• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2013 |OT3| 1,000 Years of Darkness and Nuclear Fallout

Status
Not open for further replies.
Here's a fun game we can all play. Let's guess which insane right-wing outlet said the following:



Answer:
The New York Times.

In 2010 Obama already had 8 (!) Katrinas.

And as someone who lived in New Orleans people really should shut up about using Katrina as political short hand. The response of the government there not only killed people but disrupted thousands of lives and one of Americas greatest cities. Bush let a major America city suffer because of his incompetence.

Personally I can't wait for Ramirez's "Heck of a Job Sebelius" cartoon
 

zargle

Member
In 2010 Obama already had 8 (!) Katrinas.

And as someone who lived in New Orleans people really should shut up about using Katrina as political short hand. The response of the government there not only killed people but disrupted thousands of lives and one of Americas greatest cities. Bush let a major America city suffer because of his incompetence.

Personally I can't wait for Ramirez's "Heck of a Job Sebelius" cartoon

Well, he would already be too late, not that that would be out of character.

139307_600.jpg
 
The bigger WTF in that story is right-wingers actually acknowledging Iran-Contra:

1. Existed
2. Was a BAD thing

Actually, perhaps you jogged my thinking into understanding his view better.

No, they don't think Iran-Contra was a bad thing . . . they just regret getting caught and having to take the political damage for it. And perhaps that is what he thinks of Obamacare . . . he knows it is not really a bad thing but he is going to try to inflict as much political damage because of it.
 

Diablos

Member
I'm not arrogant, Diablos, I am simply looking at the fundamentals of the situation and, seeing there is nothing to be concerned about in the long term, not panicking.

I said once that this thread feels much like it did after the first debate in 2012:
1. PD was trolling and/or believing some of the stuff he said.
2. Pigeon, Black Mamba, and I were looking at the fundamentals and not freaking out.
3. You were panicking.

Present:
1. PD is trolling and/or believing some of the stuff he says.
2. Black Mamba, Pigeon, and I are looking at the fundamentals and not freaking out.
3. You are panicking.

I really don't feel like going through this a second time. :|
1. PD trolls sometimes but I think his criticism is understandable here. More than understandable. I believe he is right when stating that there's way too much damage control/spin going on in regards to this not being that big of a deal. At the very least it is going to haunt Dems through Jan/Feb.

2. Look at the fundamentals all you want, this is the lowest point in Obama's Presidency and he is losing influence on his party. Clinton basically told him he fucked up in the nicest way possible. Also, the botched first debate was all about messaging. The botched rollout of hc.gov and the panic/rage/what have you afterwards is over something that is a controversial LAW, something that Democrats have stood by in the best and worst of times politically since 2010. Next year is going to be critical. If Democrats lose the Senate and some previously tossup/safe Gov chairs over this, for example, it's going to set up a horrible precedent for 2016. Even Hillary will be in a bad position because it's her party and thus her law to defend.

3. I'm not panicking so much as I am pissed. Pissed that the rollout was handled so poorly. Yes, new websites that have to deal with loads of traffic often have issues but not this severe. I'm also pissed about everyone overreacting to something that would not have been made as big of a deal if the website would just work as intended. It would have calmed a lot of nerves. Now we've opened a pandora's box of sorts and it's just going to be a mess trying to mop this up over the next couple years. I think it is way too early to assume that by this time next year, healthcare won't be a thorn in the Dems' side. I don't disagree when people say the cancellation notices aren't that dire or that the website woes as time goes on will prove to be mostly overblown. I disagree with the notion that the vast majority of Americans who are the least bit politically aware (and vote) are going to see things in the same light. Especially people who just read headlines. Look at Google News right now: "US News & World Report: House approves its own health care fix, but Obama opposes it". When Joe Voter reads that what's he going to do? Blame the GOP? LOL. Is anyone in this thread thinking about these implications? Not from your standpoint of being an intelligent and informed voter, but from the standpoint of the typical ignorance that goes along with attitudes in polling and elections? The icing on the cake is that Obama is usually aware of this, except for when it comes to something like his signature domestic achievement.

Diablos at least be glad the rollout happened in non election year and not during October 2012. Also people saying Obama am doooomed. Not at all.
See above.

Reid wont allow it.
Yeah and what happens if Reid loses his majority status next year? Ever think of that? It is entirely possible now. We were basically heading into pure tossup territory post-shutdown and that was before healthcare.gov/cancellations set in the minds of the public. Dems could get clobbered over not only this but also what seems to be a growing unease about Obama's overall leadership (or lack thereof), whether you agree or disagree with the criticism.

Too much diablosing on this thread.

Keep calm and carry on.
So tired of this expression, everywhere I go there is a product or shirt with a variant of this.

JUST IN: In mild rebuke to Obama, 39 Democrats help pass GOP bill on health care reform in the House
It was inevitable. I only expect it to grow.

APKMetsfan said:
Why do politicians make horrible analogies?
No idea, but it's never good to see that from the standpoint of just reading the headline and gobbling it up. Dems are freaking out clearly, never a good thing.
 
If Dems lose the Senate. If Dems lose seats in the House. if If if.

The fundamentals of next year's race aren't in place outside of things that haven't changed and won't (GOP still anti-gay, anti-immigration, etc).

If the Obamacare website is terrible in March, then we can worry. Why should you bother with these hypothetical? Obama's approval rating today is meaningless.

What matters is that the website is functioning in time and enough people buy insurance. Nothing that is true today will necessarily be true tomorrow. none of us here, as far as I know, work on the Obamacare website and thus we cannot have an affect on that. What is the point of all this worrying right now. You don't need to state the obvious that if the website still sucks in march, the dems are in trouble. We all know this. But it's so far away.

Take a step back and breathe. You're wasting energy. Yeah, I get that you're peeved that it hasn't been smooth so far, we all are. But seriously, you need to relax a bit. You should be more focused on the WH/Dem push for a UE extension as that is in the near term and affects you and about a million other people and is very fucking important.

Stop talking and worrying about 2014. Nothing about Obamacare today will affect 2014. NOTHING.


On the lighter side:

Donnie WahlbergVerified account
‏@DonnieWahlberg
Why dump 600,000,000 taxpayer dollars into healthcare website?
Why not dump $2,000,000 in the pockets of 300,000,000 U.S. taxpayers instead?

LOLOLOLOL
 

Wilsongt

Member
If Dems lose the Senate. If Dems lose seats in the House. if If if.

The fundamentals of next year's race aren't in place outside of things that haven't changed and won't (GOP still anti-gay, anti-immigration, etc).

If the Obamacare website is terrible in March, then we can worry. Why should you bother with these hypothetical? Obama's approval rating today is meaningless.

What matters is that the website is functioning in time and enough people buy insurance. Nothing that is true today will necessarily be true tomorrow. none of us here, as far as I know, work on the Obamacare website and thus we cannot have an affect on that. What is the point of all this worrying right now. You don't need to state the obvious that if the website still sucks in march, the dems are in trouble. We all know this. But it's so far away.

Take a step back and breathe. You're wasting energy. Yeah, I get that you're peeved that it hasn't been smooth so far, we all are. But seriously, you need to relax a bit. You should be more focused on the WH/Dem push for a UE extension as that is in the near term and affects you and about a million other people and is very fucking important.

Stop talking and worrying about 2014. Nothing about Obamacare today will affect 2014. NOTHING.


On the lighter side:



LOLOLOLOL

Fucking math. How does it work?
 
1. PD trolls sometimes but I think his criticism is understandable here. More than understandable. I believe he is right when stating that there's way too much damage control/spin going on in regards to this not being that big of a deal. At the very least it is going to haunt Dems through Jan/Feb.
Nothing PD has ever said can be classified as astute or perceptive political commentary. Just so you know.

Off year elections can be used to gauge voter satisfaction with the president's party. In 2009 Christie got swept in in New Jersey while Democrats were swept out in Virginia. In 2013 Democrats took all three statewide elections in Virginia for the first time since the 1980s, and while Christie was reelected by a large margin, Democrats didn't lose one seat in the state legislature. Not to mention Cory Booker held down the Senate seat easily even after concern trolling that he'd be the next Martha Coakley.

Everything that we're talking about now was an issue last Tuesday.
 
Question cause I'm tired of "you don't want to move there all the jobs are leaving to Texas" re: California.

I was talking and mentioned I would be looking in California for tech/software engineering jobs and keep getting told everyone is moving out and honestly sounds like bullshit so I wondered if anyone could clear that up?
 
Nothing PD has ever said can be classified as astute or perceptive political commentary. Just so you know.

Off year elections can be used to gauge voter satisfaction with the president's party. In 2009 Christie got swept in in New Jersey while Democrats were swept out in Virginia. In 2013 Democrats took all three statewide elections in Virginia for the first time since the 1980s, and while Christie was reelected by a large margin, Democrats didn't lose one seat in the state legislature. Not to mention Cory Booker held down the Senate seat easily even after concern trolling that he'd be the next Martha Coakley.

Everything that we're talking about now was an issue last Tuesday.

Whatever.

With respect to these off year elections...dunno. The Virginia wins were big but I just don't think NJ tells us anything. If it wasn't for the storm, Christie would have been dealing with near 10% unemployment as the main narrative and would have faced a very focused, well funded Cory Booker. Instead Christie cruised to victory as an above the fray savior of NJ; that title applies to him alone, not other state republicans who have to actually run on their records or beliefs.

2014...I think we can safely say there will not be a wave election, which means democrats will not win the House. But it's too early to tell which side is fucked. It's going to come down to the economy and Obamacare. Will we be at 6.7 unemployment by next October, for instance? It's possible. Likewise will the ACA website be up and running? Almost certainly yes. On the flip side if the economy still sucks and Obamacare is still struggling, republicans will gain support.

I think voters don't want to reward democrats, but don't want republicans in charge of shit. How they strike that balance, who knows.
 
http://queenofspainblog.com/2013/11/13/we-just-enrolled-in-obamacare/

can't be overlooked/forgotten that the law is going to help a whole lot of folks.

It is. Which is why the website issues that happened are inexcusable. Well, some are expected but the magnitude of issues here are bad. And not allowing people to shop for plans without registering...wtf

I am now wondering if the administration should have done a phased rollout. Working in software implementation, that has been the norm for us for large implementations.
 

teiresias

Member
Was on the treadmill at the gym and saw (wasn't listening to it) that CNN did a segment on the "threatening letters" that insurers have been sending people. It would be nice if the talk of Obama's "fix" moving responsibility to the insurers actually gets the media to look into what the insurers do a bit more.

About three TV screens to the right, though, was Fox News (this one had closed captioning on, so I could follow it a bit more) complaining about Obama moving responsibility to the insurers. I had to stifle a laugh as the irony of conservatives complaining about responsibility being assigned where it actually belongs washed over me.
 
speaking of the website issues, apparently my premise that the government was largely responsible for the invention of the internet was too ridiculous for people on twitter to accept
 
Question cause I'm tired of "you don't want to move there all the jobs are leaving to Texas" re: California.

I was talking and mentioned I would be looking in California for tech/software engineering jobs and keep getting told everyone is moving out and honestly sounds like bullshit so I wondered if anyone could clear that up?
fuck that noise, SF is still the busiest place for software engineering
 
http://queenofspainblog.com/2013/11/13/we-just-enrolled-in-obamacare/

can't be overlooked/forgotten that the law is going to help a whole lot of folks.

Yeah, I'm sick of all the bitching & moaning. Some 95% of the people are NOT AFFECTED AT ALL about the various Obamacare woes. They get healthcare from their employers, medicare, medicaid, got a better plan on Obamacare, etc. It is only a small percentage of people that are affected.

But nearly 50% of the country hates Obama. The hate him because of abortion, higher taxes, racism, or whatever. Those are going to nit-pick every little teeny-tiny little thing that goes wrong. And they'll false complain about things that are not Obamacare's fault or would have happened anyway (like a lot of policies being cancelled). And they'll ignore every single person that is helped.

So you gotta just ignore most of the whinging. Listen to some, evaluate it, see if there are things that could be adjusted, see if they actually have a better plan . . . but most of it just should be dismissed because it will be worked out eventually or it is just kvetching over small number of cases.
 

bonercop

Member
good news!


A key official in the repair effort for HealthCare.gov said the site's error rate is now lower than 1 percent thanks to weeks' worth of special improvements were made.

Former White House budget director Jeff Zients, who was enlisted to triage the website, touted the development as a sign of progress.

ADVERTISEMENT
But he refused to say whether the system had fully turned the corner since its botched rollout on Oct. 1.

"It's likely that, as we move forward, we'll find additional glitches," Zients said on a call with reporters.

"Our bottom line continues to be that by the end of November, we will have the site working smoothly for the vast majority of users."


The administration is hoping to fix the site by Nov. 30, a self-imposed deadline designed to assuage criticism over the system's faulty launch.

The cut-off date has additional significance as millions of people receive notices that their insurance policies have been canceled.

The wave of notices has created a political firestorm for the White House, culminating in President Obama's announcement that insurers can continue to offer canceled plans for one year to people who previously had them.

In a bid to spurn the White House, the GOP-led House also voted Friday to allow insurers to sell canceled policies to any customer for one year.

A significantly improved ObamaCare enrollment site is seen as one development that could help turn the news in Obama's favor.

But many users are still facing serious problems with the system, casting doubt on how quickly the repair effort is moving.

Technicians working on the site are also facing headwinds as more and more people log in to purchase coverage.

Applicant numbers are expected to rise week on week until Dec. 15, the cut-off for people to enroll if they want plans that begin Jan. 1.

Zients said his next priority is adding capacity to the system, which is currently handling 20,000 to 25,000 users at one time.

He noted that there were no unscheduled outages on the site in the past week, a positive sign, and that more than 60 bugs were recently fixed.


The call was not fully positive, however, as Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services spokeswoman Julie Bataille acknowledged that some insurers are still receiving flawed application data.

"We are actively working on with issuers ... to put that fix in place as soon as possible," Bataille said.
 
Question cause I'm tired of "you don't want to move there all the jobs are leaving to Texas" re: California.

I was talking and mentioned I would be looking in California for tech/software engineering jobs and keep getting told everyone is moving out and honestly sounds like bullshit so I wondered if anyone could clear that up?

People have moved out of California (mostly poorer people) to Texas but jobs have not. It's a myth.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/trulia/...-leaving-california-for-texas-but-people-are/

In fact, tech industries are continually moving into California. They want to be here, not in a place like Texas.

It should be noted Texas' job gains are largely in oil or low wage jobs. They're not having any special tech surges outside oil.

Also: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57562186/california-leads-nation-in-job-creation/
 

Diablos

Member
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303789604579199611237337606

William Galston, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a former policy adviser to President Bill Clinton, called the vote a troubling sign after the president apologized Thursday and took responsibility for fumbling the rollout of the health law. "It's not going to be enough to do one contrite press conference," he said. "He needs to show that he's in touch and in charge and that he understands how important it is to get it right the second time, having failed to get it right the first time."
And what do you suggest he do, Mr. Galston? Support the Upton bill?

It is at times like this how much I remember that the Clintons will nearly roll over for any GOP proposal when the politics go south...
 
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303789604579199611237337606


And what do you suggest he do, Mr. Galston? Support the Upton bill?

It is at times like this how much I remember that the Clintons will nearly roll over for any GOP proposal when the politics go south...

Dick Morris had a editorial in The Hill last week titled 'Time for Triangulation' I laughed when I saw it. It was even worse when after reading it I had no idea what its point was.
 
Do conservatives not understand that the Compromise of 1850 is not a good thing to be idolizing (Is it any wonder they can't win minority votes)? These people live in a different world were any 'compromise' is good.

George Will wrote a whole article about why we should be looking for another Compromise of 1850 in our current immigration debate. Yeah, we need to compromise with a bunch of radicals who still went to war (why this bill is often described as 'saving the nation' when all it did was postpone a war), never mind the fact that the 'compromise' keep slavery around and strengthened the Fugitive Slave Act. Real model legislation there.

These are what 'serious' republicans think. The republican party is insanely radicalized but they're still taken seriously. I don't get it.
 

Diablos

Member
Whatever.

With respect to these off year elections...dunno. The Virginia wins were big but I just don't think NJ tells us anything. If it wasn't for the storm, Christie would have been dealing with near 10% unemployment as the main narrative and would have faced a very focused, well funded Cory Booker. Instead Christie cruised to victory as an above the fray savior of NJ; that title applies to him alone, not other state republicans who have to actually run on their records or beliefs.

2014...I think we can safely say there will not be a wave election, which means democrats will not win the House. But it's too early to tell which side is fucked. It's going to come down to the economy and Obamacare. Will we be at 6.7 unemployment by next October, for instance? It's possible. Likewise will the ACA website be up and running? Almost certainly yes. On the flip side if the economy still sucks and Obamacare is still struggling, republicans will gain support.

I think voters don't want to reward democrats, but don't want republicans in charge of shit. How they strike that balance, who knows.
Even I think the aca site will be running by next year during election tim.e But if people are still mad about their dropped policies and such and/or enrollment sucks that will be a big prob for dems

i need to stop drinking this wine
 

Chichikov

Member
Do conservatives not understand that the Compromise of 1850 is not a good thing to be idolizing (Is it any wonder they can't win minority votes)? These people live in a different world were any 'compromise' is good.

George Will wrote a whole article about why we should be looking for another Compromise of 1850 in our current immigration debate. Yeah, we need to compromise with a bunch of radicals who still went to war (why this bill is often described as 'saving the nation' when all it did was postpone a war), never mind the fact that the 'compromise' keep slavery around and strengthened the Fugitive Slave Act. Real model legislation there.

These are what 'serious' republicans think. The republican party is insanely radicalized but they're still taken seriously. I don't get it.
Is George Will retarded?
WTF is that shit?
 
Is George Will retarded?
WTF is that shit?
I think it reveals a lot about the modern GOP that they're self identifying with the antebellum south and slavery defenders (Don't call them out on this or your the radical racist/provocateur ). It also shows their hagiography of the 1800s which sucked for non land-owning whites. They view history through a very sanitized lens that completely washes away the reality for the vast majority of people.

Don't know how this didn't generate the outrage that Cohen's piece did. Cohen is just a doofus, Will is taken seriously.
 

Chichikov

Member
I think it reveals a lot about the modern GOP that they're self identifying with the antebellum south and slavery defenders (Don't call them out on this or your the radical racist/provocateur ). It also shows their hagiography of the 1800s which sucked for non land-owning whites. They view history through a very sanitized lens that completely washes away the reality for the vast majority of people.

Don't know how this didn't generate the outrage that Cohen's piece did. Cohen is just a doofus, Will is taken seriously.
His argument doesn't make sense on any level though, like, he claim the compromise of 1850 was a good thing because it gave the north a decade to prepare for the war, that's a historically ridiculous and revisionist theory, not to mention mathematically wrong as that compromise only lasted 4 years until the Kansas Nebraska act, but whatever, even if you accept that bullshit, what is he saying? that we need make a compromise so we can be better prepared for the impending civil war?
Nobody, not even the south will rise again people think the compromise of 1850 solved anything.
I think he just googled "compromise" and that's the first hit he got.
 
His argument doesn't make sense on any level though, like, he claim the compromise of 1850 was a good thing because it gave the north a decade to prepare for the war, that's a historically ridiculous and revisionist theory, not to mention mathematically wrong as that compromise only lasted 4 years until the Kansas Nebraska act, but whatever, even if you accept that bullshit, what is he saying? that we need make a compromise so we can be better prepared for the impending civil war?
Nobody, not even the south will rise again people think the compromise of 1850 solved anything.
I think he just googled "compromise" and that's the first hit he got.

He's in love with 'Process'. Something actually passed through gridlock so by virtue its good.
 

Diablos

Member
The Advanced Research Projects Agency Network (ARPANET) was one of the world's first operational packet switching networks, the first network to implement TCP/IP, and the progenitor of what was to become the global Internet. The network was initially funded by the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA, later DARPA) within the U.S. Department of Defense for use by its projects at universities and research laboratories in the US. The packet switching of the ARPANET, together with TCP/IP, would form the backbone of how the Internet works. The packet switching was based on concepts and designs by American engineer Paul Baran, British scientist Donald Davies[1][2] and Lawrence Roberts of the Lincoln Laboratory.[3] The TCP/IP communication protocols were developed for ARPANET by computer scientists Robert Kahn and Vinton Cerf.
The fundamentals of the way the Internet works started with ARPANET.
 

Sibylus

Banned
Newsmakers with Senator Patrick Leahy
Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) talked about National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance programs and the USA FREEDOM Act, which he co-wrote. The bill was intended to rein in the National Security Agency’s collection of Americans' telephone records as well as its searches of electronic mail and social networking sites. He was a co-author of the PATRIOT Act in 2001, and the plan for the new bill is to correct some of the practices that had sprung from that act. After the interview the reporters discussed his responses with the host.



Do conservatives not understand that the Compromise of 1850 is not a good thing to be idolizing (Is it any wonder they can't win minority votes)? These people live in a different world were any 'compromise' is good.

George Will wrote a whole article about why we should be looking for another Compromise of 1850 in our current immigration debate. Yeah, we need to compromise with a bunch of radicals who still went to war (why this bill is often described as 'saving the nation' when all it did was postpone a war), never mind the fact that the 'compromise' keep slavery around and strengthened the Fugitive Slave Act. Real model legislation there.

These are what 'serious' republicans think. The republican party is insanely radicalized but they're still taken seriously. I don't get it.
Well, I think it kinda goes without saying that they're in large part taken seriously by the radicalized headwind that popularized and pushed the tea party to begin with. They represented their suicidal wing of policy before there were big political incentives for doing so, and they'll do it again when (if?) the GOP comes to its senses. There's certainly a schism coming, but I'm beginning to think it's shaping up to run far deeper than just through the Republican party.
 

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
I get the WSJ for free now. My god, I did not realize how bad their editorial section was EVERY SINGLE DAY. The amount of water carrying they do for corporate america is a sight to behold.

The best part of that was that one of the dudes who really was instrumental in creating the internet who he sourced wound up debunking his claims.
 

Chichikov

Member
Actually the internet was derived from the invention of the ethernet, which was created by a private corporation:

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10000872396390444464304577539063008406518
I'm going to sidestep the main thesis of this article as I don't really think such stupidity is worth a response, and instead talk about PARC labs.
Now there's no denying that PARC labs is one of the best examples of private sector innovation (or innovation in general) but it also shows the problems with that model.
Xerox didn't end up benefiting all that much from those amazing innovations, the incentivizaiton model for such groundbreaking work is pretty problematic.
Moreover, the way they could've monetize that stuff was through aggressive patenting and licensing (though thanks god we didn't grant patents to such stuff back then) which would've been not only detrimental to society as a whole but also to the giant and profitable private sector those breakthroughs helped usher.
Now to be clear, I'm not saying there's no room for profit driven private sector innovation, that's fucking silly, but government funded and driven research is not only is a great tool that only dogmatic "government is the root of all evil" dipshits can hate and it's a big part of what made America great.
 
Do conservatives not understand that the Compromise of 1850 is not a good thing to be idolizing (Is it any wonder they can't win minority votes)? These people live in a different world were any 'compromise' is good.

George Will wrote a whole article about why we should be looking for another Compromise of 1850 in our current immigration debate. Yeah, we need to compromise with a bunch of radicals who still went to war (why this bill is often described as 'saving the nation' when all it did was postpone a war), never mind the fact that the 'compromise' keep slavery around and strengthened the Fugitive Slave Act. Real model legislation there.

These are what 'serious' republicans think. The republican party is insanely radicalized but they're still taken seriously. I don't get it.

I'm surprised he didn't make a baseball reference.
 

GhaleonEB

Member
Making progress:

The Obama administration has said that HealthCare.gov will be "working smoothly for the vast majority of users" by the end of November. They've brought in Jeff Zients, a former corporate executive, to save the ailing website from its disastrous launch. So how are they doing?

They're making serious progress, Zients said on a Friday conference call with reporters.

The administration is judging its improvement by two metrics, Zients said: the website's response times and its error rates. In other words, how long it takes a page to load for users and how often users encounter a crash or error page.

In both areas, Zients reported, HealthCare.gov is improving exponentially.

When the site launched, pages were taking an average of eight seconds to load. Now, Zients said, the average is less than one second.

The average error rate in the weeks after the site's launch was 6 percent, Zients said; as of this week, it's now below 1 percent.


To top it off, the site didn't experience any scheduled or unscheduled outages this week -- a notable achievement after the opening six weeks.

"We've made measurable progress," Zients said. "The system is more stable, and users are having a better user experience on the site."

Tally it all up, and the administration has crossed 200 bug fixes off its oft-mentioned "punch list" -- about 50 "priority fixes" to go, Zients said, though he cautioned that more issues could arise as traffic increases.

The problem of volume continues to be a top concern for the administration, Zients said. Right now, HealthCare.gov can comfortably handle between 20,000 and 25,000 users at a time. But at "peak volumes, some users still experience slower response times," he said.

Officials are also expecting traffic to spike at the end of the month and onward. So this weekend, the administration is adding more servers and data storage to help handle any additional load.


The goal is "to maintain good speed and response times at higher volumes," Zients said. "This is a key focus of our work now."
The combination of the improving site and looming deadline should hopefully push up the enrollment in November.
 

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
The average error rate in the weeks after the site's launch was 6 percent, Zients said; as of this week, it's now below 1 percent.

6 percent originally? That doesn't sound too bad. Exaggerations from the liberal media once again?

The problem of volume continues to be a top concern for the administration, Zients said. Right now, HealthCare.gov can comfortably handle between 20,000 and 25,000 users at a time. But at "peak volumes, some users still experience slower response times," he said.

That's weird. How come Evilore doesn't seem to have a problem (for the most part) dealing with that many people, HMM?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom