Welcome to your Friday open thread. Well, it’s been an eventful week. What’s on your mind?
Gee, despite what Republicans are saying, Americans do care about who’s funding all these political ads. I hope Democrats keep hitting hard on this topic.
But a new poll commissioned by MoveOn, and done by the respected non-partisan firm Survey USA, strongly suggests that the issue may indeed matter a good deal to voters after all.
The poll finds that two thirds of registered voters, or 66 percent, are aware that outside groups are behind some of the ads they’re seeing. This makes sense, since the issue has dominated the media amid the battle over the huge ad onslaught against Dems funded by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Karl Rove’s groups.
What’s more, an overwhelming 84 percent say they have a “right to know” who’s bankrolling the ads. And crucially, the poll also found that the issue is resonant when linked to the economy. A majority, 53 percent, are less likely to think a candidate who is backed by “anonymous groups” can be trusted to “improve economic conditions” for them or their families. People don’t believe these groups are looking out for their interests.
Yesterday a judge in Florida allowed the states’ lawsuit against health care reform to go forward, including the challenge to the individual mandate. On the same day, Republican pollster Bill McInturff wrote that Republicans need to be very careful with “repeal and replace.”
As the November elections approach, House Republican leaders are trying to capitalize on public dislike of the new health-care law – about half of voters oppose it – by vowing to “repeal and replace” it. But that’s a risky approach for individual GOP candidates, warns Republican pollster Bill McInturff, a partner of Public Opinion Strategies, a national political and public affairs survey research firm. The reason: Many people already are enjoying some popular new benefits, which include allowing adult children to remain on parents’ policies until the age of 26 and a prohibition on insurers’ rescinding coverage when people get sick.
McInturff has been urging Republicans to use a more moderate message: Keep what’s good in the law and replace what’s not. He says new polling that he will release Friday shows that this approach works.
Q.If there’s significant opposition to the health-reform law, then why would it hurt candidates to promise a full repeal?
If you’re for repeal and replace, it means you have to say that every single element of health care is something you disagree with, or at least allows your opponent to characterize your position that way. That seems to me to not make much sense.
Number two, people are very conscious that we fought for a year about this. And so . . . telling people that we’re going to start totally from scratch and do it again, there’s a certain kind of weariness about the process.
And number three, and importantly, right now we’re not really fighting about health care. If you look at most Republican advertising and most of the issue-advocacy advertising that relates to health care, it’s being used as a proof point about cost and the role of government, and it’s a pretty powerful proof point.
Yes, Democrats have already characterized “repeal and replace” as a return to recission, pre-existing condition exclusion and lifetime caps. I’ve noticed that both Christine O’Donnell and Glen Urquhart say they want to “repeal and replace” the health care law with…the health care law.