We took the opportunity to revisit the national polling done on the public option from the fall in an attempt to divine whether or not pushing such a measure through congress with no Republican support, and possibly several Democratic votes in opposition, would be a politically astute move for the Democratic Party (on a side note, we also believe it to be the most desirable outcome in terms of progressive, and effective, health care reform legislation).

After crunching the numbers of 21 different polls, through August to mid-December (when polling of the public option effectively ceased), this is what we have:

Essentially, the trend lines for support and opposition are flat, with support for the public option coming in at a clear majority over opposition to the measure.  Here it is again in a different graphic.

These are all nationwide polls, and although perhaps we will take a look at some of the internals in the future, it’s pretty obvious–the public option was by far the most universally popular of the various health care reform bills proposed.  If the Democrats want to win in the fall, they have to stop backing down from popular legislation just because the Republicans do what is strategically smart for them and oppose it with all the vigor and fury and misinformation they can muster.  Sure, the Tea Partiers and the uber-conservative base would never have supported the public option.  But they aren’t going to vote for Democrats anyway, and the Democrats let down people who would by backing away from legislation that their potential voters liked.

And now we are facing a lack of enthusiasm crisis among left-wing voters.  Hopefully reintroducing the public option will help to rectify that by giving Obama voters something tangible to rally around in support of.

                          

Which is exactly why the Democrats must not let them get out of it.  If they show up, in simple terms, they will get owned.  If they don’t…well then Americans will see a room full of empty seats where Republicans should be.  They will see that their incessant whining about a lack of bipartisanship on behalf of Democrats is bogus, and that the Republicans are in fact, not really interested in governing or in solving the problems faced by millions with no access to health care.

This is a win-win situation for the Democrats–which kind of makes me scared in a way, given the party’s seeming penchant for blowing win-win opportunities.

                          

The Republican responses to his State of the Union were telling; even when the President highlighted accomplishments that are traditionally thought of as centerpieces of Republican policy (such as tax cuts, which the Obama Administration and Democrats delivered to 95% of working people), they remained stoic and silent in their seats.  Obama even vocalized his surprise at their lack of positive response, remarking that he thought he was sure to get applause for that.

He shouldn’t have been surprised.  Nothing the Republican Party has done during his first year in office has even remotely suggested that they are at all interested in helping the President govern.  Some prominent Republicans have openly remarked that they want Obama to fail–nearly all of them have echoed this sentiment through their actions as Senators and Representatives.

Under a lack of leadership from the White House, the Republicans have succeeded in compromising and stalling the Democrats’ signature health care bill without giving anything in return.  And so I was disappointed when Obama seemed to make the same mistake in his speech, of voicing support for healthcare reform, but essentially leaving the issue to congress by neglecting to put forward anything specific; by neglecting to draw any line around core values around which he will not be moved.

However, if his upcoming (and to be televised!) meeting with congressional Republicans (unless they back out, which after the thrashing meted out last week, would not surprise me) regarding healthcare is anything like his trip into the lion’s den last week, then perhaps there is hope.  Obama stared the Party of No in the face and said yes I will answer your questions and your talking points, and I will do it on live television.  It was the kind of frank, transparent, and politely combative moment that Americans need to see more of from their politicians.

The Republican narrative since the start of summer has been wildly successful among their own base, and the President finally began to take them head on.  As it stands, a Research 2000 poll released last week of self-identified Republicans finds that 36% still do not believe the President was born in the United States; 63% believe that he is a socialist; 24 percent believe that he “wants the terrorists to win;” 53% believe that Sarah Palin is more qualified than he to be president; 31% believe that he is a racist; 23% believe their state should secede from the union.

That’s not a base for whom compromise is desirable, and any Republican running for reelection knows that unless they want to find themselves like Dede Scozzafava facing a tough tea-bag primary challenge, working with this President is not an option.

Yet fortune may have thrown the Democrats a bone this week, with Republican Rep. Paul Ryan’s introduction of the Republican budget plan.  Unlike their budget plan from earlier this summer, this one actually contains numbers, and not just vague Venn Diagrams.  LIke the Republican budget plan from the summer, it is also incredibly, and politically, stupid.  It essentially calls for the extension of the Bush tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans (the largest single contributor to the massive increase in national debt under Bush, and the current deficits) at the expense of privatizing Social Security and Medicare, while finally balancing the budget in 2080…really, all that pain and no gain until 2080!  This from a party that merely months ago was wailing about how the Democrats wanted to pull the plug on grandma for targeted cuts at Medicare inefficiencies.

And with this bill, the Democrats must do what they should have been doing all along; force votes.  Voting is the political equivalent of put up or shut up, and it’s time for the Republicans to either show their true colors, or shut the hell up.  Any Republican who casts a vote in favor of privatizing Social Security and medicare is sure to reap electoral wrath in November, and if Republicans vote down their own budget plan, it clears the way for Democrats to push through theirs uncontested.

                          

That being said, I agree with an assessment I read earlier today which says that they have already taken the hit they will take on healthcare and should just pass the damn bill. Failing to pass healthcare will make the Obama administration a lame-duck on domestic issues and they will pay a heavier price come November. But, health care must no longer be the signature issue (and God is that painful for me to say since it is my key-domestic issue). As I see it, there are four ways forward on health care:

1) Demonstrate the Power of the Nuclear Option- Democratic leadership won’t have the spine for this, and I don’t actually think it is necessarily the best option (though it would produce the best bill), but the Democrats could simply say, “Enough. The people elected us to pass this agenda and if the Republicans wish to make use of legislative obstacles, then we will use the tools at our disposal.” Do it quickly. Pass the bill. Then bury the news with a quick onslaught of jobs proposals to change the narrative. In fact, argue that using reconciliation on health care was actually a test case for using it on job measures to prove that Democrats will do what it takes to pass jobs legislation and that Republican obstructionism will no longer be tolerated.

2) Force the Filibuster- This would have been a good idea two months ago. It no longer is. Democrats have taken too long to pass health care and their argument that Republicans are holding up the agenda won’t hold water when Republicans go on the air and say “The President cares more about his political baby of health care than your jobs.” The truth doesn’t matter. Perception does. They can’t win this way.

3) Acknowledge defeat, accept responsibility, give Snowe and Brown the opportunity to be heroes- I think this is the best option the Democrats have from a political standpoint. Barack Obama uses the State of the Union to say, “Health care has become a polarizing issue, but what should not be polarizing is that there are too many uninsured Americans, and too many Americans dying because of our failing system. Both houses have passed a version of health insurance reform, I call on Olympia Snowe and Scott Brown (who right now are considered the two most liberal members of the Senate, Brown voted for Mass. health care reform after all…) to make whatever changes they feel are necessary to this bill, and I call on the Democratic leadership to accept these changes.” Snowe wouldn’t change much. She just wanted the issue to slow down. Brown might, but calling him out and winning his support on this issue (something which shouldn’t be too difficult for a newly elected Senator who would love some national attention and to prove to Mass. that he can deliver for them so they don’t kick him out in three years during a Presidential election cycle). Let them create an open conference committee while the rest of Congress turns to jobs. Pass Health Care in March. After you have passed jobs bills. It’ll be a victory for Brown and Snowe first and foremost, but the Democrats will reap the benefits come November.

4) Pass and Amend- Harry Reid convinces Nancy Pelosi to pass the Senate Bill as-is with the understanding that as soon as it is passed, Harry Reid will introduce a Health Care Reform bill in the Senate which makes the changes they have agreed to in ping-pong. The House and The Senate pass this Amendment immediately following passing the original Senate Bill. It’s messy, but there’s a better chance that Republicans will pass the Amendment seeing that they have already lost the battle on health care, they may be willing to strip the most heinous clauses of the Senate Bill from it (the Nebraska Purchase). Failing to do so once the Democrats give them the option would be risky.

Personally, I support a combination of three and four.

Oh, and no matter what, Barack Obama should accept Scott Brown’s invitation to play basketball. That’s just a given.

                          

Massachusetts’s voters did their damndest to save the Democratic Party from itself by electing Scott Brown.  They fired a warning shot across the bow of an administration and congress that has mismanaged the wall street bailouts, and has turned healthcare reform into a ghost of a bill due to its fixation on pleasing and avoiding confrontation with Republicans.

Last night was a protest.

Look at it this way—Scott Brown will serve only three years, the loss of one vote doesn’t really hurt the Democrats since the “supermajority” in the Senate proved to be anything but that in reality, and this special election took place far in advance of the far more substantial fall midterms.

So what was Massachusetts telling the Democratic Party in perhaps the strongest way possible?  What do the post-election polling numbers reveal and convey?

Easy.  Voters revolted not because they have turned against the Democrats’ agenda, but because they want to the Democrats to go farther, push harder, and stand up to the obstructionist Republicans in the Senate.

A new poll from Research 2000, conducted for Democracy For America, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, and MOveOn.org proves what many of us on the left have been screaming into the deaf ears of party leaders for months.  It reveals a mixture of populist anger over the way the bailouts were conducted, as well as anger over the party’s seeming inability to stand up to Republicans and its own conservatives over the very progressive agenda it was elected to enact.

Let’s start with the populist anger.  According to Research 2000, 18% of Obama voters who voted in the Senate race ended up supporting Brown.  A majority of these said that Democratic policies were doing more to help “Wall Street than Main Street.”  The left has been calling for a Main Street focused jobs bill for months.  Quite clearly, if Democrats want to win in the fall, they need to attach harsher regulations on the banks that caused the economic crisis, and they need push forward a new stimulus package designed to help struggling homeowners, small business owners, and create jobs.  Why this was never part of the original plan is beyond us; it takes no political strategic genius to figure out that voters will be angry when they feel like Wall Street is getting a fat deal at their expense—especially when Wall Street is to blame in the first place.

Of these Obama voters who switched their support to Brown, 37% said that their reason for doing so was because the Democrats were not being “hard enough” in challenging Republicans.  This can be said no more clearly:  voters want a party with backbone.  They do not want a party that will concede, appease, and concede over and over again.  The advice here is clear. Give Republicans an opportunity to vote their true colors, and then pass the strongest, best legislation possible and don’t fret over being called “socialists.” It seems that voters want Democrats to take to heart kindergarten advice.  Sticks and stones…

Furthermore, 48% of those who switched, and 43% of those who didn’t vote stated that they opposed the senate healthcare bill.  Why?  Well for Brown voters, 23% said it went too far, but 36% said it did not go far enough!  And the numbers are even worse for voters who stayed home: over half of them opposed the bill for not going far enough.

The Democrats are once again being their own worst enemy, not for pursuing too progressive an agenda, but for being ineffectual, too unwilling to stand and fight, and for not being progressive enough.

I don’t know how much more clearly this can be said, but the Democrats need to hear it loud and clear and wake up before the real disaster comes in November.

                          

Back on November 5, I penned these words:

If you want to lose the 2010 elections, then go ahead and don’t do anything meaningful with your control of government. Unexcited Obama voters and progressives will stay home on election night just like they did in Virginia and change will finally come to Washington—you will be out of power and the Republicans will be back in power.

I was cautioning the Democrats to draw the right lessons from Virginia and New Jersey; that voters (especially the base) want to see strong, progressive action.  And if they don’t get it, they will be unenthusiastic, thinking, “well what’s the point?” and will stay home.  Unfortunately, at the moment, I am able to say…I told you so.

Martha Coakley is in a much tighter race than anyone imagined possible.  Regardless of the outcome, the Republicans will declare it a victory–that if a race like this, for Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat, could be so close in perennially blue Massachusetts, then it’s a clear sign that America is against healthcare reform.  But in all likelihood, what we will see tomorrow is that Obama voters have stayed home, while the excited right wing base has risen to their challenge of putting into Congress a tea party candidate from Massachusetts.

We will examine the numbers more closely as a team following this election, but at the moment, no matter what happens, all I can hope is that the Democrats learn what I urged them to remember on the fifth of November–forsake your base at your peril.

                          

At Roundtablet, we have our own ideals and hopes for progressive legislation, yet we also realize that the American system of government is flawed; it is much more conducive to perennial election worries than to moving forward with groundbreaking, era defining legislation.  We further realize that long-term goals may be at odds with short-term electoral goals, and that even if one focuses on the long term, irreparable damage can be wrought by conservative electoral victories if the long-term focus shortchanges the short-term.

Our challenge to ourselves is to try and break down future possibilities in hopes of identifying the most strategically advantageous moves the Democratic Party can make for electoral success, while also keeping a broad focus on using these electoral successes to continue to push a progressive agenda and build a truly progressive future.

Tomorrow a special election will take place in Massachusetts, for the great Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat.  Whether Martha Coakley wins or loses, the Republicans are sure to pounce on the closeness of the race as proof that Americans are opposed to healthcare reform—even in perennially blue Massachusetts.

With open minds, we will be examining the outcome of tomorrow’s election; it’s lessons heading into the fall midterms, and beyond.