Laura,

If all we had to go on were the facts you laid out (and there is definitely room for disagreement about some of these conclusions), I might agree with your premise.

Couple this with these additional facts:

1. GOP leads Dems by 4% in the "generic ballot," with independents favoring GOP 52% to 30%

2. Obama remains at 54% generic approval (same as W just prior to 9/11), but when polled on specific issues, his approval ratings for those issues go below 50% across the board (and WAY below, in some cases)

3. Despite his 54% generic approval, Obama has the highest "negative" rating (strongly oppose vs. strongly support) polled - higher than W's

4. Congress polls at the lowest level EVER measured - and when specific questions re: Pelosi and Congressional leadership are added, the results go even lower

5. Not in all polls, but a significant number are now showing, on the "which party do you trust to do a better job of [state the issue in question], GOP is outpolling Dems on almost all issues (defintely on the economy), and this is true among independents, which are breaking GOP vs. Dem almost 2 to 1, vs. how they voted in '08

6. Polls along the lines of "what do you think is our biggest problem/issue right now" show "the economy" outpolling every other issue by huge margins - ESPECIALLY health care reform

7. When broken down further, polling on the economy shows that people are particularly worried about deficit levels and debt. Polling also shows a majority as skeptical, if not downright disbelieving, Dem claims about costs of health care reform and "cost savings" (which everyone knows are complete fantasy).

8. While a majority of people polled still say they want "health care reform," breaking it down to specifics produces MUCH different results. Most oppose government option (huge majority, when cost is mentioned). When offered this choice of a particular item of "reform," tort reform polls fairly well, as does portability and guaranteed insurability. Individual mandate? Not so much.

9. Cap and tax polls poorly in any poll with anything like a reasonably worded question. When Manbearpig's new book comes out, in which he ADMITS that he can't sell his global warming BS on the facts, so he's now selling it as a religious "duty", this ain't going to get better for Nancy, Harry and The One.

I dunno, but if it was me, and I were a Dem strategist looking at the 2010 midterms, I'd be crapping in my drawers.

But then, I'm just a bitter racist, who clings to guns and religion.

"I'd have to do some research on the polls numbers you're quoting (like who did the polls and what were the questions)."

Quinnipiac, PPP, and that other one (can't remember name, starts with an "R")

"Interestingly, I heard in passing on Jon Stewart the other night that the majority of Americans are FOR a public option."

Sure, depending on how question is asked - add anything relating to COST of same, poll numbers drop like a rock. This be my surprised face - people want free goodies, but don't want to pay for them.

"I think, as I've said before, that the Right has been downright brilliant in whipping up fear, loathing and anger since Obama was elected."

Oh, he's been doing quite a good job on his own, but we're happy to help. 'Course, NO ONE from the Left did ANYTHING like that when W was in office, did they? That, Laura, was so rich in lack of self(and party) awareness that I am simply gobsmacked by the disingenuousness of such a claim.

"(Guess that's how they're spending their free time since they sure aren't legislating.)"

I sure as hell HOPE so! I can't understand why liberals just don't "get it" that we DON'T WANT more legislation. Don't want it; don't need it. Most of what's wrong with our country right now is the direct result of dumbass legislation to solve "problems" that were either non-existent, not appropriate for government intervention, or both, and the wholly-predictable unintended consequences thereof.

"Fox has added to the atmosphere with their subsidized "tea parties.""

Given your post above, I find your dismissal of the exercise of First Amendment rights by your political opponents richly hypocritical. And NO, Fox did not subsidize the Tea Parties. Fox DID subsidize a bus tour to go attend/film them - representing, what, less than 1% of the people in attendance at same? Go to one, talk to the people there. You might be surprised what you find.

"But I haven't seen a whole lot of problem solving from the right that would convince me to vote for any of them (with a few minor exceptions)."

That's because our solutions aren't sufficiently collectivist/statist/"social justice" for you. We HAVE solutions - you just don't like them. The Republican health care reform bill costs less than $70 billion, and reduces the deficit by more than that Pelosi abortion - but it's "free market" oriented, so liberals HAVE to oppose it. God forbid that free market solutions actually be adopted and work - the Left would be out of business.

"As to clinging to guns and religion, I think you cling more to purist economics and American Exceptionalism."

I guess, in this day and age, it is almost to be expected that a thorough academic grounding in economics, and an understanding of the rigor of TRUE economic analysis, is seen as a bad thing. Color me guilty - and COMPLETELY unapologetic. Until all liberals learn enough economics to understand the basic truth of TANSTAAFL, we are in grave danger (TANSTAAFL = "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.")

American Exceptionalism? Again, guilty as charged, and even LESS apologetic. It could accurately be said that I believe in Western European (historical) Civilization Exceptionalism, but America is the truest and most advanced flowering thereof.

"Bitter racist? Who said that?"

Obama - but from him, I take it as a compliment.