• Opposition to healthcare law eases, poll finds. Weekly Standard disagrees.
    177 replies, posted
[B]LA Times Opposition to healthcare law eases, poll finds[/B] [release]Hard feelings over President Obama's healthcare overhaul have subsided, with only about 1 in 4 people supporting its repeal, an Associated Press-GfK poll has found. Although the nation remains divided over the law, the strength and intensity of the opposition appear diminished. Forty percent of those surveyed said they supported the law and 41% opposed it. Just after the November congressional election, 38% supported the law and 47% opposed it. Strong opposition stands at 30%, close to the lowest level registered in Associated Press-GfK surveys dating to September 2009. The law expands coverage to more than 30 million uninsured Americans and would require, for the first time, that most people carry health insurance. Opposition to the law remains strongest among Republicans: 71% say they are against it, compared with 35% of independents and 19% of Democrats. Republicans won control of the House partly on their promise to repeal what they call "Obamacare." But as the House prepares to vote on repeal this week, public support for that has flagged. Only about 1 in 4 respondents said they wanted to do away with the law completely. Even among Republicans, repeal draws markedly less support than it did a few weeks ago: 49%, compared with 61% after the November election. The poll was conducted Jan. 5-10 by GfK Roper Public Affairs and Corporate Communications. It involved landline and cellphone interviews with 1,001 adults nationwide, and has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4.2 percentage points.[/release] Source: [url]http://www.latimes.com/health/la-na-0117-healthcare-poll-20110117,0,632289.story[/url] Related Blogs [I]Weekly Standard AP Erroneously Reports that 'Opposition' to Obamacare is Easing[/I] [quote] A widely reprinted AP story, based on a recent AP/GfK poll, is entitled, "Opposition to health care law eases." Don't believe it. What has eased isn't the level of opposition to Obamacare, but rather the level of effort that AP/GfK has made to ensure that its polling sample is representative of American voters. When the AP/GfK poll screened for likely voters a couple of weeks before the election, it estimated that 48 percent of voters leaned Republican and that 42 percent leaned Democratic (which the election showed to be about right). In its latest survey -- the one that serves as the basis for the AP story -- AP/GfK didn't screen for likely voters and didn't screen for registered voters. Instead, it merely surveyed 1,001 adults. The result? The percentage of Democratic-leaning respondents stayed the same (42 percent), but the percentage of Republican-leaning respondents dropped by 12 points, to 36 percent. As one would expect -- with the same percentage of Democratic-leaning respondents having been surveyed both times -- the level of support for Obamacare remained essentially unchanged: 41 percent supported it previously; 40 percent support it now. Just as unsurprisingly, when the percentage of Republican-leaning respondents dropped by 12 points, the level of opposition to Obamacare dropped by 11 points (from 52 to 41 percent). Moreover, despite its gross under-representation of Republican-leaning respondents, the current AP/GfK poll still shows more people opposing Obamacare than supporting it, even greater opposition among those who feel strongly, overwhelming opposition to the individual mandate, and more support for repealing Obamacare in its entirety than for keeping Obamacare as it is. There's no story here, even though AP wrote one. [/quote] Source: [url]http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/ap-erroneously-reports-opposition-obamacare-easing_533774.html[/url] Something fishy with that first article, if this blog is anything to go by.
Weakly
Practically the only opposition was from FOX-thinkers, who were dead-set on opposing this because it's "socialist", and "having it implemented is a step to becoming a new USSR". Good that such notions are finally dying down.
Hmm, do I trust an Associated Press-GfK poll or: [quote=Wikipedia]The Weekly Standard is an American neoconservative opinion magazine[/quote] GLABER YOU MAKE IT SO HARD TO CHOOSE
[QUOTE=Zeke129;27491004]Hmm, do I trust an Associated Press-GfK poll or: GLABER YOU MAKE IT SO HARD TO CHOOSE[/QUOTE] Neoconservative? THEY'RE SO TRUSTWORTHY :hurr:
Will people please stop calling it Obamacare, it sounds stupid as fuck.
I think glaber needs to stop posting things from opinion magazines
[QUOTE=Glaber;27490881]Something fishy with that first article, if this blog is anything to go by.[/QUOTE] Except that blog is not something to go by.
In reality half the country just doesn't give a shit.
Nice Freudian slip there, Glaber.
I've been trying to limit them, but the Title is stuck like that now.
Hmm... The LA Times, or an openly-neoconservative opinion blog... Seriously though, of all of the blogs you could have picked to argue against that poll.
I also fail to see how that makes the poll erroneous or anything. It doesn't say 38% of likely voters support it, it says 38% of the population support it. Just because more republicans vote than democrats or whatever doesn't mean there are more republicans period. e: also why can you never post something unbiased in response? It's never "The AP claims this, and Reuters says otherwise", it's "The AP claims this, and WND or Fox says otherwise"
[QUOTE=Xen Tricks;27491508]I also fail to see how that makes the poll erroneous or anything. It doesn't say 38% of likely voters support it, it says 38% of the population support it. Just because more republicans vote than democrats or whatever doesn't mean there are more republicans period. e: also why can you never post something unbiased in response? It's never "The AP claims this, and Reuters says otherwise", it's "The AP claims this, and WND or Fox says otherwise"[/QUOTE] Probably because Glaber is biased to side with Right-Wing blogs and opinion pieces because he views them as unbiased or correct.
Close, It's more because that the Talk show hosts I listen to link to them on their web sites and I trust the Talk show hosts.
I can't even name one talk show host. [editline]17th January 2011[/editline] wait wait no whoopie goldberg
[QUOTE=Glaber;27491873]Close, It's more because that the Talk show hosts I listen to link to them on their web sites and I trust the Talk show hosts.[/QUOTE] You miss my point entirely. It doesn't matter who you trust, it's still a blatantly biased source, and it looks poor in comparison to something like the AP. I trust Ed Brayton but i'm not gonna cite Dispatches From The Culture Wars against CNN.
[QUOTE=Glaber;27491873]Close, It's more because that the Talk show hosts I listen to link to them on their web sites and I trust the Talk show hosts.[/QUOTE] A talk show is similar to an opinion piece, in that it is based on the host's opinion. More often than not, the opinion piece or host is biased, as a lot of those types are. That's why it's best to find as objective a source as possible, examples being AP or Reuters.
I can't believe people still trust anyone classified as a neocon after the previous administration holy shit not even the Tea Party wants anything to do with them.
[QUOTE=Lambeth;27491889]I can't even name one talk show host. [editline]17th January 2011[/editline] wait wait no whoopie goldberg[/QUOTE] He means people like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, I'm sure.
[QUOTE=Glaber;27491873]Close, It's more because that the Talk show hosts I listen to link to them on their web sites and I trust the Talk show hosts.[/QUOTE] I listen to conservative talk radio for fun and the guy I listen to is incredibly dumb. I wouldn't trust any of his sources at all personally.
Why would you even post a fucking blog in the news section??? Seriously glaber god dammit please stop you're HURTING ME [editline]17th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;27491999]I listen to conservative talk radio for fun and the guy I listen to is incredibly dumb. I wouldn't trust any of his sources at all personally.[/QUOTE] That's because it's [I]conservative[/I]talk radio. Have you ever heard of a moderate radio show? The point isn't real news, it's entertainment. not that I really listen to you either as you're incredible biased but you're right here.
[QUOTE=Dalndox;27491984]He means people like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, I'm sure.[/QUOTE] I believe he has actually referenced Rush Limbaugh in his posts at one point or another.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;27492004]Why would you even post a fucking blog in the news section??? Seriously glaber god dammit please stop you're HURTING ME [editline]17th January 2011[/editline] That's because it's [I]conservative[/I]talk radio. Have you ever heard of a moderate radio show? The point isn't real news, it's entertainment. not that I really listen to you either as you're incredible biased but you're right here.[/QUOTE] Actually there are a few liberal talk radio shows, not many, but some. They tend to be either weak and boring or just as batshit as the equivalent on the right. Talk radio as a whole isn't the greatest thing.
[QUOTE=Xen Tricks;27492082]Actually there are a few liberal talk radio shows, not many, but some. They tend to be either weak and boring or just as batshit as the equivalent on the right. Talk radio as a whole isn't the greatest thing.[/QUOTE] The Young Turks?
[QUOTE=Xen Tricks;27492082]Actually there are a few liberal talk radio shows, not many, but some. They tend to be either weak and boring or just as batshit as the equivalent on the right. Talk radio as a whole isn't the greatest thing.[/QUOTE] I said moderate which isn't necessarily either side but yes.
[QUOTE=Lambeth;27492128]The Young Turks?[/QUOTE] That's from the internet, it's different. I'm talking about old school AM/FM talk radio. [QUOTE=DOG-GY;27492129]I said moderate which isn't necessarily either side but yes.[/QUOTE] Oh yeah oops. Well what would be the point of a moderate one, that wouldn't be entertaining and thus would be a failure as a talk radio station?
Move along folks, nothing to see here.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;27491093]I think glaber needs to stop posting things from opinion magazines[/QUOTE] Posting shitty biased opinion pieces should be a bannable offense.
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;27491999]I listen to conservative talk radio for fun and the guy I listen to is incredibly dumb. I wouldn't trust any of his sources at all personally.[/QUOTE] Uhh, the LA Times is one of his sources, You saying you don't trust them? Edit: MSNBC is another source Rush links to, and they are opposite Rush.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.