PoliGAF 2010: Home Of "By The Time I Get To Arizona"

Status
Not open for further replies.
The real problem with the bill is not so much that it does things wrong but that it's not clearly defined and it lies with the agency governing the exchange to interpret it. Kinda like our constitution, we know we're guaranteed affordable plans, standards of coverage and the like but without any specifics before they just start making checks out to insurance companies there's really no guarantee that it will be good. Of course, there's also no guarantee it will be bad either, but concerning such a large change in our country I think to use the word irresponsible would be an understatement.

So essentially, one's outlook on the bill itself is completely formed by one's opinion of whether or not government is good without any facts, outside of some things that are good to certain individuals no matter who runs the exchange, like people under 27 that can stay on their parents insurance, people who can now get insurance that couldn't before because of exceptions, for them there's a marked improvement because even if the end product sucks, they still get to buy into that product that they couldn't before.

In a way, I don't really think any of the scenarios spell out outright doom and gloom, I mean, insurance in this country sucks but no matter who runs the exchange and how consumer friendly they are things won't change that much, the whole concept is just ingrained in us.

But I still, and always will, that this was one hell of a stupid move when it could have done better.
quadriplegicjon said:
Is that what we are saying? *Scratches head*
Click to expand...
Essentially yes. It could be a failure of written language if you prefer but when read aloud everyone on this page essentially says it's insane not to support the bill which is essentially saying no bad will come of it.
 
Tamanon said:
Why do Americans need to see immediate results?
Click to expand...


Because the fears have not been abated by words (yet) and that's all there will be to change public mood back the other way once the bill is passed. People aren't going to wake up the next day after it passes and say, "whew, everything's okay now!" Their fear and cynicism has been built up over decades and a few days and sunny speeches won't undo that.

Of course, other calamities or concerns can trump that or an improved economy can erase those feelings. But neither of those things are a sure thing.
 
Tama: You don't... but that's why it's such a disaster. The longer they keep this going (fuck, can they even manage to set an all time low again and push this back once more), the more the public will be weary. I'm worried that it's reached the point that no matter what they pass, people will reject it for the simple fact that they grew tired and distrustful of the whole process that has been ongoing for how long now...
 
Cool post by Nate Silver, where he asks, "Which Democrats are under Primary Pressure on Health Care Vote?"

primary.png


Lots of work to do in New York!
 
Diablos said:
Tama: You don't... but that's why it's such a disaster. The longer they keep this going (fuck, can they even manage to set an all time low again and push this back once more), the more the public will be weary. I'm worried that it's reached the point that no matter what they pass, people will reject it for the simple fact that they grew tired and distrustful of the whole process that has been ongoing for how long now...
Click to expand...

So....then what's your other option? Take more time for some bizarre reason? Not do anything? You're creating a narrative where there's no possible answer, it's classic Diablos.
 
Tamanon said:
So....then what's your other option? Take more time for some bizarre reason? Not do anything? You're creating a narrative where there's no possible answer, it's classic Diablos.
Click to expand...
Well, my solution is to take time to do the bill right and say fuck the public opinion on it at that point, because that's why we're a representative democracy and not a direct democracy, the politicians job is to do what's best for the voters interest and that doesn't always line up with following opinion polls.
 
mAcOdIn said:
Essentially yes. It could be a failure of written language if you prefer but when read aloud everyone on this page essentially says it's insane not to support the bill which is essentially saying no bad will come of it.
Click to expand...


Except it's not a failure of written language. I like how you decry hyperbole, while spouting hyperbole. The bill is far from perfect, it has many issues.. but it is better than what we have now, and it leaves the door open for further reforms. THAT is why I am supporting it.
 
quadriplegicjon said:
Except it's not a failure of written language. I like how you decry hyperbole, while spouting hyperbole. The bill is far from perfect, it has many issues.. but it is better than what we have now, and it leaves the door open for further reforms. THAT is why I am supporting it.
Click to expand...
It's not better than what we have now for everyone and it leaves the door open for future reforms as much as anything would, including doing nothing. It's like everyone's wishing upon the same star.
 
Diablos said:
Tama: You don't... but that's why it's such a disaster. The longer they keep this going (fuck, can they even manage to set an all time low again and push this back once more), the more the public will be weary. I'm worried that it's reached the point that no matter what they pass, people will reject it for the simple fact that they grew tired and distrustful of the whole process that has been ongoing for how long now...
Click to expand...
Well that's true. But it is also being intentionally distorted and turned into a doomsday device by Fox News, Tea Parties, Limbaugh and all their friends on radio. There's too much stupid these days. The noise will keep getting worse. So its imperative to pass the bill within next two weeks before another break. Hell, even I'm tired of the whole damn thing and just want it to get it over with.
 
mAcOdIn said:
Well, my solution is to take time to do the bill right and say fuck the public opinion on it at that point, because that's why we're a representative democracy and not a direct democracy, the politicians job is to do what's best for the voters interest and that doesn't always line up with following opinion polls.
Click to expand...

They've been working on the bill for over a year, I'm pretty sure there's nothing that additional time could possibly do.
 
Tamanon said:
So....then what's your other option? Take more time for some bizarre reason? Not do anything? You're creating a narrative where there's no possible answer, it's classic Diablos.
Click to expand...
No, I don't have a solution nor did I say I did. I'm saying that they dropped the ball in the summer of last year and as a result may very well have damaged their reputation for years to come. They allowed the process to go on for far too long. If they pass it, the public will retain the amount of fear and distrust they've had for a while now, and hopefully, as economic conditions improve/other things happen/people are able to see the new legislation working for them, that will dwindle. But that's risky at this point, considering Democrats are quite vulnerable this year, and who knows what 2012 will bring. If they don't pass it, they'll look like even bigger pussies than they've been over the past few months and Obama will take one step closer to being a lame duck not even halfway through his first term.

They've shot themselves in the foot either way, at this point, really. Incompetence would be the driving factor. The White House was far too removed, the Senate is corrupt, and Harry Reid is a fucking idiot.
 
mAcOdIn said:
It's not better than what we have now for everyone and it leaves the door open for future reforms as much as anything would, including doing nothing. It's like everyone's wishing upon the same star.
Click to expand...


You are delusional if you think that doing nothing now will leave the door open for reform any time soon. and no shit the bill won't be better for everyone, but it will be better for the majority of Americans.. thus, it's a better system overall than what we have now.
 
Tamanon said:
They've been working on the bill for over a year, I'm pretty sure there's nothing that additional time could possibly do.
Click to expand...
There is, define everything in the exchange part and I would be happy. Let people know what they are getting.

All the other problems it has can easily be fixed, in fact I all but expect the specifics to be wrong, I doubt that the income rate to qualify for assistance will stay where it is, I doubt the tax per employee will stay where it is, I doubt the fine for not carrying insurance will stay where it is, they may play around with what percentage the insurance companies can keep so I doubt that's permanent, hell even the language I want defined in the bill would be changed over time, but I think it should be defined and made obvious for all to see what coverage people will get before it passes and what that minimum of coverage will be.

My main gripe, and I think most reasonable people's gripe would probably be alleviated if they picked a popular plan and cloned it and made that the standard for the exchange in the bill itself instead of using more general terms, it's not enough to know there will be a standard of coverage or different levels of coverage we need to more or less know what they are, instead of assuming based on our assumptions of government that they'll be crap or not, we need to know more or less what the target average deductible and co pays are and not just get hollow words like affordable, even though I fully expect them to change in the future.

Everything budget wise people gripe about, well that will be griped about until the end of eternity once it passes, there's no way to get that perfect in the first place, health care will always be a work in progress.

I, personally, will never be happy with any bill based on the current structure but if this one were at least clearly defined I could support it on it's own "merits" despite the fact I'd hate every bit of it.
quadriplegicjon said:
You are delusional if you think that doing nothing now will leave the door open for reform any time soon. and no shit the bill won't be better for everyone, but it will be better for the majority of Americans.. thus, it's a better system overall than what we have now.
Click to expand...
Well, just as delusional as thinking that the political climate will be favorable for this bill in the future is I guess.

If health care is truly getting worse and worse in this country every year why exactly would demand for reform not get higher and higher if we left it alone?

You've got this kind of mentality, "it's these guys or never" and it's definitely not true. We can make it true by just accepting what these guys pass, then it'll be history and indisputable that this congress was the congress that did something but that doesn't change the fact that someone will have to do something sometime and if it isn't these guys someone else will do it. Now I'll admit that doing nothing also poses risks as well, even if demand for reform rose every year the reform, say, a Republican congress would give us would look strikingly different and probably be an even worse plan than this one is.
 
Tamanon said:
Eh, most of the fear is based upon hyperbole. When it passes and none of the proposed bad things occur then poof, no "toxic" problem.
Click to expand...

Considering many provisions don't go into effect for years, I could see this being harped on for years on the republican side. And imagine all the "elderly woman dies in hospital after not receiving care in time" chain emails that will be spreading around this summer.
 
PhoenixDark said:
Considering many provisions don't go into effect for years, I could see this being harped on for years on the republican side. And imagine all the "elderly woman dies in hospital after not receiving care in time" chain emails that will be spreading around this summer.
Click to expand...
Is this supposed to be worse than "_____ ______ can't pay for healthcare" emails that I get now from democrats?
 
Via TWI, House Republicans say they can't block the House procedurally in their plan to pass the reconciliation bill with a self-executing provision considering the Senate bill "deemed" as passed.

House Republicans say they cannot block a Democratic maneuver that would allow Members to avoid a separate vote on the Senate health care bill.

“There is nothing that can prevent it,” said Rep. David Dreier (R-Calif.), the ranking member of the Rules Committee. “It’s something they can clearly do if they have the votes."

Of course, that's not preventing Dreier from attacking it.

Dreier ripped the plan as “trying to avoid the accountability of an up-or-down vote” and said it violated Pelosi’s pledge of an open and transparent Congress. “It pains me to see,” he said.

You know what's coming next, right?

"When Republicans were in the minority, they railed against self-executing rules as being anti-deliberative because they undermined and perverted the work of committees and also prevented the House from having a separate debate and vote on the majority's preferred changes....

When Republicans took power in 1995, they soon lost their aversion to self-executing rules and proceeded to set new records under Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.). There were 38 and 52 self-executing rules in the 104th and 105th Congresses (1995-1998), making up 25 percent and 35 percent of all rules, respectively. Under Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) there were 40, 42 and 30 self-executing rules in the 106th, 107th and 108th Congresses (22 percent, 37 percent and 22 percent, respectively). Thus far in the 109th Congress, self-executing rules make up about 16 percent of all rules.

On April 26, [2006] the Rules Committee served up the mother of all self-executing rules for the lobby/ethics reform bill. The committee hit the trifecta with not one, not two, but three self-executing provisions in the same special rule. The first trigger was a double whammy: “In lieu of the amendments recommended by the Committees on the Judiciary, Rules, and Government Reform now printed in the bill, the amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of the Rules Committee Print dated April 21, 2006, modified by the amendment printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, shall be considered as adopted in the House and the Committee of the Whole.”

And which Republican was chairing the Rules Committee in April, 2006? Why, David Dreier, of course.
Click to expand...
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/3/15/846539/-The-Mother-of-All-Self-Executing-Rules

lol
 
PhoenixDark said:
Considering many provisions don't go into effect for years, I could see this being harped on for years on the republican side. And imagine all the "elderly woman dies in hospital after not receiving care in time" chain emails that will be spreading around this summer.
Click to expand...
For a party that lied us into a war and crashed the economy, it is amazing how powerful GOP seems to be. I mean geez, Bush had like a 30% approval rating leaving office and Cheney even less. Pretty amazing how the GOP has turned around their image. . . . and it is not like Obama even fucked up anything big.

I guess Obama gets blamed for the deficit even though that is a bit unfair. But it is not like we got hit with a big terrorist attack, the economy got worse, we entered a new war, or we lost a city to the sea.
 
speculawyer said:
For a party that lied us into a war and crashed the economy, it is amazing how powerful GOP seems to be. I mean geez, Bush had like a 30% approval rating leaving office and Cheney even less. Pretty amazing how the GOP has turned around their image. . . . and it is not like Obama even fucked up anything big.

I guess Obama gets blamed for the deficit even though that is a bit unfair. But it is not like we got hit with a big terrorist attack, the economy got worse, we entered a new war, or we lost a city to the sea.
Click to expand...
I don't think they're all that powerful, I think the perception is they're that powerful, which causes the Democrats to plan and act as if they're that powerful, which then filters out to the people via their actions and then they believe they're that powerful which then makes it true.

Unless we're talking procedural hurdles, which a different thing than I typed about still every bit as troubling and baffling, but then anyone who chooses to wield that power can, so I guess it wouldn't be power so much as dickery.
 
You guys saw how Obama called out Kucinich when he gave his speech in Ohio earlier today?

Just more proof that he could go out and fight for something useful if he wanted to. You know, like the PO....

bububu he's only ONE president! What could HE possibly accomplish?! :(
 
mAcOdIn said:
Well, my solution is to take time to do the bill right and say fuck the public opinion on it at that point, because that's why we're a representative democracy and not a direct democracy, the politicians job is to do what's best for the voters interest and that doesn't always line up with following opinion polls.
Click to expand...

That's nice in theory. If Republicans actually wanted to help pass a good healthcare bill, then yeah I would say take all the time they need. The problem is Republicans aren't coming to the table as honest brokers. They absolutely DO NOT want Obama to sign a quality healthcare bill. They feel it will lead to a democratic majority for the next decade or so if Obama has any major domestic accomplishment. So the Republican strategy is to either stop it outright or water it down massively so it can be shown to be ineffective. And then you have moderate Dems who are in the pockets of the insurance industry, which taints their motivation.

Given all of that in our current political climate, it's pretty much impossible to get a really good HCR bill. For now, the best thing is to get a good stepping stone that can be improved and modified by future generations. Dragging it on for another year (in an election year no less), means it will die a slow agonizing death, not get better.

Who knows, maybe the Dems will suffer for passing a mediocre HCR bill and instead of passing a good one. If so, that's on the Dems for mismanaging the whole process. But with a HCR bill on the books, at least it can be improved even if Obama is long out of office.

In our instant gratification society, we've lost the ability to do things for the "greater good" for future generations. If we don't see the benefits of healthcare reform in the next 8 months, we cry about it.
 
The Chosen One said:
That's nice in theory. If Republicans actually wanted to help pass a good healthcare bill, then yeah I would say take all the time they need. The problem is Republicans aren't coming to the table as honest brokers. They absolutely DO NOT want Obama to sign a quality healthcare bill. They feel it will lead to a democratic majority for the next decade or so if Obama has any major domestic accomplishment. So the Republican strategy is to either stop it outright or water it down massively so it can be shown to be ineffective. And then you have moderate Dems who are in the pockets of the insurance industry, which taints their motivation.

Given all of that in our current political climate, it's pretty much impossible to get a really good HCR bill. For now, the best thing is to get a good stepping stone that can be improved and modified by future generations. Dragging it on for another year (in an election year no less), means it will die a slow agonizing death, not get better.

Who knows, maybe the Dems will suffer for passing a mediocre HCR bill and instead of passing a good one. If so, that's on the Dems for mismanaging the whole process. But with a HCR bill on the books, at least it can be improved even if Obama is long out of office.

In our instant gratification society, we've lost the ability to do things for the "greater good" for future generations. If we don't see the benefits of healthcare reform in the next 8 months, we cry about it.
Click to expand...
Well my main issue with THIS bill is the language, that doesn't require starting over, just amending the thing, I don't think anyone'd have a real problem with that and it could be done rather quickly. I'm actually amazed at how specific parts of the bill are and yet how vague others are.

But I don't see why we even bother bringing up Republicans, Moderate Democrats are the only ones worth talking about, Republicans won't vote yes to anything.
 
Then that means Healthcare would need to be shelved for at least a year. Moderate Dems won't start acting reasonable until mid-terms are over.

The problem though that a year from now Healthcare will be even more toxic than it is right now. Every politician will treat it like Chernobyl.
 
Monday's campaign round-up
from Washington Monthly by Steve Benen
Today's installment of campaign-related news items that wouldn't generate a post of their own, but may be of interest to political observers.

* With a closely-watched Senate race in Nevada this year, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's (D-Nev.) re-election prospects may depend, at least in part, on whether there's a Tea Party candidate splitting the right. At this point, the Tea Party of Nevada is apparently in the midst of an intense conflict with Tea Party Nation -- the latter believes the former is phony.

* In Illinois' key Senate race, Rep. Mark Kirk (R) launched his first television ad of the general election today. He uses the word "Republican," but also highlights the word "independent" in an on-screen graphic.

* Florida's gubernatorial campaign is eight months away, but neither state Attorney General Bill McCollum (R) nor state CFO Alex Sink (D) are especially well known.

* Carly Fiorina's (R) increasingly odd Senate campaign in California seems to have a real fondness for creating bizarre web videos.

* Corporate D.C. lobbyist Dan Coats (R), running for the Senate in Indiana, claims to hate the 2008 financial industry bailout. His lobbying record, however, paints a different picture.

* Lansing Mayor Virg Bernero's (D) gubernatorial campaign in Michigan got a boost on Friday when the state AFL-CIO endorsed him.

* And in 2012 news, Minnesotans have seen Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) up close for two terms, and a majority of them have no intention of supporting his presidential campaign. Probably not a good sign.​
 
Monday's Mini-Report
from Washington Monthly by Steve Benen
Today's edition of quick hits:

* Mexico: "President Barack Obama is 'deeply saddened and outraged' at news of the murders of a federal employee and two relatives of workers at the U.S. consulate in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, an administration spokesman said."

* Netanyahu is sorry U.S. officials are upset, but Israel isn't changing course: "In the face of sharp American disapproval of an Israeli plan for an East Jerusalem building project, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu firmly rejected Monday any curbs on new Jewish settlements in and around Jerusalem."

* And predictably, GOP leaders are attacking the Obama administration for being unhappy with Israel.

* Step one is done: the House Budget Committee voted 21 to 16 this afternoon to send the final health care reform package to the House Rules Committee. Two Blue Dogs -- Texas's Chet Edwards and Florida's Allen Boyd -- voted with Republicans. Both voted against reform in November.

* Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) kicks off his initiative to reform the way Wall Street does business. The White House is pleased. More surprisingly, Elizabeth Warren seems to like the plan, too.

* Good to see industrial productionedge up.

* Eyeing an overhaul of No Child Left Behind.

* Student aid bill "hobbles forward."

* Fantastic interview with Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens from Jeff Toobin. Of particular interest: Stevens will retire before the end of Obama's first term.

* Fareed Zakaria on the success of Obama's approach to Pakistan.

* After Rep. Dennis Kucinich's (D-Ohio) votes against health care, against the hate crimes bill, against the Democratic budget, against the cap-and-trade bill, and against financial regulation, Nate Silver considers the liberal lawmaker's value to the Democratic Party.

* Utah's House Republican majority leader resigned in the wake of his under-age, hush-money, hot-tub scandal. Probably a good idea.

* Fact Checking the Sunday Shows.

* Harry Reid issued a statement today, noting that he still expects his wife to make a "full recovery."

* And on a related note, I'm reminded why I don't miss reading right-wing blogs: one relatively prominent conservative blogger suggested, in print, that Reid's wife should be "euthanized." He was apparently making an insane observation about why he hates health care reform.​
 
I never ceased to be amazed that the Republicans have gotten any traction whatsoever with their "start over on HCR" talking point. It's like there's some mass amnesia that people forget DeMint's "Waterloo" statement about how the Republicans are against this administration passing *any* HCR *at all.*.
 
LosDaddie said:
I'm more surprised Dems are supposedly organized enough to send out chain emails like the Repubs do.
Click to expand...
True fact: 4% of all internet traffic is comprised of Democrats trying to find a middle ground with bounced emails they themselves sent.
 
Mike M said:
I never ceased to be amazed that the Republicans have gotten any traction whatsoever with their "start over on HCR" talking point. It's like there's some mass amnesia that people forget DeMint's "Waterloo" statement about how the Republicans are against this administration passing *any* HCR *at all.*.
Click to expand...

But the only traction they're getting is among people who already agree with the waterloo sentiment.
 
cntrational said:
* With a closely-watched Senate race in Nevada this year, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's (D-Nev.) re-election prospects may depend, at least in part, on whether there's a Tea Party candidate splitting the right. At this point, the Tea Party of Nevada is apparently in the midst of an intense conflict with Tea Party Nation -- the latter believes the former is phony.
Click to expand...
Don't know how to feel about this one. If liberal groups really are behind it, it seems a small step beyond the shenannigans the RNC were doing funding the Green Party campagins to split the opposition vote during the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections. It was a dick move then, it's a dick move now.
 
Mike M said:
I never ceased to be amazed that the Republicans have gotten any traction whatsoever with their "start over on HCR" talking point. It's like there's some mass amnesia that people forget DeMint's "Waterloo" statement about how the Republicans are against this administration passing *any* HCR *at all.*.
Click to expand...
So. Again, they've excused themselves from the discussion and process so who cares? besides, if we want to split hairs then Jan Schakowsky statement the public option was to lead to single payer and I believe Barney Frank actually called it a Trojan Horse, it's like asking us to believe one groups individual members but not another and we had people here telling us that it wouldn't be a Trojan. Hmm.....

But, standard partisan hypocrisy aside I'll concede that the Republicans are definitely all playing by the same handbook while the Democrats are not, so I guess you win.
The Chosen One said:
Then that means Healthcare would need to be shelved for at least a year. Moderate Dems won't start acting reasonable until mid-terms are over.

The problem though that a year from now Healthcare will be even more toxic than it is right now. Every politician will treat it like Chernobyl.
Click to expand...
To make a bill that I'd like they'd need to start over, to make a bill that I don't feel is completely irresponsible they should or should have already taken a week, any week, and hammered out some details while they were worrying about abortion language and shit like that.

A mandate with exchange needs a stronger "Bill of Rights" type language in the bill than is present to prevent the scenario of it becoming hell, that's all I'm saying, to not include it is irresponsible and dangerous as it leaves the quality of coverage up to the whims of the present government, which could be red or blue.

Seriously, how some of it can be so defined it's painful to read and other parts are not is boggling.
 
I work down the street from my congressman's office. Theres a 'STOP HEALTHCARE PROTEST' going on right now. Last I counted, there was a grand total of two people - but one does have a five foot sign mounted on his car saying Impeach Obama and Barney Frank.
 
Democrats should just make it easier for themselves by starting impeachment procedures early, like during the primaries. You know it's coming, might as well get ahead of it so you can start your term with it out of the way.
 
dave is ok said:
I work down the street from my congressman's office. Theres a 'STOP HEALTHCARE PROTEST' going on right now. Last I counted, there was a grand total of two people - but one does have a five foot sign mounted on his car saying Impeach Obama and Barney Frank.
Click to expand...

huh, so that's the work ethic conservatives are always talking about.
 
To Mr. Macodin,

Putting off health care reform does not open the way to a better bill or new reforms. I spent all day yesterday reading news articles and policy papers from 1912 until 1993, and all that's happened as a result of putting off reform is a scaling down of ambitions as the problem worsens. The issues of today are almost identical to the issues of 1932, health care-wise, only they've become predictably more acute over the years.

Fellow forum poster in good faith,

Flightofheaven
 
Fighting in Jerusalem . . . Shocking! How could this have happened?

JERUSALEM (Reuters) – Palestinians mounted violent protests in Jerusalem on Tuesday and President Barack Obama's Middle East envoy canceled plans to return to the region as a U.S.-Israeli crisis over Jewish settlement plans deepened.

Hundreds of rock-throwing Palestinians clashed with police in several locations in East Jerusalem, which Israel captured in a 1967 war along with the West Bank. Police responded with teargas and rubber bullets.

"We have come to throw stones because that's all we have and the situation in Jerusalem is dangerous," one protester said in a confrontation at an Israeli military checkpoint, reminiscent of the early days of a Palestinian uprising that began in 2000.

Medical officials said at least 40 Palestinians were treated in hospitals in the most serious flare-up in the holy city in months. Police said two policemen were hurt.

The violence was another challenge to U.S. efforts to revive Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, which were suspended in December 2008 but had looked set to resume in the form of indirect negotiations under U.S. mediation.
Click to expand...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100316/wl_nm/us_palestinians_israel
 
Mike M said:
Don't know how to feel about this one. If liberal groups really are behind it, it seems a small step beyond the shenannigans the RNC were doing funding the Green Party campagins to split the opposition vote during the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections. It was a dick move then, it's a dick move now.
Click to expand...

i've said it before (probably in this thread) but liberals should be funding tea party candidates across the country to help blunt some of the losses in '10. all fair is love and war...
 
Incognito said:
i've said it before (probably in this thread) but liberals should be funding tea party candidates across the country to help blunt some of the losses in '10. all fair is love and war...
Click to expand...

Agreed.
 
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/03/16/house.health.care/?hpt=T2

This is what a democrat said...

" Health care reform is needed, but the bill before us is too expensive, does not adequately address rising medical costs and skyrocketing insurance premiums, and tries to do too much too soon," McIntyre said in a statement Monday, confirming his opposition to the legislation.

"We simply cannot afford to create a new federal bureaucracy that costs nearly $1 trillion when our national debt is $12 trillion and there is no plan in place to address it. I will not vote for it."
Click to expand...

How can he stand up and say shit like this? You dumbass...what do you think the whole reform is about? Are he and the other blue dog dems against reform not reading the same plan that we are reading. He, Stupak and the rest disgust me. What the fuck does "doing too much too soon" mean? So we should just sit by and trickle in reform bit by bit? Heck there is no single payer or public option...isnt that slow enough for you? And for those dems crying about the abortion langauage, cry me a river. So you are going to hijack a bill that can save millions of people and regulate the insruance empire becuase of abortion language. Really? That is what is so important right now...abortion over a massive health insurance regulation that has never been done? smh

Sorry for the rant, but seeing shit like this despairs me. We need to get this reform out of the way and begin the many other reforms. I seriously cannot wait for immigration reform...
 
Interesting

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/7450237/Barack-Obama-threatens-to-withdraw-support-from-wavering-Democrats.html

Barack Obama threatens to withdraw support from wavering Democrats

The president will refuse to make fund-raising visits during November elections to any district whose representative has not backed the bill. A one-night presidential appearance can bring in hundreds of thousands of dollars in funds which would otherwise take months to accumulate through cold-calling by campaign volunteers. Mr Obama's threat came as the year-long debate over his signature domestic policy entered its final week.
Mr Obama is personally telephoning congressmen who are still on the fence this week, in between several personal appearances devoted toward swinging public opinion.
Click to expand...
 
JoeBoy101 said:
:lol

His support isn't what it used to be. The edge has certainly dulled on that particular blade. Hell, most dems who don't support the bill are likely Blue Dogs who DON'T want him to show up.
Click to expand...

Even at Bush's WORST, he still helped raise mucho dinero for candidates. Barack is still publicly popular and therefore will bring in the $$$. Don't discount this thread as being insignificant.
 
LovingSteam said:
Even at Bush's WORST, he still helped raise mucho dinero for candidates. Barack is still publicly popular and therefore will bring in the $$$. Don't discount this thread as being insignificant.
Click to expand...
He raised money from social conservatives, but was walking kryptonite to everyone else.
 
LovingSteam said:
Even at Bush's WORST, he still helped raise mucho dinero for candidates. Barack is still publicly popular and therefore will bring in the $$$. Don't discount this thread as being insignificant.
Click to expand...

Bush helped raise money for the RNC, but his support for specific candidates started waning in the 2004 elections and dropped off from there. Sure, he could bring in money, but his presence would provide attack fodder and galvanize the opposition.

Similar circumstances here. He's personally popular, and you're right, he'll bring in the big dollars. But it will fuel attack ads and galvanize opponents, so the question becomes is it worth it. For some, it might, but again, if they aren't supporting the bill, it is likely over fears of November.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
I don't get parasocial relationships.
6
610
reinking replied
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood 2 in the works at Netflix -- written by Quentin Tarantino, directed by David Fincher
2
58
2K
DKehoe replied
  • Locked
I think it's time we take off and nuke Reddit from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
3
676
Aesius replied
It seems like the older I get, the more conservative I get. Is it because young people are the worst?
2
91
4K
StreetsofBeige replied
How's Arizona Bros
37
2K
SpiceRacz replied
Top Bottom