Is Sen. Nelson out of touch with Florida on drilling?
That's the suggestion of Ron Sachs, whose PR firm is working for a mystery group of pro-drilling investors and whose "Sachs Poll" on the Florida political landscape also happened to include a series of questions on drilling.
The results of that industry-funded part of the poll: 55 percent of likely voters (80 percent of Republicans, 36 percent of Democrats and 51 percent of independents) generally support drilling for oil off Florida's coast. That number goes higher of course, when Mason-Dixon, threw in sweeteners like, Would you support drilling if it provided lots of money for schools, health care, roads, in Florida? (71 percent support). Would you support drilling if it generated thousands of new jobs? (72 percent support). If you were convinced it was environmentally safe (78 percent) or not visible from shore (65 percent). Or if offshore drilling resulted in you being surrounded by gorgeous dancing girls or boys, candy, and showered in hundred dollar bills (kidding).
Sen. Bill Nelson, who has been leading the charge against drilling was also tested in the poll, which found 37 percent of voters recognized him favorably, 19 percent recognized him unfavorably, 33 percent were neutral, and 11 percent don't recognize him.
"Florida's senior senator is highly regarded, but it appears he is not in touch with what the vast majority of Floridians believe on this energy issue,'' Sachs told the Buzz.
*

Sachs should poll to see how voters feel about the Republican legislators who voted to spend $6 million on an airplane hangar.
Posted by: Drilling another Great Sansom Idea | June 30, 2009 at 12:50 PM
or if you were polled by an organization that slanted the questions to get results they were paid for (80 percent support) mistakenly thought that it would lower gas prices (79 percent support) mistakenly though that the gas would be used by Americans (82 percent) were shown pictures of the oil and tar washed up after Katrina (2 percent support) were shown a picture of a fat cat in a Hummer shouting "Drill Baby Drill! (3 percent support) were shown a picture of Dick Cheney sending our youth to fight in Exxon-Mobil War in Iraq (0 percent support) were shown a picture of George Bush in bed with Saudi Royal family and bin Ladens (0 percent support) were shown a picture of Sarah Palin in church (result not available too much laughter)
Posted by: You get what you pay for | June 30, 2009 at 01:01 PM
In a related story:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CALIFORNIA_POLLUTION?SITE=FLPET&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Call it nationalization if you want, but getting the greedy CEOS out of the auto industry and putting them under government supervision was the only way to bust the anti-environmental lobby and get some meaningful laws passed. If only Bush had enforced some emissions standards the big 3 wouldn't be broke right now.
Posted by: you can blame Obama if you want, but it was bush and the conservatives that bankrupt the big 3 | June 30, 2009 at 01:18 PM
Sachs is a tool; get real.
Posted by: Sach this! | June 30, 2009 at 01:25 PM
Nelson isn't out of touch on this one. Take the corporations and their lies out of it, tell people the God's honest truth about what ruining the coast of Florida WON'T do for them and you'd find that he is dead on. Gas prices won't get lower, it won't lower our dependence on anyone else and it will just line the pockets of the big companies even more. And yes, shocker, it WOULD affect our water and beaches. But hey, those in charge don't have any problem with selling out this state and everything good about it as long as it is a pay off for them. Yes, Charlie, that includes you too.
Posted by: No, he's not out of touch | June 30, 2009 at 01:29 PM
1:01 I read this article and immediately had a response come to mind,scrolled down,you already posted it.
I love the whole "mystery group" thing also.
this year expected checks from Alaska's permanent fund (oil royalty fund)is expected to be considerably less because of crude prices are drastically down.
If these checks are as many people think going to be in the range of $1,500.00 and $2,100.00 considering there are 840,000 people eligible to receive money and here in Fl we would have over 18 million residents that would be eligible to receive royalty funds and couple that with the far less amount of crude that is available our royalty checks could possibly be as high as $20-$32(twenty to thirty two dollars) a year.
Also look at the tourist industry in Texas,they have miles and miles of beach right? Well you know the beautiful sand beaches of Florida,they have sand beaches in Texas also,they are just not very pretty with all the little tar balls and goo.
I see written all the time about this greedy generation using far more natural resources then past generations and this is true,if we are to worry about what to hand down to our Grand Children,lets think first about conservation and last about drill baby drill.
The biggest mistake our party has made in many decades was to become pro oil,many in our party complained when Bill Clinton propped up oil prices a year after he took office and now look at us!!!
There is not one single thing wrong with our party being conservative.
We just need many of the pseudo conservatives out of office and replace them with real conservatives.
These guys are killing us!
Posted by: Fl Republican | June 30, 2009 at 01:40 PM
Sounds like a Times-type poll, LOL, but with a different ending.
Posted by: Bud | June 30, 2009 at 01:41 PM
I say DRILL BABY DRILL!!
Posted by: Sick of RINOs | June 30, 2009 at 01:45 PM
Democan't at 01:18 - You are such a dweeb. The breakup of American auto manufacturing was merely about busting unions and relieving Americans of the one blue-collar job that allowed a decent living. You think American factories will start making only enviro-mobiles once they become warts on the butt of a world manufacturing conglomerate? You fool. The big , gas-guzzling cars are what people buy, so that's what will get produced...whether it says Chrysler on the label or Fiat. Your own socialist President sold out the American worker.
Posted by: Buzzard. | June 30, 2009 at 01:51 PM
The answer is, "no."
Posted by: see above | June 30, 2009 at 01:53 PM
Yeah, who needs beautiful beaches anyway? Who needs tourism?
Man I just love those beaches in Texas and Louisiana, don't you?
There is no debate, don't drill, put your money elsewhere. Its going to take ten years to get any oil, if we worked at it, we could be off of oil completely by that time.
Republicans have a hard time doing this, but its best to look forward to the future, to have a plan, not to focus on the energy of the past or what's right in front of your face right now.
After the Democrats make major gains from redistricting, things will start to move in the right direction.
Posted by: Almond brother | June 30, 2009 at 01:56 PM
Why are the "journalists" reporting a push poll as if it had any scientific validity?
Senator Nelson is not at all out of touch.
Here is a question for the next survey: "Do you support drilling off Florida's coast if all of the oil is sold on the global market and is not guaranteed for domestic use, nor will it reduce the cost of gasoline by any appreciable amount?"
Even some Republicans might say no to that.
Posted by: Alex | June 30, 2009 at 02:12 PM
What about our existing businesses? Hotels, fishing and other mostly small businesses make up Florida's $560 billion a year coastal economy. And support of the rigs -- storage, pipelines and transport -- are the main threats of causing an oil spill. Is the risk worth it?
Posted by: Tampa Bay Conservative | June 30, 2009 at 02:22 PM
CRASH BABY CRASH… just as long as our oil buddies make CASH BABY CASH!
Posted by: Floriduuh's economy | June 30, 2009 at 02:45 PM
Senator Nelson out of touch with Florida citizens on offshore drilling:
Ya think?!
Common sense asks:
1) Should we just leave it in the ground under the sea?
2) Tourism industry:
How far down has your business gone lately?
3) Real estate industry:
How's that real estate business been for you lately?
4) Government spending proponents:
How have your preferred spending programs done lately?
5) Drivers:
Which direction are those gas prices going, now and in the future?
6) Senator Nelson:
Why are you fighting so hard to convince voters of the evils of drilling, if we already know its small dangers but want it anyway?
Waaaay out of touch!
Posted by: whasup | June 30, 2009 at 03:56 PM
If cap and trade forces energy costs as high as Obama intends, you will see this is gain even more importance and popularity.
Posted by: Jimbo | June 30, 2009 at 03:56 PM
If whasup ever had a decent bone in his body, they made him take it out when he joined the Fascist-Libertarian Party.
Posted by: whasup mclance the heartless anarchist and moneygrubber | June 30, 2009 at 04:04 PM
Wake up people. Florida is at risk of a spill from the tremendous amount of tankers it takes to keep gasoline in our cars. We're a peninsula for heaven's sakes! The fuel comes here on a boat. Why isn't Sen. Nelson doing something to ban tanker traffic? Because tourism (heavily dependent on oil) would come to a crashing halt without gasoline to fuel cars, natural gas to light hotels and jet fuel to fuel jets.
Posted by: oil fuels florida | June 30, 2009 at 04:14 PM
Look at the horrible beaches in Texas and Louisiana to see what off-shore drilling is capable of doing to our state.
Perhaps, the Senator is out of touch with repiggie lobbyists.
So what?
Posted by: how 'bout them repiggies | June 30, 2009 at 04:40 PM
4:40. I keep hearing about the horrible beaches in Texas and Louisiana.
Louisiana's beach is basically a bayou -not much sand. Pensacola and Mobile are both as close to oil rigs as anywhere in Texas and Louisiana. Both have nice beaches.
I am not sure how much beach Louisiana has anyway, seems mostly swampy. But I haven't been past New Orleans, at least sober.
Posted by: Gator(R) | June 30, 2009 at 05:10 PM
oops sort of repeated myself
Posted by: Gator(R) | June 30, 2009 at 05:12 PM
What matters in this discussion is how many miles from the coast for the drilling.
Posted by: Paul D. Harvill | June 30, 2009 at 08:12 PM
What you "drill baby drill" people don't understand is that our entire economy in Florida is based on tourism. Trying to entice us with promises of jobs and royalties has no weight here. If you destroy tourism we have NOTHING. There are no other industries in Florida if you allow drilling here you will destroy the only thing we have. We do not need big oil to "save" us we are doing just fine. Keep your jobs, keep your filthy money, and save the propaganda because no one here is buying it.
Posted by: Chris | July 01, 2009 at 01:55 AM
Numerous polls have consistently showed that Americans & Floridians support drilling for more oil.
Why is Sen Nelson against voters wishes?
Posted by: Carl | July 01, 2009 at 04:33 AM
Numerous polls (all sponsored by Exxon-Mobil, Chevron, and Rupert Murdoch) have consistently shown that Americans & Floridians, only when presented with lies, half truths, and propaganda, support drilling for more oil.
Why is Sen Nelson against Big Oil's wishes?
Posted by: Carly (recently "reassigned") Norquista | July 01, 2009 at 04:43 AM
5:10 You should know Gator(R); you seem to spend much of your time wallowing in slime.
Oops, sorry, I shouldn't be so rude. Actually, I kind of skim past your posts anymore.
Posted by: Gator(D) | July 01, 2009 at 04:47 AM
4:47
You certainly skim them, if not past them. While I think we ought to consider drilling, I would hope the decision would be based on facts.
Do the beaches in Texas suck, and is it because of oil rigs?
How much money do states that allow offshore drilling make?
How many jobs would be created in Florida? Would most be out-of-state workers that fly in and out?
What is the risk of a significant spill?
What would the impact of such a spill be on Florida's coast?
Would rigs be visible from shore? I have read they are temporary and drilling can be done under water? I don't know.
What is impact on sea life? I have heard good and bad.
What is impact on military?
How much oil is there? Will it add significantly to global supply potentially impacting prices? Will it be enough to help trade deficit, or reduce reliance on foreign oil?
My main complaint is that what I read comes from one side or the other and rarely is objective.
We can and should reduce consumption in a responsible and sensible manner, but if we can produce more oil in a safe and cost-effective way, I say go for that as well.
Posted by: Gator(R) | July 01, 2009 at 09:31 AM
When Crist follows polls, everyone criticizes because he's not showing leadership. Nelson knows this "poll" is just flat wrong, and that so many people have been misled by the oil companies.
There's not enough oil there to make a difference, especially weighed against the risk of a spill. People may get caught up in histeria and lies, but no reason a real leader should support wrong-headed thinking.
Posted by: Nelson Wright | July 01, 2009 at 01:06 PM
There is absolutely no reason to drill for more oil. Sen. Nelson is not out of touch - 95% of people are. Try reading about all the new technology that is out there and has been evolving for the past 10 years. If the 95% would just be aware of it, they would understand that destroying our beaches and the planet is not feasible nor the answer.
Try reading some of the stuff here:
http://www.peswiki.com/index.php/Congress:T100:Sterling%27s_List
Then think about what YOU can do to further promote some of those products rather than drilling! Try thinking out of the box for a change.
Posted by: Sasha | July 01, 2009 at 02:18 PM
Those "polls" you guys love to cite were conducted by an oil company PR firm using carefully worded questions. You will always have the hard core "drill baby drill" crowd but their numbers are small. You guys have to rely on manipulation and spin to win over people who don't truly understand what drilling would mean for Florida.
Posted by: Chris | July 01, 2009 at 02:48 PM
gator @ 9:31,
"We can and should reduce consumption in a responsible and sensible manner, but if we can produce more oil in a safe and cost-effective way, I say go for that as well."
This will get you thrown out of the (R) party now-a-days.LOL
Actually its the extremists in the party that have become so OIL oriented.
The Republican party of not too long ago was "conservative" not only in name
We were taught frugality,now we are told by Cheney types that frugality and conservation of resources are a matter of personal vanity. PERSONAL VANITY? Yeah had me with that one too.
This drill baby drill thing has one ultimate goal,give huge assets to the oil industry right now.
Posted by: when did the cash grab begin? | July 01, 2009 at 03:39 PM
gator @ 9:31,
"We can and should reduce consumption in a responsible and sensible manner, but if we can produce more oil in a safe and cost-effective way, I say go for that as well."
This will get you thrown out of the (R) party now-a-days.LOL
Actually its the extremists in the party that have become so OIL oriented.
The Republican party of not too long ago was "conservative" not only in name
We were taught frugality,now we are told by Cheney types that frugality and conservation of resources are a matter of personal vanity. PERSONAL VANITY? Yeah had me with that one too.
This drill baby drill thing has one ultimate goal,give huge assets to the oil industry right now.
Posted by: when did the cash grab begin? | July 01, 2009 at 03:39 PM
Public Support for Sotomayor Falls
After Supreme Court Reversal
Rasmussen Reports
A heavily publicized U.S. Supreme Court reversal of an appeals court ruling by Judge Sonia Sotomayor has at least temporarily diminished public support for President Obama's first Supreme Court nominee. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey, conducted on the two nights following the Supreme Court decision, finds that 37% now believe Sotomayor should be confirmed while 39% disagree.
Posted by: Bill Nelson is the biggest tool i've ever met. | July 01, 2009 at 03:49 PM
Conservation works,we recently saw that with a drastic reduction in cost when our consumption went down.
If we can keep our government from Giving cash to buyers of the very largest of SUV's (over 6000 lbs) ever again will be one way to not create a desire and then resulting habit of buying these gas guzzlers will help also.
Another fault in Governmental intervention like the one concerning cash payments for gas guzzlers was the industry ramped up production towards gas guzzlers so when gas did rise so high and the bad policies of Reagan Bush caught up to us,our companies were not ready.Toyota was ready as were most import auto companies.
It was this intervention that helped create the current problem with car companies.
We need to have the same cash payments to ultra high fuel mileage vehicles and it would help crude consumption as well as feed the buying frenzy like it did for the gas guzzlers.This will help our wallets as well as help the industry.Using less oil is win-win!
Posted by: not all conservatives are extremists | July 01, 2009 at 04:06 PM
"This will get you thrown out of the (R) party now-a-days.LOL
Actually its the extremists in the party that have become so OIL oriented.
The Republican party of not too long ago was "conservative" not only in name
We were taught frugality,now we are told by Cheney types that frugality and conservation of resources are a matter of personal vanity. PERSONAL VANITY? Yeah had me with that one too.
This drill baby drill thing has one ultimate goal,give huge assets to the oil industry right now."
I agree 100%. I'm a Republican I am strongly opposed to any and all drilling in Florida. This is not about "tree hugging" and supporting dictators this is about reality. Any thinking person can see this would do nothing for the price of gas and would come at a very high cost to Florida. No amount of royalties will be able to undo the damage to our environment and our economy after a spill. I have argued with many of my conservative friends about this, some agree and some don't. The majority who disagree don't really have much of a reasoned argument they simply parrot oil lobby talking points.
Posted by: Chris | July 01, 2009 at 04:54 PM
Don't these dolts realize that going "green" would stimulate a industry that could rival that of tech and at the same time save resources for future generations.The oil industry does not "give" to our society,the oil industry
takes,takes,takes.
TAKES from the environment,in the case of gas guzzlers,TOOK an entire industry to the brink of extinction,TAKES money from us and the thing that angers the extremists the most,TAKES oil money out of the coffers of extremist think tanks!
Posted by: Go green | July 01, 2009 at 05:21 PM
It can't be about Royalty payments,
they are estimated by some to be $20.00
or less if production is lower then expected and this would only be after years and years.
The only benefactors would be in oil industry or maybe political parties that are oil friendly.
I like cap and trade because it puts money in green tech,this green tech will last for ever.Oil? we don't know but many places in Texas have ceased pumping because of low levels.
Posted by: Go green | July 01, 2009 at 05:27 PM
To: Carl | July 01, 2009 at 04:33 AM ---
What matters in this discussion is how many miles from the coast for the drilling.
Posted by: Paul D. Harvill | July 01, 2009 at 08:53 PM
"What matters in this discussion is how many miles from the coast for the drilling."
This has nothing to do with not being able to see the rigs. The current would quickly spread any spill down the entire west coast and up the other side. 200+ miles sounds pretty good to me.
Posted by: Chris | July 01, 2009 at 09:17 PM
What they are talking about "off our coast" could be beach line @ low tide out to 100 miles.
After all the lies surrounding all the spills during katrina I realized you can not trust the current Republican politicians and especially the far right news/commentary.
The biggest flip flop was Peyoush "bobby" Jindal,before the Bushies came out of hiding Jindal was screaming about all the spills,after the bushies came out of hiding Peyoush went into denial mode,there were no spills.
You can find links on both sides of Jindal,pre-spill,after-spill.
Posted by: Peyoush first said there was oil everywhere,then after talking to bushies,it was,,,what spills. | July 01, 2009 at 09:21 PM
truth be told: Once gas prices goes above $3.00/gal the majority of the people will be yelling "DRILL BABY DRILL"
"GET OIL FROM USA INSTEAD OF THE MIDDLE EAST"
Posted by: Carl | July 02, 2009 at 04:14 AM
truth be told: Once gas prices goes above $3.00/gal the majority of the people will be yelling "DRILL BABY DRILL"
"GET OIL FROM USA INSTEAD OF THE MIDDLE EAST"
Posted by: Carl | July 02, 2009 at 04:14 AM
truth be told: Once gas prices goes above $3.00/gal the majority of the people will be yelling "DRILL BABY DRILL"
"GET OIL FROM USA INSTEAD OF THE MIDDLE EAST"
I try to have faith that people aren't that stupid. But you're right, even if there's not a single ounce of truth in any of those statements people will fall for it. That's how politicans get elected by making ridiculous promises. I hear offshore drilling won't just lower the price at the pump 20 years from now, but will also make you appear taller and more attractive to the opposite sex. And rumor has it with all the new technology it's an effective cure for baldness as well.
Posted by: Chris | July 02, 2009 at 02:20 PM
Chris - Really?
Drill, Baby, Drill
Posted by: Gator(R) | July 02, 2009 at 02:52 PM
Boy, you read a lot of dumb things when you read comments posted to news articles, but the liberal who implied that the oil industry is why the Louisiana coast isn't the tourism draw that the Florida coast is takes the cake.
The Louisiana coast is a marshy, muddy mess without breakers. That's it's natural state. Would you rather go beaching on sand or muck? And that muck isn't oil, it's nature.
Posted by: Dan M | July 03, 2009 at 09:30 AM
Obama 'meddles' in Honduras -- and chooses the wrong side
Cold comfort that The Won has become so predictable.
Posted by: Bill Nelson supports the Marxist--Leftists in Honduras-----he needs to retire and live out his sad life and reflect on all the debt he foists upon our children | July 03, 2009 at 09:50 AM
Obama 'meddles' in Honduras -- and chooses the wrong side
Cold comfort that The Won has become so predictable.
Posted by: Bill Nelson supports the Marxist--Leftists in Honduras-----he needs to retire and live out his sad life and reflect on all the debt he foists upon our children | July 03, 2009 at 09:50 AM
"Boy, you read a lot of dumb things when you read comments posted to news articles, but the liberal who implied that the oil industry is why the Louisiana coast isn't the tourism draw that the Florida coast is takes the cake.
The Louisiana coast is a marshy, muddy mess without breakers. That's it's natural state. Would you rather go beaching on sand or muck? And that muck isn't oil, it's nature."
------------------------------
What about Texas then?
Posted by: Chris | July 04, 2009 at 02:30 AM
Don't you guys get it? Floridians don't want drilling. You can try and spin it and shape the debate all you want but at the end of the day you're not going to change people's minds. There might have been some wavering during the presidential election but 2008 is over. Drilling will always be a loser in Florida and if you try and impose it on us against our will you can bet there will be a backlash at the ballot box. If the politicians want to keep their jobs they would do well to listen to what the people want and not to what the oil lobby tells them the people want.
Posted by: Chris | July 04, 2009 at 03:07 AM
Donald Trump says there is plenty of oil. Bill Nelson is in touch. No destin dome. Alaska shares oil money with the citizen, if we were to drill where is our share? The citizens if they drill have a right to the wealth
Posted by: john | July 06, 2009 at 02:53 PM