Up for Debate: Latest VU poll results

Wednesday, May 22, 2013 at 12:58am

Do the results of the latest Vanderbilt Poll reflect your opinions? Where do you stand?

Filed under: City Voices
Tagged: Up for Debate

89 Comments on this post:

By: govskeptic on 5/22/13 at 4:21

I stand firmly with my good friends at the IRS "where Fairness is selective and pure."

By: HoundDog on 5/22/13 at 4:44

From the story:
"Sixty-eight percent of people who identify as belonging to the tea party also approve of the governor"

Haslam is a big hit with the tinfoil hat crowd, but amazingly, he also seems to be popular among Democrats and Independents. I guess you can fool all of the people some of the time.

By: Loner on 5/22/13 at 4:57

Good morning, Nashville.

Do the results of the latest Vanderbilt Poll reflect your opinions? Where do you stand?

Quote: “It’s a story of stability, for the governor and the state legislature,” said John Geer, co-director of the Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions, which conducted the poll of 813 registered voters." (end quote)

No, it's a story of idiots being led by an asshole.....end of story.

By: Loner on 5/22/13 at 5:09

One thing is clear, the majority of Tennesseans have no problem mixing matters of state with maters of religion....nearly 70% approve of the school voucher program, which often means taxpayer support for faith-based education.

If the union of American States should ever break up, the state of Tennessee would quickly morph into an armed Christian theocracy, ruled by a royal family, who govern by Divine Right.

By: Loner on 5/22/13 at 5:23

As Hound Dog pointed out, the Governor has been able to fool all the people some of the time. The pollster did not even mention the Haslam family's long-running, massive and fraudulent scheme to rip off America's truckers....the Governor kept his family business holdings out of any blind trust arrangement, when he took the oath of office...obviously, the Governor did not want any outsiders sniffing around the family business....the feds did sniff around and they found a rat's nest....you have a rat running your state.

By: Rasputin72 on 5/22/13 at 5:52

Yes, indeed!

By: yogiman on 5/22/13 at 6:07

You're right, HounDog,

You can fool all of the people some of the time, but you can also fool some of the people all of the time, especially on the national level is is currently being done..

By: BenDover on 5/22/13 at 6:25

We got i bed with the feds on Tenncare before and it about bankrupted the state. Took us more than a decade to get out from under that albatross that still give much remnant pain. Finally Bredesen stood up and said, 'this is stupid' so we could finally get some consensus (i.e. yellow-dog concessions) to fix it. Let's not go down that path again.

By: BenDover on 5/22/13 at 7:17

Sorry for the typos.

By: govskeptic on 5/22/13 at 7:38

Loner: I would say the Rat, as you described him, running our state is no worst
than the Rat that inherited the same job running your state at the present!

By: Rocket99 on 5/22/13 at 7:47

We need to accept the Affordable Care Act expansion to Medicare, deny school vouchers, kick out Haslam before his buddies take all of the State's money and kick out all the crazies in elected positions, especially Ron Ramsey.

By: Blanketnazi2 on 5/22/13 at 7:48

Amen, Rocket.

By: BenDover on 5/22/13 at 8:07

Nah... it's just going to be a national repeat of the Tenncare disaster.

By: Blanketnazi2 on 5/22/13 at 8:11

ACA is not the same as Tenncare was.

By: pswindle on 5/22/13 at 8:19

I cannot believe that so far Haslam has gotten off scout-free. If this were a democrat, they would already be under the bus and the GOP screaming, hang the criminals.

By: BenDover on 5/22/13 at 8:27

It's not another example of arrogant centrally-planned top-down political and bureaucratic hegemony that has as its first aim wealth redistribution; and that will have the predictable result of ridiculous costs to the taxpayer that threaten to bankrupt society as we know it?

By: bfra on 5/22/13 at 8:27

Haslem, like Bush, always has that deer in the headlights stare. He never looks in control of any situation, just amazed.

By: bfra on 5/22/13 at 8:29

Ben - 9:27 comment - HUH???????

By: BenDover on 5/22/13 at 8:32

Blanket said ACA is not the same as Tenncare bfra. I question her assessment.

By: Blanketnazi2 on 5/22/13 at 8:35

ACA is not "wealth distribution." It will help control costs and it pays for itself. Do you want links?

By: Blanketnazi2 on 5/22/13 at 8:37

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/02/11/dont-worry-kids-obamacare-is-a-good-deal/

For starters...

By: Blanketnazi2 on 5/22/13 at 8:39

http://www.seniorinfo4u.com/blog/featured-blog-posts/obamacare-how-does-it-pay-for-itself/

By: bfra on 5/22/13 at 8:39

Ben - Your wording is still off! What is NOT another example?

By: Blanketnazi2 on 5/22/13 at 8:41

Also, part of ACA is to make public how much each hospital charges for services. It also is much more aggressive about penalizing those who abuse Medicare and Medicaid. HCA has already taken a big hit.

By: Blanketnazi2 on 5/22/13 at 8:42

http://www.aucollegedems.org/2012/06/obama-cares-breaking-down-obamacare/

By: BenDover on 5/22/13 at 8:43

"I know central planning and socialism has always failed historically but we're going to do it the right way this time".

The main purpose of the ACA is to create a scenario that will eliminate private health insurance and move us down the road to single payer.

Don't pretend any of the reforms advance any other cause. It's no longer insurance when you force private companies to accept pre-existing circumstances.

The result will be increased costs or diminished services (or most likely both). They can stave off some of the damage by busting the AMA Trust; but unless it's repealed the US health-care system (along with the whole price-controlled world that depends on our market to underwrite medical advancements) is doomed.

By: BenDover on 5/22/13 at 8:45

It's logically correct but I do concede way too much distance between the negative and the question mark bfra.

By: bfra on 5/22/13 at 8:46

Ben - How is it no longer insurance when companies have to accept pre-existing conditions? What do you call it then?

By: Blanketnazi2 on 5/22/13 at 8:50

I'd say our healthcare system is doomed without any major change such as ACA. Private health insurance isn't exactly working very well, is it?

By: budlight on 5/22/13 at 8:56

This conversation is way above my pay grade. So I'll opt for the 5th amendment. Oh, that's just for liars and crooks in the White House who are heading up the office for the so-called obama"care". What a joke. Obama cares only about obama's agenda, not the people -- or the majority.

Oh well. I'm going to remain neutral on all controversial issues. But has anyone noticed how fast grass grows lately? Must be all the steroids in the atmosphere.

By: BenDover on 5/22/13 at 8:57

Because there's not an unknown anymore, bfra. Insurance is a diversification of risk. After the risk is known it's simply an administration of payments. Some insurance companies will continue in this role just as BCBS and other companies administer Medicaid and Medicare but it's not insurance unless there is a diversification of risk.

By: bfra on 5/22/13 at 9:00

Ben - Sorry, but your twisted words (as usual) don't pass muster, it is still Insurance. Do you get tarot reading on a regular basis?

By: Blanketnazi2 on 5/22/13 at 9:06

Ben, is it just that ACA doesn't jive wit your Libertarian leanings?

By: Blanketnazi2 on 5/22/13 at 9:07

Because we all know the "free market" is a myth.

By: BenDover on 5/22/13 at 9:10

I think we should have solved the pre-existing condition problem with a large public risk pool similar to the way they do for floods. It would be charity for those with pre-existing conditions at first but would eventually work into a catastrophic health insurance program for everyone with costs maintained using public clinics and such.

Private care should have been left alone but that was unacceptable because some people don't measure in absolutes but instead in relative relationships. They think that the fact that someone worked hard got a job with a good company that provides an excellent health care plan is no reason for them to expect a better level of care and convenience than someone who chooses another life path where they have done nothing at all to look after their own well-being.

Obamacare, if allowed to persist, will be an absolute disaster. It will, as Tenncare did, provide very expensive Cadillac service to a group of people who had no self-discipline with which to earn it. We'll go back to people calling the Ambulance for a ride to the hospital because it's right beside the liquor store and cheaper than a taxi.

By: bfra on 5/22/13 at 9:10

Ben trys to act like he is qualified to analyse everything & everybody. From his comments, it is obvious he is not, that is just his pipe dream, thus why he comes across like another yogi.

By: BenDover on 5/22/13 at 9:13

If you remove the unknown it is not insurance guys. This is basic stuff. I worked in the insurance industry for years and have a FLMI. This is just an absolute basic fundamental.

Insurance is a diversification or risk of an unknown.

By: Rasputin72 on 5/22/13 at 9:13

Bfra........What are you qualified to do?

By: Blanketnazi2 on 5/22/13 at 9:16

Ben, Obamacare does not provide "Cadillac" insurance. Show me where it does.

By: bfra on 5/22/13 at 9:18

s/h/b - analyze

By: bfra on 5/22/13 at 9:19

Raspy - Obviously way more than you. I don't live off of someone else.

By: Blanketnazi2 on 5/22/13 at 9:21

ACA allows people to get healthcare when they need it instead of waiting until they have to go to the ER which is the most expensive route and which taxpayers end up paying for under the current circumstances.

By: BenDover on 5/22/13 at 9:31

No but it will result in the destruction of Cadillac policies dragging everyone down to the same levels, bfra. And price controls will create a scarcity of service.

By: BenDover on 5/22/13 at 9:34

"ACA allows people to get healthcare when they need it instead of waiting until they have to go to the ER which is the most expensive route and which taxpayers end up paying for under the current circumstances."

Yeah... see the whole Health Management craze of the '90s Blanket. This stuff's been tried before.... though notably without the iron fist of government to assure compliance.

By: Blanketnazi2 on 5/22/13 at 9:35

Ben, so far you have only provided speculation. And this is not the same as the HMO's of the 90's. Apples and oranges.

By: bfra on 5/22/13 at 9:36

Ben - I don't believe in your tarot readings or that you can predict the future!

By: Blanketnazi2 on 5/22/13 at 9:37

Scarcity of service? Really.......

By: BenDover on 5/22/13 at 9:39

It's an educated hypothesis, friends. Time will be the arbiter.

By: dargent7 on 5/22/13 at 9:41

Now, for something completely different...
San Jose' has just raised the tax on marijuana dispenseries (97 of 'em) from 7% to 10%...the revenue will raise from $3.5 million to an add'l $1.5 million...
And get this: used for Police and Fire and to fix "pot-holes".
This just in....A US Mail Carrier was found to have 3,000 letters and was sentenced to 18 months in jail....
That's all folks.....

By: Blanketnazi2 on 5/22/13 at 9:42

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2013/0508/New-report-reveals-stunning-disparities-in-health-care-costs

Disparity among hospitals raises the question: Could providers migrate toward the lower-cost end of the spectrum, without sacrificing quality?

Many health-care experts, citing academic research on waste or mispricing, believe that’s possible. And some argue that consumers, armed with the right information and incentives to shop around, could play an important role in nudging costs down.