You want to know why the WSJ dedicded to skip that question, knowing how it polled before?

Do you think they would have skipped it if 60+% were AGAINST the public option?

Hell, it would be the headline of the poll in that case.

What's really great is that this number is coming during the height of the attacks on the idea of the public plan. This means hopefully that the public is unmoved by the industries attempt to defeat the plan. That's a really good thing and bodes well.

It's conceivable that the question is pulling in some anti's as well as pro's because it doesn't say "Do you favor X", it says "How important is X".  For example:

In any law enforcement proposal, how important do you feel it is that the government should have the right to eavesdrop on citizens without first obtaining a warrant -- Extremely important, quite important, not that important, or not at all important

People might think "Yes, that's mighty important to me, because I'm so against it."

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/us_health_ care_kaiser_8411.php

Do you favor or oppose creating a government-administered public health insurance option similar to Medicare to compete with private health insurance plans?
59%     Favor
38%     Oppose

A silent majority indeed.

So why, then, are some in Congress so skittish about giving the public a choice -- one that they seemingly want -- between private insurance and a program administered by the federal government?

Because polling is not the be-all and end-all of political calculus, nor should it be; and there's more to healthcare reform than a "public option" and always has been.

I'm sort of amazed both at the vehemence on the left of "a public plan or else!" type rhetoric and the subsequent outsized push to make it a centerpiece of political success. Insurance reforms - which, at least, has become the more accurate description of what we're doing - need to be about more than what is likely to amount to a small, government supported option for subsidized insurance. Sure, government supported and subsidized insurance is key to getting full insurance... but we have equally or more important goals to consider: expanding and properly supporting Medicaid (which, ideally would mean federalizing it away from state block grants), getting some meaningful reforms to private insurance (which will not go away, under any current proposal), and making some hard decisions about changes to Medicare. Making a "public plan" into the most important, or only, issue in play is distorting the overall discussion beyond recognition, and it's a reminder that what August has produced, most terribly, is an unproductive discussion that's pushed people to either-or shouting matches. That's deadly for a complex issue like healthcare, and it's not just about all those terrible things the right has done. I'm less concerned about a public plan than I am about what a mess the overall shape of reform has taken, and public plan or no, i'm not convinced we're seeing a path to a really meaningful outcome in the current debate. And I'm not sure mst progressives are being flexible enough to refcous on doing some key things that could really get passed and make change, in favor of a shrill shouting match.

I know it is nice to feel like 77% of the public agrees with us and the only way we're being foiled is by those evil special interests.  But any time we see a number this large, we ought to get skeptical and think about what else might be going on.  Because seriously, you can't even get 77% of the country to agree that President Obama might have been born in this country.

So why would 71% of Republicans answer this poll by saying that a choice between a public option and private insurance is important?  Well, one reason is that they may be putting the emphasis on the other half of the question.  In other words, we think it's important that people have a public alternative to the current, privately-run insurance system.  But maybe Republicans think like this: "even if there's a government-run system, I still think it's very very important that people retain the option to buy private insurance!"

Polls are complex and this line of thinking is probably one of many things that's going on in people's heads.  But if someone says that 71% of Republicans support a public option, come on, doesn't that set off anyone's bullshit meter?

I just wanted to add a post a friend of mine made on another site. His name witheld, but these are his words in response to the question, what do US Insurance companies add to healthcare. This is just simply taking a moment for everyone to see both sides here and realize that insurance companies employee hundreds of thousands of good people who believe in reform but are also upset how they are being portrayed:

"I work for an insurance company and I am a progressive Democrat so I wanted to respond to the person who asked what value insurance companies offer. Insurance companies are a service provider. They provide services that may be transparent to many but when you peel back the onion, they are very valuable. 1) Take financial risk 2) Negotiate discounts with providers (doctors, hospitals, etc) and pharmacy manufactures; 3) Investigate fraud and abuse; 4) Insurance companies employ nurses that work with a member/patient that need for: Improved skills in self management; Improved transition/coordination among multiple providers and/or levels of care; Coordination of end-of-life care needs and life-limiting disease care needs; Assistance to maximize effective use of limited health plan benefit; Reduction of avoidable costs 5) Provide Medical management - making sure that members get the right care at the right time. In our current fee for service provider, providers are motivated to perform more services than may be appropriate to benefit their own bottom line. Experimental and investigational procedure exclusions would be included here. 6) Provide higher levels of customer service and provider support. Think about the last time you called your insurance company. I bet most people agree that that call was much more pleasant in the private space than it would be if you were calling a government office. 7) Innovate and develop new technologies/services that enhance our customers health care experience such as a self-service member portal, patient safety programs & personal health records/ electronic medical record) There is very limited 't happen with government run programs. I realize that it is very easy to vilify insurance companies but the problems with health care in America are much, much broader than insurance companies. Eliminate us and you will see costs continue to rise."

It is only poll to say that. If you want to pick an outlier to argue your point feel free to do so, but it is unconvincing to use one poll out of multiple polls as proof of a position.

New ABC News Poll: 52% support public option!

http://abcnews.go.com/images/PollingUnit /1093a3HealthCareReform.pdf

Hardly...

We have no idea how "ABC phrased the question... As we saw from the discredited NBC poll, not emphasizing that the public option is a choice is a big deal...

It is ironic that someone would choose the name "FreedomFan" in order to vehemently argue against giving people a choice between a private plan and a public one.

Given the tone of your posts, I'm guessing the irony was completely unintentional.

Do you know what outlier means? it has nothing to do with who ran the poll. Nor does the issue of wording necessarily have to do with who ran the poll. That deals with whether people understood the word choice=option. Just like the abortion poll recently in which they asked people were they in favor of abortion as I remember rather than in fvor of keeping roe v wade. If I had answered that poll I would have said no, I am not in favor of abortion, but if I had answered a poll about roe, I would have said yes to that. The nature of the question matters. One of the reason you look at multiple polls rather than cherry picking as you are doing is that it provides you with a better picture of what's occuring. Overall, the number seem to realistic between 55 and 70 for the public option, but it is popular. The reason i can guestimate that is looking at multiple polls. Not just one.

Okay , I get now that youare not reachable regarding your understanding of numbers. I wil leave you to your wingnuttery.

Quinnipiac in Florida...  58% support public option....

http://cbs4.com/local/obama.health.poll. 2.1136681.html

I guess they are an outlier, too....

You have the freedom to understand that the public option is financed through premiums, not through taxation.

Where in the hell are all of these libretardian fucknozzles cooming from?

Hey asswipes, NEWSFLASH!!!  This is  a progressive website.  You are not welcome here.  Go to RedState to engage in your little Randian circlejerks, you stupid fucksticks.