Not to declare failure or anything

[AllentownJake]

However, back in May/June when this entire Health Care debate started (it was a health care debate before it turned into a Health Insurance debate) did anyone think we would be talking about triggers, co-ops, and mandates in October?

I hope I'm wrong but it seems that a whole lot of political capital was wasted going nowhere.

[ipaint]

1. Only the people who knew that taking single payer off the table

meant you negotiate DOWN from a public option. They were roundly condemned at the time and still are by some.

[AllentownJake]

2. Yeah

I never understood starting from the middle in the debate. Doing nothing becomes a perfectly acceptable position for your opponents to have.

[saracat]

3. folks keep talking about Obama not wanting to waste political capitol on various things

My question is, If Health Care isn't just cause to use the political capital, what is? It hasn't been used on anything yet, and political capital is a "use it or lose it" propositions and it is already diminished. I wonder what it is being "saved" for?:think: :think:

[AllentownJake]

4. The musical

:rofl:

[saracat]

7. Ya know, Mebbe so. Makes as much sense as other opinions!

:rofl:

[AllentownJake]

8. or optimism

:rofl:

[TexasObserver]

5. I cannot believe how badly the president blew his position of strength on Health Care.

He really let the GOP and the health care industry run wild for 3 months, and he can't undo the damage they did in that time. His lack of leadership on this issue has been deadly to the health care needs of millions.

[AllentownJake]

6. You understand better why I'm nervous about Financial Regulations

From the team that brought you Health care reform...Wall Street Reform:scared:

[TexasObserver]

10. He's utterly failed to show leadership in dealing with Wall Street Excesses

While I generally approve his efforts in economic matters, he's done far less than he could have. There's been no tough love at all. He's letting these same spoiled Wall Street brats who drove the economy into the ditch continue to drive. That's irresponsible. The economy may rock along and recover fully, but Obama has missed his opportunity to join FDR and LBJ as presidents who actually did something of note. I've given up hoping he'll be the promise he represented himself to be. He's a caretaker president. He'll be ok in some matters, weak in others where he shouldn't be. He's going for PASS on a pass-fail standard. He's not shooting for high grades. He just wants to PASS.

I'm disappointed in him. He's turned out to be kind of shallow and gutless.

[AllentownJake]

12. I apologize

for past things I have said to you.

[TexasObserver]

13. Well, then I'd better apologize to you, too, Jake.

I've been too hard on you. As I've read more of your posts, I've gotten a clearer picture of your situation. It's tough to be your age and realize you've worked your ass off, gotten that education, but you're still caught in an economic vise that is bigger than all that.

[AllentownJake]

18. Right now it feels like a kick in the face

I worked for free for this guy for nine months and he's sitting in that White House like some sort of model for US Weekly and People magazine.

I did this so he would fight for people (I wasn't included at the time).

Watching the Health Insurance fiasco take its course I've become more and more angry at the leaders of the party for not taking a fighting stand for the people who elected them and they represent.

Honestly, I'd settle for Jimmy Carter right now...at least I could trust the words that were coming out of his mouth on issues even if he was kind of inept at getting things done.

[TexasObserver]

19. I admit I had really high hopes for thim to live up to his promise.

But a pattern has evolved. He really doesn't want to take on controversial issues. He's not going to do anything about the crimes of the Bush administration. He's not going to push back against the DHS/NSA/FBI excesses and expansions. He's not going to take on the military industrials excesses.

He's not going to make any waves for any powerful interests.

I just hope he'll be reasonably competent, and he'll appoint great justices.

[AllentownJake]

23. Well he's the President for the next 3 years possibly 7

We will see what starts to happen next year.

A left flank is going to open after Healthcare....I expect the anti-war movement to start picking up again in 2010 as well.

[sendero]

37. I think it is very unlikely..

... that Obama will be a 2 term president. The right hates him and he's totally let down the left. The economy is not likely to be substantially better in 2012. I just don't see how he gets re-elected, his rhetoric is great, his actions pathetic.

[AllentownJake]

41. The war protest are going to begin soon

The minute more troops are sent...and if the President thinks the anti-war lobby won't make noise against him...tell him to have a seance at the White House and ask LBJ, they learned what to do under his Presidency.

[annabanana]

14. He let the tea baggers run wild. Those clowns didn't do their side

any good. I maintain that we "won" the Summer.

[TexasObserver]

17. I don't think the teabaggers did any lasting damage to the GOP.

They did hurt the cause of health care reform, however, and were successful in pitting the Medicare recipients against those who don't have care and might get it under a reform plan.

[AllentownJake]

20. Actually they are going to be trouble

If they are folded into the GOP in 2010 and the GOP compromises with them on the platform for a few key issues.

Those people screaming at Town Halls today, will be the people knocking on doors and making calls next October.

How do I know this, because the Barack Obama's campaign in Allentown's backbone when it started was the Peace movement here and a lot of the volunteers were from that same movement.

Not comparing the Tea Bagger to Peace Movement people in terms of morality...just in term of what makes up a political base.

[HowHasItComeToThis]

15. YES

[BzaDem]

9. No offense, but this was completely obvious.

In March, the hardest to get 60th vote was one of Joe Lieberman, Ben Nelson, or Olympia Snowe. Now, in November, the hardest to get 60th vote was one of Joe Lieberman, Ben Nelson, or Olympia Snowe. Nothing has changed. The chance that we were going to get anything like what progressives demanded was 0% from November 4th, 2008, when the current United States Senate was elected. All talk about having a robust public option that anyone can choose has been a dog and pony show mostly conducted by people who didn't like the Senatorial math and chose to deal with that by ignoring it.

If we want to enact a robust public option, we need the 60th vote to be someone like Claire McCaskill at the worst. We would most likely need 66-67 senate seats for that to happen.

[AllentownJake]

11. Why the hell would you choose to attack an issue

Where you know you don't have the support from your campaign promises if the math is against you.

[BzaDem]

16. Because Obama (and most people not like those on DU) would be satisfied with something less.

For most people, ending the ban on pre-existing conditions and subsidies to those making under 3-4x poverty level so that they can afford insurance (thereby raising coverage from 83%-94%) is a HUGE change, worth spending political capital over. The public option as a concept wasn't even conceived until 4-5 years ago. Howard Dean did not include such an option in his plan. The truth is, we will probably never get 66+ Senate seats (or at the very least not in the next two decades). So what you want is really not feasible, and what Obama wants is feasible (and closely but not exactly mirrors what the Democratic party wanted before the concept of a public option came about). Of course he is going to try to get it.

And those currently with pre-existing conditions and those below 3-4 times the poverty level will be thankful for it.

[AllentownJake]

21. Not a good idea to sell your base on one thing

while you know you can only get another. I understand bargaining, however, he keeps this kind of stuff up, he'll have a primary challenger in 2012 and that is the last thing an incumbent President wants.

[inna]

22. not in this political climate. he won't have a primary challenger.

[AllentownJake]

24. Depends on the next 3 years

No one thought Jimmy Carter in 1977 or LBJ in 1965 would get one in 80 or 68.

[BzaDem]

25. Actually it is a good idea.

It is done all the time, by every single presidential candidate. Positions a candidate takes in the primary vary widely from positions taken in the general, and positions taken in the general vary widely from those that are actually enacted.

Obama can't promise to enact anything. He does not control Congress. He can promise to support something, and he has absolutely kept that promise. He supports a robust public option open to everyone (as do I). Just because he cannot get such a public option due to factors outside of his control doesn't mean he doesn't support it.

And a primary challenger? Seriously? Obama is not worried about a primary challenger. Obama will not get a remotely successful primary challenger. If anything, such a primary challenger would position Obama as more moderate in the general election.

If you are saying that you want one (or you want him to move left and want the threat of a primary challenger to get him to do so), that is one thing. But to say that he in reality is actually worried about a primary challenger is rank denialism.

[AllentownJake]

27. Well next election they can find another sucker

to man their phone banks...I'm sure they will. I'll vote and make calls on issues, but it will be a long, long, long time before I go knocking on doors and making phone calls for any candidate.

[ProSense]

28. Who is the sucker, you? n/t

[AllentownJake]

29. You know for someone who has such a zeal

for this President, You'd think you'd stick less of a fork in the eye of someone who worked very hard for him...or maybe try to change their mind that he was worth doing that type of stuff for again.

Of course, I really have my doubts about whether you support this President or whether you have a teenage crush on him.

[BzaDem]

35. If your lack of phonebanking results in a Republican president (which I doubt), you will jump at the

chance to phonebank in the following election.

One would think that otherwise intelligent people would realize that there is a difference between what one wants and what one can achieve. Apparently you don't. You think that Obama not achieving a public option/single payer/etc is Obama's fault, whereas in reality it is the fault of the Senators that would vote no on it. Until we have a better educated populace that understands how government actually works, we will continue on the cycle of enthusiasm -> Democratic president -> lack of enthusiasm -> Republican president -> enthusiasm -> Democratic president. There's not much anyone can do about this except try to educate their fellow citizens of how government works.

I don't really think that my attempts to do so are going to convince you of anything. So we will have to wait for a Republican president to focus your mind. And the cycle will continue.

[AllentownJake]

36. Maybe

See, here is the thing. I have no problem working, but I'm not going to go out and sell people on things that aren't going to happen. I looked people in the eye in 2008 and told them that the mandates would be a pox on this nation and that because of this you should vote for my guy vs. the other person. That might not mean anything to you, but it meant something to me.

If someone has me go out and lie for them...well I'm none to happy about it and I really don't believe that you do bad things for a higher cause.

[saracat]

43. The reality is that the buck stops at the President's desk. he may not always succeed but he has to

to try. Obama isn't even trying. That was obvious when he took single payer "off the table" They said it wouldn't pass.Why? Because they think it is more important to appease the GOP than get a real health care program. Why are they appeasing conservative DEMS instead of whipping them in line? If we can't even ask for single payer now when we control all three branches of government , we are a sorry excuse for a party and we have no leadership. The President "refuses" too even "demand" a PO. He can use the bully pulpit and demand things.He also has a veto pen. My Democratic governor, now Homeland sec chief, regularly used the veto pen against an outrageous legislature. She was our buffer. The President needs to protect the people and be our intermediary and stop worrying about bipartisanship and the midterm elections.

[inna]

31. no, you.

either a sucker or a shill.

[ProSense]

32. No, you.

:rofl:

[inna]

33. very funny.

:eyes:

[ipaint]

26. A very temporary change. Nothing at all to reduce spending

will crush this type of change before it gets out the door. The ins. companies are the problem.

This president certainly could have fought the good fight for real reform. He chose not to. A feasible but very temporary change versus a real fight for reform and risking loss. The only way to get lasting change is to choose the latter. Choosing the former leaves the insurance companies in charge, positioned to destroy any meager reforms and much stronger for the long haul.

[HughMoran]

30. true

Revisionist history is what makes the DU go round...

[tabasco]

38. Then go somewhere else.

You spend a lot of time here for someone who hates it so much.

[HughMoran]

42. lol

Yeah, disagreement is not something one should expect on a political website - I just can't take it. :rofl:

Why don't you leave if you're so defensive?

[Bluenorthwest]

34. The Insurance Companies are the problem

And that is that.

[dixiegrrrrl]

40. I think Robert Rich nailed the problem pretty well here

"It is time for the political combatants on the Left and Right to begin to realize that this cultural war was always intended; for it keeps us disorganized, broke and powerless. We are supposed to see the Right as paranoid delusional fruitcakes and they are supposed to see us as Godless Commies bent on turning this nation into the next social and economic experimental dictatorship. While we are battling each other over who if anyone is going to Michelle Bachmann's supposed gulag, Wall Street and its complicit partner the U. S. Government will be busy silently stealing our wallets while telling us to spend $80,000.00 getting an education for the Wal-Mart jobs of the future because that is all we are creating."

http://www.examiner.com/x-3629-Philadelphia-Progressive-Examiner~y2009m10d24-Middle-Class-America-United-We-Stand-Divided-were-broke

[Hippo_Tron]

39. I certainly did

And I think anybody who didn't, does not understand how difficult it is to get something through Congress.