Obamacare

Nancy Pelosi Still Thinks Obamacare is a Winner for Democrats

|

Whitehouse.gov

Democratic Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi says she believes Obamacare is a winner for her party. Asked about how the law's ongoing low approval numbers would affect Democrats' chances in tight races this November, she said, "You'll have to ask to ask the member, but I believe it's a winner."

The polls say otherwise. Indeed, they've said otherwise since before the law was passed. On average, polls currently show that about 53.7 percent of the public disapproves of the law, while just 38.5 percent approves, according to RealClearPolitics (RCP).

There have been minor shifts in approval and disapproval since the law passed, but overall those numbers have consistently shown disapproval since the law passed. The law passed in March 2010, but according to the RCP poll average, at no point since that year has public approval ever topped disapproval.

But Pelosi still claims to think it's a winner. If that sounds familiar, it's probably because that's the same argument the Democratic establishment pushed back in 2010 to help nudge anxious Democrats to vote for the law. As Politico noted at the time, numerous top Democrats and party strategists, including Bill Clinton and Obama administration pollsters, publicly predicted that the law would become popular after passage, and that party legislators would be able to run on its successes.

Indeed, even months after the law passed, that was the line that Pelosi and her staff were feeding reporters. She and her leadership team were "doubling down on healthcare reform," the Hill reported in July 2010, "betting that it will do Democrats more good than harm in November's elections." Once the public were more exposed to the law and its benefits, the argument went, they would warm up to it. 

Obviously, they didn't. In fact, there's some pretty solid political science research suggesting that Democrats lost the House in 2010 because of Obamacare

Four years later, the public has had plenty of exposure to the law and its effects—and if anything, it's less popular now than it was when it passed. That doesn't sound much like a winner to me.

NEXT: Will the Feds Crack Down on Medical Marijuana in Washington?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. True Believers gotta maintain ranks.

    Also, I suspect random phrase generator Pelosibot does not personally know anyone adversely affected by the Obamacare.

    1. “Obamacare will not hurt the Democrats” is part of Shreek and Tony’s party provided talking points every single day. They can’t have the faithful breaking and running on this issue.

      1. When have I ever said such a thing?

        1. Do you think it will Tony? If so, then I stand corrected, at least with regards to you.

          1. I think if Obamacare is an important election issue, it’s a net loser for Democrats. The Affordable Care Act, on the other hand, tends to poll better. Which demonstrates really the only lesson from any of this: the American people are ignorant and their opinions are being vaguely shaped by whichever partisans yell the loudest.

            Dems are repeating their perennially losing strategy of being wishy-washy in support of something they think is good policy but that they’re afraid of, while Republicans are, as ever, as loud and shrill as you like in the only policy idea they have had in years (Obama and anything with his name on it sucks).

            When people are informed about aspects of the law, they approve of them. They are against an abstraction mostly being defined by Republicans. Which is fine. Can’t fault Republicans for playing the card that works for them. Actually having ideas about governing clearly is too much for their little guppy brains to handle.

            1. Holy shit, I think he just pegged the derpometer.

            2. Yeah Tony. It is just bad optics. The fact that millions of people are seeing their insurance rates go up and we now have fewer people with insurance thanks to a program that was sold as providing insurance to everyone has nothing to do with it.

              Like I said, unlike shreek, you don’t fuck up the talking points. But wow are they getting pathetic and desperate.

              1. None of that is true.

                More pathetic and desperate than not caring about reforming the healthcare system in the first place, preferring power for its own sake and nothing more?

            3. People don’t know what is good for them

              If they only truly understood Dear Leader they would love his ideas.

              I think you are right on the money Tony. Keep up the good work.

              1. I am laughing my ass off here.

                Tony, that truly is one of the stupidest things ever said here. I mean, it is on par with the rantings of Pelosi or White Indian.

                1. When all else fails and no one left to blame, the stupidity and ignorance of people is the progressive scoundrel’s final excuse.

                2. I’m reminded of that speech from an Adam Sandler movie about us all being dumber for having been subject to it.

                  1. Principal: Mr. Madison, what you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

                    Billy Madison: Okay, a simple “wrong” would’ve done just fine.

            4. Come on, Tony. If you went out and asked someone: “What do you think of the Affordable Care Act” their likely response is going to be: “Is that like Obamacare?”

              1. “When people are informed about aspects of the law, they approve of them.”

                – If you like your doctor…
                – Families will save$2500 per year
                – no one will lose coverage

                When people are MISLED about aspects of the law, they approve of them.

                FIFY

                1. I don’t quite get how the government could have said this things – and really, it can’t be misinterpreted in any way no matter how the lame apologists spin it – and people would still think it’s a ‘good.’

                  At some point even a junkie has dignity.

            5. When people are informed about aspects of the law, they approve of them. They are against an abstraction mostly being defined by Republicans.

              Don’t you think the abstractions are more on the Dem side? That’s what people tend to support, the abstract idea that the Act will make insurance more affordable. Then they get hit with reality when they lose their current insurance policy and are then presented with much more expensive policies to choose from.

            6. whewww …. that was close. It almost seemed sentient at first glance.

            7. Which demonstrates really the only lesson from any of this: the American people are ignorant and their opinions are being vaguely shaped by whichever partisans yell the loudest.

              I suspect their opinions are shaped by the fact that they, or their friends or family, have had their plans canceled, or are suffering financial hardship from being forced to purchase an overpriced product they don’t need.

              1. But that’s all bullshit rightwing propaganda and not real.

                1. But that’s all bullshit rightwing propaganda and not real.

                  Damn, you’re right. I’m just imagining that those things that I described happened to me.

            8. When people are informed about aspects of the law, they approve of them.

              As in:

              “Here are the keys to a new car!”

              “I approve.”

              “Here’s the bill for your new car.”

              “Whoa, whoa, whoa. I do not approve.”

              Sure. Tell people about the benefits, and they approve. Tell people about the costs, and you’re going to get a different answer.

            9. Dems are repeating their perennially losing strategy of being wishy-washy in support of something they think is good policy but that they’re afraid of, while Republicans are, as ever, as loud and shrill as you like in the only policy idea they have had in years (Obama and anything with his name on it sucks).

              The projection is strong.

            10. “Which demonstrates really the only lesson from any of this: the American people are ignorant and their opinions are being vaguely shaped by whichever partisans yell the loudest.”

              Which demonstrates why we should subject the entire healthcare system, and as much of the rest of our lives as possible, to this incredible rationale way of making decisions, right?

      2. I, for one, hope that after all of the “Obamacare didn’t hand the Senate to Republicans” articles by Journolisters and juiceboxers the Democrats get their own insurgency movement like the Tea Party.

        1. What sort of ideology would that insurgency stand on? Complete communism?

          1. Maybe liberaltarians aren’t a complete myth. What? Stop laughing!

            There must be some group of reliably Dem voters who are starting to understand that there ain’t no more Free Shit.

            1. Rand Paul did get a good reception in Berkeley of all places.

              1. I was told that’s because Berkeley is now a libertarian and conservative stronghold because it’s so expensive to go so only the children of plutocrats can afford it. No really, someone said this.

                1. Berkeley is now a libertarian and conservative stronghold

                  Someone should tell that to all the dirty hippies who keep showing up for class out there.

                  1. Watch the speech. Rand only discussed the NSA, which is a popular issue there. Good strategy!

                  2. Lots of dirty hippies are children of the rich.

                2. That would be a beautiful irony.

            2. “There must be some group of reliably Dem voters who are starting to understand that there ain’t no more Free Shit.”

              I think those are the ones who go into politics

        2. They already had one. It was called OWS.

    2. Well of course they’re not adversely affected, because before 1.they didn’t have insurance, and 2.now they have insurance, 3.?????, 4. Profit, 5. Profit is evul, so it will be rephrased to budget surplus, which will then promptly be spent. Yeah, this sounds like something that her skull mush would fart out.

  2. The Dems bury their heads in the sand and believe Obamacare is a political winner, the Reps bury their head in the sand and think “social issues” are a political winner. Fine by me on both counts. I hope they keep up the “good” work.

    1. I don’t think they think it is a winner. I think they think it is the right thing to do and something that is really important to a large number of their supporters.

      Saying they think it is a winner is to imply that their support of such is some kind of cynical ploy. I think they are far too earnest for that.

      1. I don’t see earnestness in Pelosi’s comments. I see pure Baghdad Bob propagandist denial.

        1. I was going to say “And Baghdad Bob probably still thinks there are no American tanks in Baghdad, either”.

      2. I don’t think they think it is a winner. I think they think it is the right thing to do and something that is really important to a large number of their supporters.

        If they really believe that then maybe they should focus on winning races instead of losing, which is what will happen if they run on abortion instead of Obamacare.

        1. + infinity

        2. Okay. So should Libertarians not talk about repealing the CRA? Libertarians never seem to have a problem seeing the virtue of a principled loss. Why should Republicans be any different?

          1. I would only repeal parts of the CRA. The parts that outlaw Jim Crow laws, I would definitely keep.

            But the CRA is so far from a priority that I would never even bring it up if I were running. If my opponent tried to hit me over the head with it, I would just state that I have no intention of even mentioning the CRA while in office because I have more pressing issues to address.

  3. 8% of the time it works every time.

  4. Nancy Pelosi is delusional and quite probably insane. That is all.

    1. I thought she is insane and probably delusional, but I am willing to compromise and say she is both delusional and insane.

      1. I thought she is insane and probably delusional, but I am willing to compromise and say she is both delusional and insane.

        Neither…what she is is in the safest seat in the country….she can afford bravado!

        1. Precisely this. I’m certain more than a few Democrats occupying more tenuous seats wish she’d shut her yap and get off camera before November.

          1. …and I desperately hope she keeps yappin!

        2. It’s like everyone in her district went through self-trepanation or something, isn’t it?

  5. I wish the mothership would hurry the fuck up and retrieve her bony ass. I love laughing at the eternally ignorant and vacuously stupid as much as the next guy but, enough is enough.

    1. What makes you think that she isn’t here because the aliens hadn’t had enough of her wrinkly thieving ass?

      1. That reminds me of my pet thoery to explain the movie ‘Signs’ – the aliens are eugenicists who dump their undesirables on the most toxic, remote death world they can find that has some form of life without equipment. If any make it back, they’re allowed to live.

        I think Pelosi is in exile here.

        1. That’s a lot better than what M. Night Shamallama came up with…

        2. So sort of like Highlander II?

          1. Highlander…. II? Was that some sort of fan art? Nobody who wrote a story about a tournament of immortals dueling to the death would write a sequel, right?

            1. Yeah my neighbor drives one one those…..

  6. What’s the guarantee that those who disapprove do so in ways that might benefit republicans?

    1. I don’t think it matters. If people disapprove of Obamacare, they are likely to either not vote or vote third party. Either way hurts the Democrats.

      Moreover, most of the country is fairly evenly divided. Even the most pro Democratic districts often have 40% Republican support. So even if say 5% of the electorate swings from voting D to voting R, that is a ten point swing. Such a swing would be devastating to the Democrats.

      1. Or they may vote for the guy who promises to add the public option or move on to single payer. All I’m trying to say is that it won’t be the slam dunk people seem to think. There’s plenty of people out there who disapprove of Obama and the ACA because they aren’t progressive enough.

        1. Some will Susan. But not all. No one who voted Republican is going to vote for the guy who promises the public option. So doing that will not attract any Democrat any new votes.

          But if even 5% of the electorate who in 2012 voted Democrat, want this thing repealed, the Democrats are doomed.

        2. Or they may vote for the guy who promises to add the public option or move on to single payer.

          Not happening. Obamacare is not pushing people towards more socialized health care it is pushing them away from it.

          1. Obamacare is not pushing people towards more socialized health care it is pushing them away from it.

            Tell that to the people being pushed into Medicaid.

            1. Sure I will. They are not going to like it or want to stay there.

              1. What choice will they have? That’s the thing. The Affordable Health Care Act is making health insurance so unaffordable that the only way to get health care will be through the government.

                1. The choice is people will demand that all of the mandates be repealed and the entire act with it.

                  People are all for helping out the poor or those with pre-existing conditions, just as long as they think someone else is paying for it. They now know they are paying for it and the usual Democratic appeals are not going to work.

                  If people thought and voted like you say they do, Leftist governments would never have to fix elections. Instead, every leftist government ends up either fixing elections and resorting to rule of the gun or being run out of power in disgrace. You can’t fool everyone forever and eventually you steal so much you can’t hide fool people into not noticing it anymore.

                  1. I didn’t say anything about how people are voting. Whatever.

                2. The Affordable Health Care Act is making health insurance so unaffordable that the only way to get health care will be through the government.

                  I’m going with the administration seeing this as a feature.

            2. Wait until they find out that Medicaid will bill their estate – if they have one.

          2. Perhaps, but it’s not a good idea to get complacent.

      2. “Even the most pro Democratic districts often have 40% Republican support.”

        Wait a sec. I thought Obama got 100% support in some districts, and sense we all know that voter fraud is an issue made up by evil white racist republicans, then you must be wrong.

    2. Seemed to work in the recent Florida special election. The race should have gone D but ended up going R, in part because the R candidate made the election all about Obamacare.

      Things may get better for the Dems by election time, but probably not.

      1. Yeah, but he barely eked out a win. And had the good fortune to be campaigning when the shit hit the fan.

        1. He was grossly outspent and was a nobody while the Dem was a big-hitting insider with lots of ‘achievement’.

          1. And he still only got a victory margin that was within the statistical margin of error. No bad thing but it’s not the Mandate From on High that’s it’s being made out as.

            1. Thank you. You’re very rational.

              But the Peanut Gallery here prefers partisan spittle.

              DOOM! LANDSLIDE!! BLOODBATH!!

              1. Ah, so PB approved=rational?

        2. Its a purple district. Republican, but voted for Obama. Alex Sink is as big a name in FL as the Dems have, and a shitton of money got dumped in on both sides. I think that it probably means that the generic Republican wins against the generic Democrat in open seat races, and there are a lot of them this year. What we don’t know yet is whether it changes the incumbency advantage.

  7. Personally, I hope everyone who is inclined to vote Dem buys this hook, line, and sinker. “Obamacare is great and only a very few people are adversely affected by it” will not get them off the couch to vote in November. However, people like me who are being screwed by it, and our family and friends, can’t wait to get to the polls. “Your insurance was cancelled and your only option is to pay $1500 a month for a shitty plan” is a hell of a motivator.

    1. The first step to solving a problem is admitting they have one. If the Democrats were not completely insane, they would be working with various RHINOs on some kind of bi-partisan fix to this mess. That would get them off the hook by saddling Republicans with some of the responsibility for the fix. It would also make them look reasonable and make low information voters think they cared about them.

      But Obama, Reid and Pelosi are such a craven idiots they don’t know how to work with the other side and view any compromise as compromise with evil. So they will continue to claim this thing is popular and telling the tens of millions of Americans who are harmed by it to go fuck themselves.

      Obama really is a gift to the Republicans and proof that perhaps God really is a Republican. Short of divine intervention, I really can’t explain how the Republicans got so lucky as to have an opponent as stupid and capable of so much long term damage as Obama.

      1. Obamacare has a higher approval rating than Republicans, John.

        1. Tony|3.21.14 @ 2:06PM|#

          When have I ever said such a thing?

          Right here. You and shreek get the same talking points probably provided by the same people. You are just not insane like he is and don’t fuck them up as badly.

          If you are convinced that “but the Republicans are bad” is going to save the Democratic Party from the voters wrath over the enormous amount of harm the Democrats did with this, well, whatever gets you through the night Tony.

          But the results in Florida and San Diego and the actions of Democrats who are actually running for election say otherwise.

          1. Tony is dishonest. Or didn’t you know that.

          2. I am making no claims about the likely outcome of the 2014 election. I’m too busy trying to hold back the sick I feel in my throat when you morons get on here and treat a real national issue as nothing but a cynical partisan thing, when most of you claim to be above partisanship.

            1. I want Obamacare out of my life. I want my old insurance policy back. If that takes supporting, ugh, Republicans then so be it.

              1. Solving national issues means sacrifice, Juice. Some of us have to sacrifice more than others.

            2. Given that the law was written behind closed doors, rammed through without even 24 hours to read it, contains such gems as the Cornhusker Kickback, was passed through improper use of parliamentary procedure, it’s pretty easy to see it as a cynical partisan thing.

            3. I am making no claims about the likely outcome of the 2014 election. I’m too busy trying to hold back the sick I feel in my throat when you morons get on here and treat a real national issue as nothing but a cynical partisan thing, when most of you claim to be above partisanship.

              Ahhhh….”serious policy”…. last refuge of the partisan scoundrel.

            4. “you morons get on here and treat a real national issue as nothing but a cynical partisan thing…”

              It is a cynical partisan thing. It is also a “real national issue”, but only as a microcosm of the debate between Liberty and govt control.

              1. That’s not the real part. If you are interested in healthcare reform (i.e., expanding access), then you could hardly ask for a more market-friendly approach. If you’re interested in letting the uninsured die on the streets, you should just say so.

                1. Sure I’m interested in “expanding access”. I’m just not interested in having the Centralized govt do it. I’m certainly not interested in using FORCE OF ARMS against people because they choose not to insure their wealth from a health problem. If you want to kill people for daring to be uninsured, you should just say so.

                  You want a solution to these problems? Have your state remove the stupid mandates on all insurance sold to their “citizens”, such as the one that requires males to be covered for maternity leave. If you truly want more people to be insured, then perhaps you should let us buy the type of insurance we want; the supply and demand curves determine that the price of this insurance would be cheaper.

                  1. Would you keep the old and poor on their current socialist systems? Or would they somehow be able to magically afford coverage too?

                    1. Couldn’t you read the implied “get govt out of it” in that last post? If is fixed by removing the socialist system in the first place. But the Fed shouldn’t force the state to remove the state’s socialist system. So the Federal answer is to removed the distortions caused by the Federal govt.

                      If you can’t afford coverage, then get a better job, re-prioritize, seek charity (private), or go without coverage. I have the right to not have coverage.

                    2. So when you have an unforeseen medical bill far beyond your ability to pay, do you refuse the treatment in the first place and die, seek the government bailout known as bankruptcy, burden your loved ones, or what?

                      Surely you can at least understand why some people think universal coverage is prudent.

                    3. There are plenty of people willing to pay for a medical procedure that I (you) can’t. This is called “charity” and is beyond the scope of comprehension of a Liberal. Funny though, the MSM reports on fundraisers for this stuff all the time.

                      I can see why. I can also see why people wear tinfoil hats. That doesn’t mean they are right.

                      Do you support using FORCE OF ARMS against the uninsured? Do I have the right to not be insured?

                    4. I think you should have a right to healthcare just like everybody else in the civilized world except Americans.

                      Really, just stop embarrassing yourself with the charity bullshit. You don’t get to wash your hands of the consequences of your “freedom” agenda by pretending that unicorns exist.

                    5. Ha! Charity doesn’t exist! You’ve proved my point! You can’t see it because you can’t conceive it!

                      You have no positive rights. You have the right to PURCHASE healthcare with the money you’ve EARNED.

                    6. Money printed and guaranteed by the federal government, you mean? Money that I claim only because the government tells me it’s mine and backs the claim up with men with guns?

                      Yeah, no positive rights in your system.

                      When did I say charity doesn’t exist, you ridiculous person?

                    7. “Really, just stop embarrassing yourself with the charity bullshit. You don’t get to wash your hands of the consequences of your “freedom” agenda by pretending that unicorns exist.” Tony

                      Right there.

                      Money of any kind, regardless of who “printed” (minted) it. You seriously think there is nothing without govt, don’t you? Is gold valuable because govt says so, or because the “market” (free people) want it? Dollars would be worth nothing if people didn’t want if for trade, regardless of what govt said.

                      There are no positive rights. I can’t give you any rights either; I don’t have the authority.

                    8. But Tony presumes to have the authority to dictate what should be done with the wealth generated by the free market, and to kill those who object to his presumed authority.

                2. Reform isn’t “expanding access,” whatever that means. Presumably access would be universal at the right price, and the price is buoyed up by market interventions. Reform means scaling back those poorly-considered provisions, not doubling down on them.

                  Seriously, I’d imagine you’ve seen the composition of uninsured people. You can’t claim that mythical thirty million number comes close to approximating the number of involuntarily uninsured. If Democrats had wanted stopgap coverage for all “underserved” citizens, they could have expanded the Medicaid roster. That would still suck, but it’s a helluvalot better (and market-friendlier) than the massive, wholesale intervention and the catastrophic aftermath.

                  1. They did expand Medicaid. Medicaid is as socialist as you get. The mandate has long been the market-friendly (Republican) alternative to attempts to make the socialist system cover more people. So I guess we agree, more socialism?

                    1. Sure, tied to unencumbering the market rather than writing new swathes of regulations to bury it. The quality of Medicaid coverage, especially when you’re competing for limited taxpayer monies with a few million other new entrants, should be disincentive enough at the margin to buy privately.

                      But your Dems tried having it both ways, and now we’re in this mess. Either repeal the thing in full, or neuter the mandate and let’s limp along until someone comes up with something constructive.

                3. That’s not the real part. If you are interested in healthcare reform (i.e., expanding access), then you could hardly ask for a more market-friendly approach.

                  Sure I could. Get rid of certificates of need. Get rid of scope of practice regulations. Get rid of all encumbrances on competition. The reason health care costs so damned much is because of lack of competition. The insurance system exacerbates the problem. There’s also lack of competition in the insurance market. Do what you can to increase competition and you’ll see greatly expanded access.

        2. Relevancy: none.

    2. I think that in their minds, the subsidies they’re handing out more than make up for that big premium hike, and that everyone receiving one will kneel to them in gratitude.

      1. Why aren’t the Republicans calling the subsidies what they are? Corporate welfare. The insurance companies jack up the rates and the taxpayer pays the high rates. The Dems made it a crime to not pay insurance companies and also made it to where the taxpayers foot most of the bill. And these aren’t government agencies, they’re private for-profit corporations.

  8. I’d be happy for the dems to keep pimping ObummerCare and watch them go down in flames if it weren’t for the fact that Republicans will be the ones taking back control,

    1. This.

      Having control of our healthcare is too valuable a method of control and means of looting for a political class obsessed with power to ever relinquish.

      My money is on the dems getting their asses stomped in November followed by the party of stupid attempting to ‘fix’ obumbles steaming pile of a healthcare law.

      Without an effective and potentially painful means of holding these fucksticks accountable we will continue to slouch towards complete totalitarianism.

      1. We might not have the ACA at all if the Republicans ever had a plan to correct the mess that is/was our healthcare system, but they didn’t and they don’t.

        Personally, I think the smarter donkeys are wondering what the fuck they’re going to do with Obamacare if they get enough support to actually change it, because they are clueless.

      2. the party of stupid attempting to ‘fix’ obumbles steaming pile of a healthcare law.

        Which, of course, would make the Repubs responsible (in the eyes of the Dems, the DemOp media, and some fraction of voters) for every single bad thing that happens under ObamaCare II.

    2. I’d be happy for the dems to keep pimping ObummerCare and watch them go down in flames if it weren’t for the fact that Republicans will be the ones taking back control,

      Nobody said that establishing our new land of libertarian, Top Hat and monocle wearing overlords was going to happen in a single election cycle.

      Now get those shoeless waifs back to banging away at keyboards for 22 hours a day undermining the confidence of HuffPo readers!

  9. You’ll have to ask the member

    Is that what… well, that explains a lot.

  10. It probably won’t hurt any Democrat is a safe district, like Pelosi’s is. What Dems need is a Latte Party to spring up and someone in Pelosi’s district to challenge her in a primary, knowing if they can beat her, then a seat in Congress is assured. Some of the most vicious in-fighting I’ve seen in politics is in a one-party dominated city like Philadelphia.

  11. Those who rob Peter to pay Paul can always count on Paul’s support.

    1. Sure. The problem is they robbed Peter and Paul and lost the money they stole.

      1. Just the other day someone submitted a letter to the local paper praising Obamacare because they qualified for subsidized health insurance. They are Paul.

        1. No Sarcasmic, those people are Democratic sockpuppets. No one has benefited from this thing. Literally no one, or effectively no one when judged against the size of the entire population.

          This is an entitlement that didn’t give anyone anything.

          1. I’m sorry John, but you are wrong. The people who qualify for subsidized health insurance are benefiting. They’re paying a couple hundred dollars a month for what would cost someone else a grand. And you are right in that more people are getting screwed than are benefiting. I never said otherwise.
            Thing is, even if the Republicans win by a landslide, they’re not going to do anything. These are the same people who brought us Medicare Part D.
            You’re living in a fantasy world if you think the Republicans are going to make any changes for the better.

            1. The people who qualify for subsidized health insurance are benefiting

              They are not. They are not for two reasons. First, the mandates have raised the cost of health insurance so much that even with the subsidies, insurance is still more expensive and worse than it was.

              Second, a lot of the people who are buying those plans didn’t want health insurance in the first place and are only buying it to avoid the penaltax. Poor people didn’t have to pay their medical bills before. How is selling them “subsidized health insurance” something they want or will like.

              Lastly, look at the enrollment numbers. Very few people are actually getting these subsidies. Most of them are just signing up for medicaide. They could have signed up for medicaide before. And beyond that, medicaide sucks. It doesn’t give you anything you didn’t have before and it requires you to go to a bunch of social worker appointments and let the government manage your life. People don’t like medicaide. They don’t like it so much that hospitals make them sign up for it not because they want to but because it gives the hospital some hope of recovering some of their costs.

              You are wrong about this sarcasmic.

              1. There are people now getting subsidized health insurance who previously had health insurance that was more expensive.

                They exist. That was all I said.

                The rest of your comment is in response to arguments I never made. You know what that’s called?

                1. There are people now getting subsidized health insurance who previously had health insurance that was more expensive.

                  It is a big country so I am sure something of about everything exists. But those people exist in numbers that are so small that they will have no effect on the overall outcome of things.

                  Beyond that, when you look at how the program actually worked, it is difficult to see how they exist. Even people with pre-existing conditions are getting fucked since they are getting insurance but also getting stuck with huge co-pays and high rates to subsidize other people’s ponies.

                  To the extent such people exist, they would have to live in Blue states that already had a lot of state coverage mandates and have some kind of expensive condition or risk that was driving their rates even higher.

                  Yeah, I am sure someone fits that description. But he or she is in a pretty small set of people.

                  1. But those people exist in numbers that are so small that they will have no effect on the overall outcome of things.

                    But, I suspect, in large enough numbers for the Dems and DemOp media to mount a Potemkin campaign (with real people!) claiming that OCare is a success.

              2. He’s not. An epilectic and mostly unemployed acquaintance of mine was just bragging on facebook about how Obamacare saved him 5000 dollars per year on health insurance. Sarcasmic is right, these people are real.

                1. So waffles,

                  You telling me that Obamacare is popular with the unemployed epileptic demographic. Okay. That is a free shit squad not exactly a free shit brigade.

                  These people exist but exist in such small numbers that there is no way they will ever be able to outdo the numbers of people who are getting screwed. In short, this is not medicaire or social security. It is not a middle class entitlement people will grow to love.

                  1. These people exist but exist in such small numbers that there is no way they will ever be able to outdo the numbers of people who are getting screwed.

                    Did anyone say otherwise? Did they, Red Tony? Huh? Or are you slaying strawmen again? Yeah, I think you’re having a strawman orgy.

                    1. “a strawman orgy”

                      I thought that was a Warty activity after harvest?

                    2. If you didn’t say that sarcasmic, you have absolutely no point. “But someone will benefit”, while probably true, isn’t much of a point. I just assumed you had a point so couldn’t be saying that. My mistake.

            2. Well sense they will be running against Obamacare they will have to at the very least make a small token gesture towards removing it.

            3. You’re living in a fantasy world if you think the Republicans are going to make any changes for the better.

              Where did I say they would? I don’t know what the Republicans are going to do. I just know this thing is a disaster and is not going to get popular or ever attract any significant support from the population at large.

              We have had thread after thread where I and others have explained in detail how there is no free shit brigade to support this program because it has managed to fuck everyone. And yet, you continue to claim that there are all of these deadbeats who will support it.

              1. John, you don’t read polls, you fucking idiot. We all know that.

                Quit telling us what people think.

                1. Tell us how Obamacare really doesn’t matter again Shreek.

                2. John, you don’t read polls, you fucking idiot.

                  I’m torn. Should the response be:

                  (1) More proggy projection.

                  or

                  (2) 8%!

              2. And yet, you continue to claim that there are all of these deadbeats who will support it.

                No I didn’t. I said that they exist. I said nothing about their numbers, their voting habits, or anything else.

                Please stop rebutting arguments I did not make. It’s tiresome.

                1. John: “there is no free shit brigade to support this program because it has managed to fuck everyone. ”

                  The ACA has exposed a lot more people to the damage than usual, and more publicly. To that extent, John is right. But the number of true believers is legion, so the swing is only a few points. Unfortunately.

                  1. Big T,

                    You don’t need a big swing. A swing of even five points is enough to put the Democrats completely out of power.

                    1. And how nice that would be. You’d get a win. Then what? What do you think Republicans are going to do with this country? Do you even care?

                    2. Tony: “What do you think Republicans are going to do with this country?”

                      They will shit all over us, just like the Donkeys. That’s why most here want to see govt shrink to where their ability to damage us is much less.

                      Only Rand Paul seems likely to move in this direction.

                    3. Most districts are not within 5 pts. There will be some movement, but overconfidence is very dangerous.

                    4. Big T,

                      A five point swing is effectively 10 points because every point one side loses the other side gains.

      2. Actually they gave it to Judas.

  12. You keep saying “since the law passed”. I remember when revenue-raising legislation had to originate in the House.

    Anywho, Pelosi lives in a world – California’s 12th District – where she is now completely shielded from the negative voter effects of Obamacare’s passage. Sure it cost her the speakership, but in her mind that’s not why the Dems were pasted in 2010 so she can blindly see it as a winner now.

  13. Well Obamacare *Could* be a winner for Democrats, if they could successfully get it rebranded *Romneycare* and blame the whole thing on Republicans

    1. +1 Guerilla Marketing!

  14. Duke gets their asses kicked by Mecer right in their own backyard! That was freaking awesome.

    Seeing that patented pouty Coach K “I can’t believe we just lost” face will never, ever get old even if he coaches another twenty years.

    1. Damn. There goes my bracket. But it was shot anyway. So I can enjoy Duke losing.

    2. The happiness from Duke losing today is doubled thanks to Jason Garrett and Tony Romo being at the game in Duke gear.

      1. Romo was there? No wonder they lost what should have been a cake-walk. And speaking of QBs who are just good enough to win you nothing, it looks like the Raiders are taking Matt Schaub off Houston’s hands. My guess is that the Texans are going to get that Bartles kid and spend 10 years wishing they’d drafted Manziel.

        1. My guess is that the Texans are going to get that Bartles kid and spend 10 years wishing they’d drafted Manziel.

          Manziel’s a smaller version of Tim Tebow. He’d probably do awesome in the CFL where things are more free-wheeling, but he’s going to get pasted in the NFL. I think it’s a lot more likely that the Texans try to trade down and draft either Carr or that Garrapolo kid from Eastern Illinois.

          1. I agree. Trade down.

      2. Romo’s aura of loserdom is powerful indeed.

        1. Mercer broke a perfect bracket I had going in another pool.

          F Duke!!!

        2. His ability to choke appears to have gained viral status.

    3. Finally, a Georgia team in the NCAA tournament. Tech and UGA have stunk for 20 years.

      1. Not only are you a useless partisan hack you don’t even know anything about the state in which you live you fucking putz! GT was in as recently as 2007 and UGA was in a year later!

  15. On average, polls currently show that about 53.7 percent of the public disapproves of the law

    True. And as polls have shown about 1/3 of that 53.7% are progressives whining about not getting single-payer.

    Will those progressives vote GOP?

    1. At least 8% of them will Putins Buttplug.

      1. Is that the same 8% that scored over 98% on their Libertarian purity?

        1. It’s the sane 97% of ‘climate scientists’ that believe in global worming.

          1. Only 8% of climate scientists got 98% on their libertarian purity test.

      2. You fucking Peanuts deny polling data but it is really all I go on. Objective data is on my side.

        Polling consistently shows that the American people reject the GOP’s repeal plans.

        * A recent Bloomberg poll found that 64% of Americans either support the law as it is or back it with small changes.
        * A Kaiser poll from last month found that the American people support keeping the ACA over repeal by a 25% margin.
        * In the Florida-13 Special Election, Geoff Garin, the Democratic pollster in the race found that by 57% to 31%, Independent voters preferred a Democrat who wants to improve Obamacare to a Republican who wants to repeal it.

        http://time.com/33587/obamacar…..elections/

        Don’t be a fucking idiot like John with your head buried in the sand.

        1. And the Peanut gallery is going to be proven wrong in Florida tomorrow!!!

          Obamacare is a big nothing!!!

          God you are pathetic. It is just funny now. Even Tony has switched to the “it is only unpopular because the racist Republicans lie about it” talking point.

          But not you. You are full retard all of the time.

          1. Typical John: POLLS ARE LYING! POLLS DON’T MATTER! ROMNEY WILL WIN EASILY!

            FL-13 polled a tossup.

            1. FL-13 polled a tossup.

              In a seat the Dems should have won. So much for Ocare not hurting them. Cry some more bitchnigger.

              1. The seat has been GOP for 42 years, dipshit. in 2012 the GOP incumbent won with 58% of the vote.

                Yeah, “supposed to win”? You make shit up too. Like Red Tony does.

                1. The polls were clear and the Dems were clearly hopeful: it was supposed to flip, your obfuscation notwithstanding.

                  1. Of course Dems were hopeful – it polled a tossup.

                    My only point is that objective data shows that the ACA will not be a significant factor in the midterms.

                2. Apparently, Obama winning the district the last two presidential elections means nothing.

        2. (in the Count from Sesame Street’s voice):

          “I count EIGHT, EIGHT PERCENT!!! AH AH AH AH……”

          1. Better yet…John Luc Picard while being interrogated by the Cardassians…..

            I SEE 8% OF THE FOUR LIGHTS…….

            Which I think as problematic as it means he sees about a third of a light! Oh well joke can’t work everytime!

              1. Yeah….that sounds like some of my math scores when I was growing up!

        3. These numbers certainly don’t agree with the numbers Reason has cited and given your error-filled history I’m more inclined to believe Reason. Also, you sound a lot like the folks talking about how gun control can happen because 90% of the people back it. Oops, only those who hate hate gun control are the most motivated to come out. It will be the same with the ACA.

          Don’t be a fucking idiot like John with your head buried in the sand.

          Projection time.

        4. Palin’s Buttplug|3.21.14 @ 2:49PM|#
          ‘You fucking Peanuts deny polling data but it is really all I go on. Objective data is on my side.”

          8%, you stinking pile of shit.
          Go lick Obo’s ass again.

    2. Probably not.

      Will they show up at the polls and vote Team Blue?

      1. In diminished numbers only.

        Progressives tend to become dispirited easily where conservatives become angry mobs.

        1. Conservatives tend to become dispirited when the Black Panthers refuse them admittance to the voting booth, but whatever.

    3. The real question is:

      Will the progressives whining about not getting single-payer turn out for the Dems?

      1. That and the other question is at what point do the Democrats finally face reality and offer their own fix. Make no mistake this thing is going to be effectively repealed. It is just a matter of time. Either the Dems finally panic and work with a few RINOs and do it themselves or the Republicans will take power and be forced to keep their promise to do it.

        I have no idea what that fix will look like. Hell maybe Hillary will win in 2016 promising to do single payer. But whatever it is, it won’t be Obamacare. Obamacare is done, it is just a question of time and which side kills it.

        1. Republicans would probably repeal it piecemeal, leaving in place the popular provisions and end up doing what they always do: not pay for anything.

          1. & Obama has paid for all of his policies how?

            Oh – that’s right – by charging future generations with massive interest payments and huge debts.

            I guess you’re right – Republicans will be much worse.

            I mean just look at Bush – he added like 3 trillion to the debt – Obama added only 8 trillion.

            I see your point now. Things are much better this way.

          2. Thank you for that interesting perspective Tony. I did not see it that way before but you have convinced me to reevaluate my position.

  16. The kind of health care I want is the kind that most (if not all) the Members of Congress (both parties) have.

    1. Paid for by taxpayers?

      1. This is the Mandalay road guy; you think he’s given it that amount of thought?

  17. The kind of health care I want is the kind that most (if not all) the Members of Congress (both parties) have.

  18. The kind of health care I want is the kind that most (if not all) the Members of Congress (both parties) have.

    1. Get out your checkbook.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.