with more than $776,000 in his campaign fund and the ability to self-finance. He has already started running campaign ads in the district.
Looking deeper into the numbers, Altshuler’s support might be slightly stronger than the poll numbers indicate. His support among Republicans is 66% to Bishop’s 23%, with 11% undecided. Those relatively weak numbers among Republicans could be due to the fact that he will likely face a primary challenge from George Demos. If he consolidates the Republican undecideds, his numbers would be much stronger against Bishop.
President Obama’s very low approval numbers in the district (42% approve, 53% disapprove) could be a drag on Bishop. Bishop won in 2006 with 61% of the vote and in 2008 with 58% of the vote. The district has a PVI of +0, whereas Driehaus had a D+1 and Snyder’s was R+5. Recently the NY-01 had been rated “lean Democrat” by the Cook Political Report, whereas Snyder and Driehaus — who both trail their GOP opponents by 15 points according to the Survey USA poll — were listed as “tossups.”
Individual Mandate
Like in the past two districts polled (AR-02, OH-01) the individual mandate was not popular when people understood that it would be accompanied by a fine of up to 2% of their annual income for failure to comply. 50% of voters think a requirement for everyone to carry insurance is a good idea, while only 44% think it is a bad idea. But when asked if they supported an individual mandate that would result in a fine for not carrying private insurance, support fell sharply:
Thinking about the proposal that requires everyone to either carry private health insurance or be fined, are you strongly in favor, somewhat in favor, somewhat opposed, or strongly opposed?
Likely Voters Republicans Democrats Independents Strongly In Favor 18% 8% 31% 13% Somewhat In Favor 22% 18% 29% 20% Somewhat Opposed 16% 16% 15% 18% Strongly Opposed 41% 55% 22% 48% Not Sure 3% 4% 1% 1%
Adding a choice of being able to buy into a government-run public alternative caused support for the individual mandate to increase dramatically — even among Republicans. Opposition dropped sharply, from 57% to only 33%:
If the bill required individuals to have health insurance, but gave them the choice of buying health insurance from a private insurance company, OR buying into the government run Medicare program … would you be strongly in favor, somewhat in favor, somewhat opposed, or strongly opposed?
Likely Voters Republicans Democrats Independents Strongly In Favor 37% 27% 57% 33% Somewhat In Favor 29% 29% 25% 23% Somewhat Opposed 10% 16% 4% 12% Strongly Opposed 23% 31% 10% 29% Not Sure 3% 4% 3% 3%
The results are very similar to a Maine poll sponsored by HCAN last September. That poll also showed the the individual mandate was very unpopular unless accompanied with the choice of a public option.
Interestingly, the voters in the New York’s first district were effectively as opposed to an individual mandate to buy private insurance as they were to having the bill increase the payroll tax to provide everyone with government run health insurance.
The individual mandate requiring people to buy private health insurance remains extremely unpopular in swing districts. Giving people the choice of buying into a government run alternative instead of private health insurance significantly reduces opposition to the individual mandate among all groups polled. Not only is a public option very popular as a stand alone policy, but it also makes one of the most unpopular aspects of the bill — the individual mandate — much more palatable with voters in this district.
Since adding the public option or expanding Medicare in reconciliation is one of the only viable ways to pay for the deal on the excise tax without raising taxes, something that the White House and Congress have agreed to, its popularity in this close district is a positive sign for those who still hope to see health care reform passed.
18 Comments
The only reason that Obama and Co. do not understand this is that they are paid not to understand it.
This is frustrating in the extreme!
GLENZILLA nails it
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/index.html?story
Nice numbers. Good analysis. Seem to confirm what we believe.
Raises the question, what will Obama do? Let’s examine the options. There are only three:
0. Do nothing. Make eloquent speeches, which at this point in time will be received as well as pork in a synagogue. Probability 45%.
1. Fix the heath care bill through reconciliation. This is the 800 lb gorilla that is the turd in the punchbowl. This includes removing the screw on the middle class, and taking bold action. Probability 15%.
Why so low? Consider this scenario:
As O’bama went to bed last night, he reflected on his staff and advisers with his wife, and asked himself, “To whom can I turn for unbiased advice among the people who got me here?”. Rahm? Summers? Hilary? Big Dog? Dean (LMAO)?
2. Invent a “bright shiny object” to distract us. A 9/11, invasion of Yemen or Venezuela, problem is, this was Bush strategy to deflect us from his economic plans, and we don’t appear to have any “smoking guns” today. Tomorrow? yes some could be invented. Probability 40%.
My prediction: O’bama’s plan for success? A combination of 0 and 2.
Wonderful oratory attacking some existential threat. Actually fixing anything? Let his track record speak for itself.
AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…
Citizen Jon Walker and the Firepup Freedom Fighters:
And how does this “final solution” Senate healthcare bill get “fixed” through reconcilliation without trustin’ ObamaRhama to fix it later when they have worked so hard to get this monster passed in the first place??!!
And please tell me who is gunna get axed by the voters in November because they didn’t pass meaningful healthcare reform and a jobs bill and bankin reform…I’m waitin’ for you to tell me that the Blue Dogs are gunna run on the Senate bill and that progressives will suffer because they opposed another corporate giveaway…KILL THE BILL!!
KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE AMMUNITION, AND DON’T SHOOT YOURSELVES IN THE ASS AGAIN!!
Of course Glen can nail it, lives almost full time in Brazil, something the rest of the so called Progressives especially those close to retirement age should deeply consider.
Why try and fix something that’s unwilling to be fixed?
We can’t do anything right, all you have to do is look at our Governmental response to Haiti, they are already trying to say it was some sort of war zone and we need lots of Military, its BS.
I can barely watch the “Liberal” Media and I see complaints that some people can’t see certain shows or newscast, my god man/woman your on the INTERNET!
Almost every major alternative news network has their own web site, some have live streaming.
Firepup Freedom Fighters:
We can break the oligarchy’s chokehold on the Democratic Party AND get rid of Rahm Emmanuel if we trust the people of the United States to recognize their own self interest and fight for change in November of 2010. Think about it…the Demoracts that lose will be the corporatists and the Blue Dog fascists and the Senate will stay in Democratic hands. If ObamaRahma then try and triangulate with Republicans, they get stuck by both ends of the sharp stick and Obama realizes that the only way he save s his own electoral ass is to jestison Rahm and get with the program.
And for those of you who think that Obama can win politically by expandin the corporate wars he ran against, revisit American history circa 1968.
The fact that Health Care Reform was promised, and Health Insurance Reform is what was put up for House and Senate vote, and the fact that what we really have in front of us is insurance mandates, no price controls on drugs or doctors or hospitals or CEO’s, no abortion funding, free money set asides to Louisiana and Nebraska and who knows who else, what’s left to fix?
If your house was this badly damaged you’d knock it down and start over. What a waste of a year.
With HCR less isn’t more. Often times bills are made better but cutting off bits of them, but if you leave in the bad parts and cut out the good parts, it’s bad. This is true with the individual mandate but no public option. I’m someone who for instance isn’t a single-payer champion or even require a public option, but I’m dead set against it when I’m forced to buy a private company’s product. No PO, No Mandate.
You’d start a new house if you’re building a house with a rotten foundation (like the PhRMA deal) as your house would self-destruct after you moved it, it could kill you as it collapses.
it seems the the practical get it done types are missing
Ezra had a good one today:
“If the Democrats run for cover, if we become pale carbon copies of the opposition, we will lose — and deserve to lose. The last thing this country needs is two Republican parties.”
Senator Ted Kennedy
1980
I think we agree.
The last time anyone really talked about Health Care Reform it was Senator Obama.
As soon as he had the power to actually do something he got in bed with Pharm and Insurance and F’d it up and congress just kept messing things up worse and worse as the year went on.
Oh, and I forgot about the unions “Tax for thee, but not for me” too.
Candidate Obama opposed an individual mandate, promised to negotiate on pharma prices, bend the cost curve down and not raise taxes on middle class families.
The Senate bill breaks all of these promises, and that is why Coakley lost.
I would be happy with a new tent.
These polls are a menace.
Just go out and talk to regular people in a natural conversation.
David Dayen has a fresh cross-post available: Prop 8 Trial Liveblog Week 2, Day 2 – I (26)
Tim Bishop is personally more popular in his district than this poll would indicate.
I live on LI, so I am kinda aware of what’s going on with my little island.
The dissatisfaction stems from the serious traction that the tea party folks got out here, and from the totally crappy health insurance company bailout bill that is Rahmcare.
Nobody with a working brain could think that was a good bill.
I want nixoncare, or the original hillarycare both of which were better plans than the piece of crap albatross bill that Rahmco is hanging around the neck of every Dem running in 2010.
Why do you keep polling non-Blue Dogs who voted for the healthcare bill? Bishop is pretty liberal and Driehaus and Snyder are definitely center-left, definitely none of them are Blue Dogs and they are also more liberal than their districts. Why don’t you poll Blue Dogs who voted against the bill? If those Blue Dogs polled badly despite their vote against HCR, then it would at least show them that their votes on controversial issues won’t really help them in tough districts. In other words, by showing Blue Dogs that voting against HCR doesn’t make them any friends, only enemies, they might be more likely to vote for Democratic bills (not just HCR).
I’m just trying to figure out why FDL is choosing to poll generally more liberal-leaning, politically endangered Democrats who voted for all of the really important bills this session? Why not poll Blue Dogs or people who voted against the bill?