About us Login Get email updates
County Fair
Print

David Gergen, please define "crumble"

July 21, 2009 9:52 am ET by Eric Boehlert

Appearing on CNN last night, Gergen announced that support for Obama's health care reform was beginning to "crumble" among voters.

This perfectly fits the CW of the Beltway press corps, which is in full Chicken Little mode regarding health care legislation--the sky is falling and Obama's entire agenda is in trouble!

CNN's Candy Crowley yesterday:

Presidents don't work this hard with things are going well, they work this hard when something is in jeopardy, especially when that something is one of the crown jewels of your campaign.

At least Crowley's hand-wringing had to do with the legislative process. (Read Nate Silver to understand why even that media meme seems overblown.) But it's telling that Gergen, among others, moved on to claim that the public no longer backs health care reform; that support is beginning to "crumble."

It's telling because it's not true. According to all the recent polling data I've seen, a clear majority of Americans support the type of health care reform Obama and Democrats are pushing for. Public support is not crumbling, it's actually holding strong. But that's not a story the David Gergens of the world want to tell. And that's precisely why they ignore all those polling results when they're released.

The Beltway is only interested in the process story behind the push for health care reform, not the substance.

UPDATED: Writes Wonkette:

Nobody Wants Health Care Reform Except Voters, And Who Cares About Them?

Support Our Work


Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by The_Cat (July 21, 2009 10:04 am ET)
      1  
      Support for the Clinton health care reform crumbled, so support for Obama's health care will crumble de facto? That's not journalism, and it's not analysis. I notice Mr. Gergen cites no polls, no information to support his hypothesis. Perhaps he is still living in 1993? I think CNN would be well advised to avoid 'senior' analysts who are so prone to 'senior moments'.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Tbone Slickens (July 21, 2009 11:01 am ET)
        1 1
        While I wont pretend to speak for Gergen, I think when you hear them talk about slipping numbers and Crumbling support it is reflected in this poll:

        NYTimes/CBS poll on Health Care

        Just to hit the high points, support is high for HC overhaul, but people when asked about their care are Somewhat to Very Satisfied. When told the COST of HC Overhaul, support starts to slip even further, down into the 30-40% range.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by The_Cat (July 21, 2009 11:07 am ET)
          2  
          "But they clearly indicate growing confidence in the government’s ability to manage health care. Half of those questioned said they thought government would be better at providing medical coverage than private insurers, up from 30 percent in polls conducted in 2007. Nearly 60 percent said Washington would have more success in holding down costs, up from 47 percent.

          Sixty-four percent said they thought the federal government should guarantee coverage, a figure that has stayed steady all decade. Nearly 6 in 10 said they would be willing to pay higher taxes to make sure that all were insured, with 4 in 10 willing to pay as much as $500 more a year."

          I clipped these directly from the link you posted. I can't seem to find the numbers you are talking about. People seem very willing to pay to fix the health insurance system. I am, for one.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (July 21, 2009 11:28 am ET)
               
            Sickens is very good at posting links to articles that don't say what he claims they do. He hopes no one reads them who is able to understand them.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by Tbone Slickens (July 21, 2009 2:18 pm ET)
            1  
            If you're going to be selective...either you didn't read it don't understand it.

            Yet the survey also revealed considerable unease about the impact of heightened government involvement, on both the economy and the quality of the respondents’ own medical care. While 85 percent of respondents said the health care system needed to be fundamentally changed or completely rebuilt, 77 percent said they were very or somewhat satisfied with the quality of their own care.


            It is not clear how fully the public understands the complexities of the government plan proposal, and the poll results indicate that those who said they were following the debate were somewhat less supportive.


            As I tried to point out, the thread is about Gergen using the word "crumble" and all I did was point out that there are polls out there that support this to some degree. You can get you nose out of joint over it but it doesn't change the fact that the more people find out about how much this will cost THEM, polls will reflect a downward trend.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by The_Cat (July 21, 2009 3:06 pm ET)
                1
              Quoting you, Tbone Slickens:

              "When told the COST of HC Overhaul, support starts to slip even further, down into the 30-40% range."

              You gave a number here that there is no support for in the article you referenced. It was a fairly simple matter to read the article, and discover that you had created this 'fact' out of thin air.

              Your first quote supplies numbers, but not about the feelings of those polled on the cost of health care overhaul. The second quote you mention is mere opinion, completely unsupported by anything.

              You have also cited, so far, only -one- poll, not 'polls'. I suggest you retire and get your facts in order before further proving your ignorance in public.
              Report Abuse
        • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (July 21, 2009 11:24 am ET)
             
          While I wont pretend to speak for Gergen
          You don't have the intellect to speak for the brain-dead.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by Bad News (July 21, 2009 10:09 am ET)
        2
      I like David Gergen.
      It upset me greatly when some goofy Fox News pundit called him David Rodham Gergen.
      David Gergen does not speak with a Forked Tongue.
      The word "Crumble" was a bad choice but that's no reason for the man to be hung.

      Speak truth to power.


      Mr. News
      Report Abuse
      • Author by captfoster2 (July 21, 2009 10:17 am ET)
        1  
        Perhaps you may be right about your assessment of Mr. Gergen.

        But something happened that has made him turn tail and turn away from that which we need in this country... a public option today and single payer to follow soon after.

        Scare tactics? Could he be under a threat of violence by someone?

        Something less sinister... he was offered enough money for him to be against it?

        Something else? (use your imagination)
        Report Abuse
        • Author by mk3872 (July 21, 2009 10:26 am ET)
          1  
          Gergen is just a dyed-in-the-wool DC insider and conventional wisdom (CW) has already been established that (a) health care is too difficult to reform and (b) it is seen as socialism so he's just towing the CW line here ...
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (July 21, 2009 11:31 am ET)
               
            that's "toeing" the line. It's from all those prison movies, where all the prisoners' toes must be touching the white line on the floor.

            </pet peeve mode>
            Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (July 21, 2009 10:58 am ET)
        1  
        OK, David Rodham Gergen he's obviously not.

        But saying that "crumble" was merely a "bad [word] choice" would be like saying "green" is a "bad word choice" to describe the color of the sky. It's not a "bad word choice" it's WRONG. Period. Flat-out, demonstrably false.

        You are being way to forgiving hear. No one's "hanging" him, anyway. But "crumble" is beyond a "bad choice," it's patently absurd.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by nerzog (July 21, 2009 10:33 am ET)
      1  
      The 24/7 NewsBeast has a vested interest in tanking HealthCare Reform. If it fails, Obama will be weakened, and we'll have a real contest going into 2012.

      On the other hand, if it passes and (gasp) succeeds, Obama will be a hero and the next two elections will be a big yawn. The Beast can't let that happen.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by MickD (July 21, 2009 11:22 am ET)
        1  
        Appropriate positioning and angle as usual Mr. N (and something that the neocon master debaters on this site can NEVER counter). I'll add the Big Pharma advertisers who pour money into the NewsBeast coffers by convincing people to take something they don't need (a pill to grow eyelashes with Brooke Shields comes to mind).
        Report Abuse
        • Author by nerzog (July 21, 2009 12:36 pm ET)
             
          Good point. That's one aspect of the plan, as it is evolving, that I find troubling. The Drug Companies are wading in on the Reform side this time, but at what cost? I read somewhere that part of the deal included a further extension on their patents, which will keep drug costs higher.

          I also heard, years ago, that the Drug Companies spend more on advertising than they do on research. Given that every third commercial you see on TV is for some kind of designer drug, as you pointed out, I tend to believe it.

          And, oddly enough, at least half of those commercials are aimed at horny old men who can't "function" any more. Any coincidence that most members of the Senate are middle-aged+ men? Just asking.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by mobaidin (July 21, 2009 12:33 pm ET)
         
      I want someone to take, say, six "pundits" and track their record for a year.

      I am sick to death of all these allegedly connected airheads yammering on and on and on.

      Remember this time in 2007? Remember when the presidential campaign was all locked up? Remember when it was going to be Hillary Clinton versus Rudy Giuliani?

      I think these pundits have an accuracy rate of about 20%.
      Report Abuse