We're still waiting for the video to be clipped, but folks watching MSNBC earlier this hour saw what will undoubtedly be an instant Youtube classic: Markos hitting Tom Tancredo so hard in response to Tancredo's attacks on the Veterans Affairs department that Tancredo scampered off set. Here's what Markos had to say that set Tancredo into flight:

"Tom, I'm a veteran. I did not get a deferment because I was too depressed to fight in... Vietnam."

The video...

Though the right wing blogs have tried to write an apocryphal history of the special election in New York's 23rd congressional district, the fact is that Democrat Bill Owens ran on a platform that included support for healthcare reform and won. Now Owens, freshly sworn in as a United States Congressman, is reiterating his support for healthcare reform.

Rep. Bill Owens (D-NY) can be counted on as a "yes" in this weekend's expected vote on the House Democrats' health care bill, announcing his support in a press release.

"This legislation will reform the insurance industry and provide increased access to affordable healthcare without taxing healthcare benefits, cutting Medicare benefits or raising taxes on the middle class, and that is exactly the direction we need to go," said Owens. "There are still changes I would like to make, including raising the payroll exemption for small businesses, but like I said last week, there is a fundamental need for reform and we must act with a sense of urgency."

With Owens' support, as well as that of California's new Congressman John Garamendi (whose office confirmed to me this afternoon his intention to vote in favor of healthcare reform), Speaker Nancy Pelosi is now two votes closer to the 218 required to get H.R. 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act, through the House and on to the Senate. Still waiting to hear, though, whether Michael Barone or anyone else is willing to take me up on my bet that Pelosi will get her 218...

Some in Congress seem to be suggesting that healthcare reform should be scrapped, or seriously curtailed, do to the poor state of the economy and the jobs market. The American people disagree.

Nearly six in ten Americans want Congress to continue working on health care reform bills that have been passed through various committees, according to a new national poll.

Fifty-nine percent of people questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey say lawmakers should continue working on the legislation, a rise of 6 points since August. But only a quarter say those bills should be passed pretty much as is, with a third suggesting that Congress should make major changes. The poll also indicates that one in four say lawmakers should start from scratch and 15 percent want Congress to stop all work on health care reform.

The CNN poll also finds that a majority of Americans, 55 percent, support the public option.

Coming in the wake of an election day that can be read as hostile to the current Democratic agenda (even as Democrats swept the two races actually involving the Democratic agenda on Capitol hill, including one in a congressional district much of which has not sent a Democrat to Congress in more than 150 years) and on the eve of the historic House vote on healthcare reform, these numbers could strengthen the hands of those whipping for 218 in the Democratic leadership. Certainly little in these numbers would lead me to want to renege on my offer to wager on the results of this weekend's healthcare vote in the House (the benefits of which would go to charity). But we'll have to wait and see.

Research 2000, polling for Daily Kos, answers in the affirmative, finding that while the Democrats lead overall on the generic congressional ballot -- which the aggregate of all polling agrees with -- the Republicans lead by a wide margin (49 percent to 20 percent) in the South.

Ipsos released its own polling yesterday, sponsored by McClatchy newspapers, which also showed the Democrats holding a lead on the national ballot (48 percent to 41 percent overall). Wondering whether the trend picked up in Research 2000 polling held firm across other surveys, I reached out to Ipsos to see if I could get a regional breakdown of their 2010 results. They obliged (and thanks to Ipsos for doing so):

First things first, it's important to note that the margin of error for the unweighted subsamples is higher than it is for the poll overall. Due to the size of these groups, the margin of error ranges from plus or minus 5 percentage points to plus or minus 7 percentage points.

That said, it's interesting to note that Ipsos does not find the same regional discrepancies on the 2010 ballot question as does Research 2000. In fact, where Research 2000 found a wide lead for the Republicans in the South, Ipsos actually sees a Democratic lead. (Go figure.)

Is one right and the other wrong? I don't think this is exactly the right question, at least not now, one year out from election day. What I do think, though, is that the differences between these results compel further analysis over the coming months, analysis that can only be undertaken if pollsters (a) are surveying sufficient numbers of people so that margins of error are not too large, and (b) are releasing regional breakdowns of their generic congressional ballot questions so that even if margins of error for smaller subgroups are larger, in the aggregate across polls they can nevertheless inform us about the regional coalitions that will help decide the make up of the next Congress.

Take a gander:

The Club for Growth has been one of the most successful entities in the nation in electing Democrats to Congress. Whether it was helping force Bill Sali (Idaho) and Tim Walberg (Michigan) through GOP primaries in 2006, only to see both lose reelection bids in 2008; unsuccessfully primarying Linc Chafee (Rhode Island) in 2006, weakening him for the general election (which he eventually lost); pushing Andy Harris (Maryland) and Steve Pearce (New Mexico) through primaries against moderates into general elections they ended up losing in 2008; or, most recently, forcing Dede Scozzafava out in the special election in New York this week, easing the Democrats' path to victory, the Club has been remarkably effective at helping Democrats win elections.

Now that the Club is turning its sights on Charlie Crist, Florida's moderate Governor and GOP Senate aspirant, the real question is (as I asked on Twitter yesterday) just how long does Crist stay in the GOP primary before jumping ship to run as an Independent or even a Democrat (a la Arlen Specter)?

The cause of healthcare reform receives a huge boost today:

Today AARP announced its endorsement of the Affordable Health Care for America Act (H.R. 3962) and the accompanying Medicare Physician Payment Reform Act (H.R. 3961). The Association's support follows nearly two years of work with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle to craft a health care reform plan that meets the needs of AARP's nearly 40 million members and all older Americans. Among those needs are reforms that strictly curb insurance companies' discrimination against older Americans and Medicare improvements that strengthen benefits while protecting the program for future generations.

This isn't too bad of news, either:

The American Medical Association endorsed the House Democratic leadership's health care reform bill Thursday.

It's "not a perfect representation of our views," but is close enough to warrant the support of the organization, AMA President Dr. J. James Rohack said.

Two days out for the forthcoming House vote on healthcare reform, I'm feeling more in more confident that the Democratic leadership will be able to round up the 218 votes in favor of their legislation. Still wondering, though, if Michael Barone or any of the other naysayers are going to be willing to take me up on a bet -- the beneficiary of which would be charitable -- that healthcare reform will pass through the House on Saturday.

From the latest Ipsos poll (.pdf) commissioned by McClatchy newspapers:

I know it is a long way off, but thinking about the elections in 2010, if the election for U.S. Congress were held today, would you vote for the Democratic candidate or the Republican candidate in your district where you live? (IF "CANDIDATE FROM ANOTHER PARTY/WILL NOT/DO NOT PLAN TO VOTE/DK/REF", ASK: If you had to choose, would you lean more towards the Democratic candidate or the Republican candidate?)*

Initial Democratic Candidate: 43 percent
Lean Democratic Candidate: 5 percent
Lean Republican Candidate: 6 percent
Initial Republican Candidate: 36 percent

Total Democratic Candidate: 48 percent
Total Republican Candidate: 41 percent

These numbers don't look too different from the overall trend, per Pollster.com:

If the Republicans are on the verge of a major comeback in next year's congressional elections, shouldn't they be improving rather than sinking relative to the Democrats in the generic congressional ballot questions?

Not a huge surprise, but the Republicans' healthcare amendment would do literally nothing to decrease the percentage of Americans without coverage, per the CBO (.pdf):

By 2019, CBO and JCT estimate, the number of nonelderly people without health insurance would be reduced by about 3 million relative to current law, leaving about 52 million nonelderly residents uninsured. The share of legal nonelderly residents with insurance coverage in 2019 would be about 83 percent, roughly in line with the current share. CBO and JCT estimate that enacting the amendment's insurance coverage provisions would increase deficits by $8 billion over the 2010-2019 period. [emphasis added]

I suppose the Republicans might try to argue that their proposal succeeds at stemming the growth in the uninsured, so to that extent at least their proposal doesn't do nothing. But it doesn't do much more than nothing.

According to polling from Bloomberg news, 61 percent of Americans believe it to be "critically important" to "[f]ind a way for those who are currently uninsured to get health insurance coverage," a goal just 8 percent believe to be not that important or a bad idea.

If the Republicans believe it to be good politics to line themselves up with the minority of Americans disfavoring efforts to decrease the proportion of uninsured in this country, then by golly they've struck gold. But if they were hoping to present some sort of alternative to the Democrats' efforts at healthcare reform, something that anyone -- whether Beltway pundits or voters around the nation -- could have taken at least somewhat seriously, they have more or less failed.