Stats

by digby

After the silly political season of August, public opinion seems to have stabilized:

Amid the mercurial American public, support for healthcare reform may have slid over the summer (blame it on the doldrums perhaps, if not individual performances), but now it’s fall — and the support seems to be ticking back up. In August, 53% of Americans said they wanted healthcare change; in September, 57% were behind it. In August, 42% thought the nation couldn’t afford to tackle the issue at the moment; in September, that number had ebbed to 39%. These numbers are found in a new poll from the Kaiser Family Foundation. The percentage of Americans who think their family would be better off with reform moved upward as well, from 36% in August to 42%. Those who think they and their loved ones would fare more poorly declined, from 31% in August to 23%. For a closer look at American public opinion, including support for various proposals (individual mandates, employer mandates, state program expansions and the like), go here.

It hard to know why people are once again believing what they are seeing in their own lives, but it’s probably a combination of things. During the late summer, congress wasn’t in session and the media was transfixed by the town halls which made it appear that the whole country was completely outraged by the propsect of health care reform. So there may have been a sort of bandwagon effect there. Since then, Obama made a big speech and got into the fray which may have helped remind people of the real issue.

But I would guess it’s also something more prosaic. The jobs picture isn’t improving and people are hurting. When you (or people you know) don’t have health care or the job is precarious, health care reform seems much more important to you personally.

That’s why we can expect the fiscal scolds and their wingnut dupes to step up their game. They are in a race to blame this torpid economy on government debt rather than capitalistic excess. If people begin to look too hard in the direction of the financial elites they might just conclude that they are better off trusting at least some their financial security to the government rather than unelected, unaccountable high risk gamblers. (Of course, it would be quite helpful if one could make a serious distinction between the two, but that’s another post …)

Update: Via Atrios, this sent a chill down my spine. Dear God.

Update II: This too. (h/t to sb)

.