If Obama went for Single Payer and failed,

[apples and oranges]

and went for a 100% green energy plan and failed,

and reversed all the bailouts so that the economy crashed, the Big 3 failed, and millions more people lost jobs...

Would he get your vote? Would that be considered success?

[no limit]

1. I would rather have seen him try to get single payer and if that didn't happen go for a publicoption

but as it stands on the healthcare bill I would have been happy with this bill failing. And my reasons for this have been very clearly spelled out on this site.

I would also love to see him fail in trying to get offshore oil drilling.

What is your point?

[ClassWarrior]

7. So you'd rather that he failed and set back the health debate another 20 years like Clinton did?

:eyes:

This "Romneycare" bill is a stinking dog, but at least the health debate is still alive and the stage has been set for more improvements.

NGU.

[dflprincess]

49. By digging the insurance companies in deeper by making Romney Care national

he has set actual reform back years.

Passing a bill that hands the crooks billions of private and public dollars with no competition from a public option will just keep them going longer. If they had had to compete with a Medicare buy in or even been left to continue on the path they've been on they would have destroyed themselves.

Instead, we get to bail them out without getting guarantees that we will be able to access care. All we get is the same lousy "coverage" they've been selling for years.

[Cleita]

65. The only reason, it wasn't done in 20 years was because Clinton walked

away from the issue for the rest of his term something that I don't think either FDR or LBJ would have done. Of course having eight years of Bush didn't help. If our legally elected President, Al Gore hadn't been blocked by the Supreme Court from taking the oath of office, I'm certain it would have been foremost on his agenda as well and we might have had the beginnings of national health care eight years ago because he would have used the surplus for it instead of tax cuts for the rich and war.

[Greyhound]

99. Same false premise, the appeal to consequence. n/t

[NJmaverick]

8. In the world of politics you don't get do overs

[no limit]

14. Tell that to the person making $14 an hour who will now be required to come up with $200 a month

or pay fine.

[NJmaverick]

20. I wish I could change reality, but I can't. All any of us can do

and as this OP is suggesting you make the best of the situation you are presented with, rather than go down in failure fighting it.

[no limit]

26. Why do people making between $10-$15/hr have to always be the ones asked to sacrafice

Yes, they will now have to make best of this situation; but that's not really an argument on your part. The same argument could be made for anything, war in Iraq, bailouts, financial collapse, etc.

[NJmaverick]

28. Why wasn't I born with Cary Grant looks and a billion dollars?

life is rarely fair. All we can do is make successful incremental efforts to improve it.

[no limit]

40. So you are saying pull yourself up by the boot straps you lazy bums?

That's your argument?

[NJmaverick]

You know that's not my argument. If you are going to be that obtuse

I see little point in any further discussion.

[no limit]

47. Then how is someone living on $12.50 an hour supposed to pay for the mandate?

The mandate that says they will have to buy $168 health insurance policy that they will never be able to afford to use because of deductibles and copays. Your argument after I pointed this out is "life isn't fair, get used to it". Do you not understand how fucked up it is for you to say something like that because it completely brushes aside the pain these people will face?

You saying you don't want to further this discussion because I'm pointing these things out to you is yet another cop out on your part. You ignore this point about the people that will be hurt every time I bring it up to you.

[NJmaverick]

50. You have not demonstrated that the person can not afford to pay for the insurance

that's a huge issue you gloss over in your rush to make your case.

[no limit]

55. There is nothing to demonstrate. That person makes about $1,400 a month after taxes

After rent, phone bills, car payment, car insurance, water, gas, electric, credit card payments, food, and everything else you need to survive that person has almost nothing left at the end of the month. And the fact you need someone to explain this to you shows how out of touch you really are.

[NJmaverick]

72. Let us see the monthly budget break out

[no limit]

76. You got it below, dont ignore it this time around. I want your reply

[muffin1]

77. Oh dear god.

Rent/Mortgage: $800.00
Power: $75.00
Phone: $40.00
Car: $150.00
Car Insurance: $50.00
Food: $200.00

These are only VERY conservative estimates, using what we usually pay each month in our area. That's not adding in ANY incidentals like one's car breaking down, or gas for one's car, or a tune-up for one's car, or needing new clothes, or the washer breaking, etc.

[NJmaverick]

80. That rent can be reduced with a room mate

which allows one to afford the insurance and all the other expenses you mention.

[no limit]

82. So everyone has the ability to get a roomate?

And now it is the governments job to tell you who to live with? What if the person likes living alone?

Lets not forget that the government is now telling you that you can't live alone yet this is just so they can afford the monthly premiums. The $1000 or $500 deductible and copays will still be unaffordable so treatment will never be possible anyway.

[muffin1]

90. Yep.

ALL that dough you save by getting a (potentially psycho) roommate, would go toward the co-pays and deductibles. Not to mention - I don't know about you - but something ALWAYS comes up that isn't planned. Car repairs - we ran over a nail the other day ($$), oil changes, gravel for our road, a broken tooth (just last month). It never, ever fails.

[no limit]

92. Absolutely. This is common sense to anyone that ever lived on that kind of income

yet people that have no clue and are totally out of touch are giving us financial adivce about how you can really afford all this stuff, you just don't know it yet.

Notice how I didn't get a response and never will before all this gets deleted. Yet I gurantee you our buddy will be repeating the same bullshit next time this comes up as if this discussion never happened.

[muffin1]

64. A blind person could see how that person can't afford it.

Jeez, Louise.

[NJmaverick]

71. Where is the monthly budget break out?

[no limit]

79. Do you know how much a loaf of bread costs? I'm guessing you don't

and before you reply it's actually one of those rhetorical questions.

[NJmaverick]

85. I notice you do a whole lot of guessing and you are usually wrong

[no limit]

88. You seem totally foreign to the concept of living on $12 /hr. It was a rhetorical question

[Raineyb]

69. You need a demonstration of what is generally simple math?

What a waste of electrons this sub-thread is.

[NJmaverick]

70. Math with out numbers?

that's certainly a new one to me

[no limit]

75. Jesus fucking christ. So out of touch, here I'll do simple math for you

$1,400 a month:

$600 for rent
$150 for car insurance
$50 gasoline
$100 - $200 for car payment (I'll use $100 for the final total)
$50 - Phone
$50 credit card bills (this health bill wont eliminate your previous debts)
$50 - Gas in winter
$50 - Electric
$20 - Water

We are at $1120 with the best scenario and I am totally low balling everything above, in reality most of those bills are much more. And we haven't even included things like food, internet, clothing, leisure, and other basic needs. $10 a day for food and you are left with $80 a month.

Do me a favor, don't bail out on this discussion like you always do. I want you to explain how this person can afford $160 a month for insurance or $60 a month for a fine.

[NJmaverick]

83. You already established a $1400 take home

which means using your numbers (which includes a nebulous $50 credit card payment) allows for the insurance mandate.

[no limit]

86. What the hell are you talking about? With the math above they are left with $80 /month

and thats before leisure, clothing, or other things people like to have.

[muffin1]

95. You crazy librul!!11!!

Poor people should not have LEISURE activities!!11!! :eyes:

[Raineyb]

91. You have the take home. You know what things cost in your area you can do the math your damn self

Of course doing the math would show that your arguments are idiotic so I'm not surprised that you can't be bothered.

Like I said a complete waste of electrons.

[no limit]

The point is to drag this out as much as possible to have all this deleted

thats what he does time and time again. Then he acts as if this discussion never took place, repeating the same bullshit later.

[muffin1]

41. Who is Carrie Grant? n/t

[subterranean]

32. Wrong.

If a single adult makes $14 an hour and the cheapest acceptable plan costs $200 a month, that would exceed 8% of that person's income. Therefore, he/she would be exempt from the mandate and the fine.

If a family of 4 has household income of $14 an hour, they'll be eligible for Medicaid.

[no limit]

39. Fair enough. Drop the income down to $12.50 /hr and they will have to pay $168 a month

Still unaffordable. And lets not forget that this $14/hr person will still be left without insurance.

Source: http://healthreform.kff.org/SubsidyCalculator.aspx

[Greyhound]

100. You left off "if you try to do for the people".

Crippling "trade deals", bankruptcy "reform", welfare "reform", unraveling the New Deal, all these and so many more were done with numerous do-overs.

[ClassWarrior]

9. For what it's worth, I agree that he should have begun negotiations with Medicare for All, and...

...then he could have fallen back to a public option. But he didn't, and that sucks, but at least he won something, which means the debate is still alive.

NGU.

[no limit]

12. Easy to say when you won't be hurt by this bill, as millions of single americans will

If you make $14 /hr the government will mandate you to spend over $200 a month on insurance you won't be able to afford to use anyway or fine you for it.

So yes, he won something, but many americans will end up losing as a result of this bill.

[ClassWarrior]

17. You're right, it would be better to fail and live with no hope of fixing a flawed system...

...for another 20 years.

:eyes:

NGU.

[no limit]

22. Like I said, tell that to the people that won't be able to afford this mandate

It's nice for you to sit there on your high horse while expecting reform on the backs of single middle class americans.

[ClassWarrior]

30. Yeah, that's about all you've said. Why don't you tell the parents of the children who...

...will now be covered that you wish this bill would have failed? Why don't you tell the people who couldn't get coverage in the past because of pre-existing conditions that you wish this bill would have failed? Why don't you tell all of the advocates who are working hard to actually get Medicare for All passed that you wish Romneycare would have failed and their work would have been set back two decades?

Semantic games. Is that all you've got?

NGU.

[no limit]

37. Why do you keep repeating arguments you know aren't logical. We already had this discussion

on more than one occasion from what I recall.

Your argument is that it's ok to hurt some people to help some others. That's not a logical argument. If we took unemployment benefits from 40% of the unemployed and gave the savings to the other 60% using your logic that would be a good idea because it would help more people. It's not a logical argument, and this has been pointed out to you in the past.

[ClassWarrior]

42. You must be thinking of someone else. Because that's not my argument.

And, according to your logic, your argument is that it's okay to continue hurting some people -- and give up hope of helping any of anyone for decades -- in order to spare others.

Nice try.

NGU.

[no limit]

46. Nope thats not my logic at all. My logic is lets not piss on people that are already hurting

to help others. Lets just help those others without pissing on those people. Sorry that's such a hard concept for you and our government to understand.

And yes, my unemployment analogy is exactly what your argument boils down to. It's okay to hurt some people as long as you help some others.

[ClassWarrior]

57. It's never okay to hurt some people, contrary to your logic. But sometimes we need to advance...

...a larger agenda. As in Medicare for All, where no one gets hurt. And I'm sorry that the process of doing that isn't all pretty ponies and lemonade, like you obviously wish it was.

NGU.

[no limit]

61. You don't see the problem with what you just said? You want to reread what you just wrote?

You said it's NEVER okay to hurt some people (you claimed this was my logic, no its not, it's your logic). The operative word here is NEVER. Yet in the very next sentance you seem to be advocating that it's okay to hurt people to advance an agenda.

Otherwise you would not support this bill, yet you do.

Yes, medicare for all is a great concept, this president has shown we will never get it (or atleast not for a very long time). So you are distracting from the main issue (which is affordibility of the mandate) by saying we will advance single payer (we wont).

[ClassWarrior]

62. Point to where I say I support this bill, Fonzie.

Let's see, I called it "a stinking dog" and "Romneycare" in this thread. Did I call it any other names? Perhaps you can have a looksee, Fonz, while you're desperately trying to find a place where I said I support this bill.

We all want pretty ponies and lemonade, Fonzie...

:rofl:

NGU.

[no limit]

63. So do you think this bill should have failed?

If you think it should have failed then my apologies; thats not the impression I got from your posts. But if you think it should have passed then you are making the argument that its ok to hurt those people to advance an agenda, no way around that.

[ClassWarrior]

67. Romneycare hurts a lot of people a lot of ways.

The status quo hurts a lot of different people a lot of different ways.

The difference is that passing Romneycare keeps the debate alive, which means there's still hope of taking away everyone's hurt -- and not having to wait a quarter century to do so.

It's not pretty. It's not ideal. It's the way it is. And we need to keep moving forward, otherwise all this concern for hurt people is just semantics.

NGU.

[no limit]

78. So when you said it's NEVER ok to hurt people you didn' really mean that, you were just talking

Hope has nothing to do with this. As it stands many people will be hurt. And you are ok with that as long as it keeps the debate going, a debate that probably won't lead to anything good since we are up for losing seats in November.

So again, you think it's ok to hurt people to advance the democratic agenda.

[ClassWarrior]

81. I told you not to put on the water skis, Fonzie...

:rofl:

NGU.

[no limit]

84. Keep laughing while people will be forced to come up with money they dont have. Very funny indeed

your use of the "rofl" smilie doesn't make up for the fact that you are ok with hurting people to advance your agenda.

[ClassWarrior]

96. And it doesn't change the fact that you are ok with hurting people to advance yours.

By your own logic.

NGU.

[Name removed]

97. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[emulatorloo]

31. If you truly can't afford insurance, the govt will help you get insurance

[no limit]

34. Absolutely not true. I just posted numbers after subsidies. $14/hr you pay $200 a month

[emulatorloo]

51. Where are these numbers and were are you getting them from? THANKS! n/t

[no limit]

56. I posted this in the thread above, sorry should have added it again. here:

http://healthreform.kff.org/SubsidyCalculator.aspx

[emulatorloo]

102. Thank for the link -- I appreciate it!

I will check it out the next couple days.

[DrDan]

2. are ou suggesting that if he failed with Single Payer there would have been no bill?

[Junkdrawer]

4. Yes. That would have angered Republicans and we wouldn't have...

obtained ONE of their votes.

Oh, wait...

[Nuclear Unicorn]

6. Exactly

Even with trying to curry their favor with the worst of their ideas Obama and the democrats were still spit upon...sometimes not so metaphorically.

At the end of the day we won but what did we win? A bill with enough GOP-brewed poison pills that it may have all the medicinal value of hemlock in 2012.

[apples and oranges]

19. Would a majority of democrats have voted for single payer?

Do we have a list of 51 names in support of single payer?

[Junkdrawer]

24. Can I invite you to my Friday poker game?

Just remember: the rules are that guests have to show their hands to all the other players. I don't think you'll have any problem with that.

[NJmaverick]

10. Not for another 2 decades based on history

[no limit]

15. Why? If singe payer failed he could have moved on to the public option

which he had support from the american people and the votes for. He chose not to even do that.

So what does history have to do with this?

[ClassWarrior]

21. That would be the way a smart negotiator would have done it.

But he didn't and that sucks, and no amount of kvetching is going to change that. Now let's get going on passing Medicare for All on a state-by-state basis.

NGU.

[muffin1]

53. Ummm...

I live in Virginia, where our esteemed Attorney General Ken Cucinneli is SUING the Federal Government. Even if Deeds had won the Governor's race last year, he said he would probably 'opt out' of any public option if possible.

I honestly don't see that happening here - at least, not until we're long dead.

[GreenPartyVoter]

59. Some states will do it long before others.The problem right now is the economy. I think

if things were better right now more states would do it sooner.

[NJmaverick]

23. Congress has a lot on its plate. With something as big as Health Care Reform

they will take it on and spend the year or so to see it through. If it fails Congress will not try again. Some of it will be that they feel it will fail again and the other is the American public hates failures so many of those congress people will be voted out.

[ClassWarrior]

25. And by the way, since you're implying that you're such a big advocate of "single payer"...

...how about getting on the bandwagon and calling it Medicare for All, which is a frame that the American public understands and likes?

NGU.

[no limit]

27. Because I feel most people reading this are smart enough to see past how you phrase something

[ClassWarrior]

33. Wow, rather than changing a simple behavior to help what you are supposedly advocating...

...you make a superiority argument.

Don't put on those water skis, Fonz!!

:rofl:

NGU.

[no limit]

43. You are the one that seems to think this is some game. I am trying to have an adult conversation

without thinking how I phrase something. Sorry that offends you so much.

[ClassWarrior]

60. It doesn't offend me. But then that was a deliberate frame that you chose, versus saying...

...for instance, "Sorry that I chose the wrong words," or "Sorry that I inadvertently hurt the cause."

So don't act so coy about "not thinking how you phrase something." You obviously think very deliberately about how you phrase things.

;rofl:

NGU.

[apples and oranges]

29. By then, the media would have torn Obama and the dems to shreds

The big headline would be: Obama and the Dems have failed and his presidency is over. Try getting something done in that atmosphere!

[ClassWarrior]

36. Yeah, good thing everything went so smoothly by doing it this way.

Oh... waitaminnit...

:eyes:

NGU.

[Junkdrawer]

3. Self Delete - Posted wrong spot.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[spoony]

38. Agreed.

It's just a pile of baseless assumptions and false dichotomies.

[NJmaverick]

11. That pretty much sums up the difference between a pragmatist and an idealist

well done

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[apples and oranges]

18. Why not just answer the question?

I think it's a valid one. What counts as success for us, and what counts as failure. Are we more concerned with appearances or results?

[Birthmark]

16. Gosh...

...that sounds bad. But most things do when you assume failure. Difficult /= failure

[Lydia Leftcoast]

35. If he TRIED and failed, he would get points for taking a strong position

AND he could legitimately blame the Republicans for the failure.

I've observed over the years that ordinary people feel ignored and shoved aside and that they LIKE strong, plain-speaking politicians. This liking seems to be irrespective of ideology. The Republicanites have a lot of forceful, plain-speaking pols these days, and your average uninformed voter gravitates toward that. It doesn't matter if what the pol is saying is nonsense. It's the energy that counts.

If Obama had come out for single-payer, mobilized his army of election volunteers to work on this issue, and conducted a carefully targeted PR campaign (explaining the system in no more than five sentences), and sending out the Dems' best talkers out to the talk shows to body-slam the naysayers, he may well have succeeded.

Even if he failed, he would still have my respect (and the respect of others) for TRYING.

[Echo In Light]

44. Exactly...and on all counts

[LWolf]

45. Yes.

Because he would have been working to move the best ideas for the nation forward.

Sure, he would have been called a socialist, and he would have lost republican support in Congress.

Don't you think it would have been worth it?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

48. Not if he still has his wars going in Afghanistan and Iraq.

[high density]

52. These all or nothing people would still vote for Kucinich. NM

[Cleita]

66. This Old Democrat will vote for, work for, and contribute to

Kucinich any time he chooses to run again. He stands for the FDR Democrats which is hardly all or nothing. However, I'm certain he will not run against Obama in 2012, however, we might see him in 2016 again.

[Tailormyst]

54. Yes- if he fights for us, I vote for him

I would rather see someone fighting for what was right, then implementing what is wrong, just to "win"

[SocialistLez]

58. Big Three

I don't have a BIG problem with the big three getting bailed out.
Chrysler was a waste of time to bail out but that's another story.

I'd much rather he bailed out the big three and made them promise to not move production to Mexico.


I didn't vote for Obama in '08. I figured he was a corporatist and surprise surprise...I am right.

[Raineyb]

68. I find it extremely difficult to take anyone seriously who thinks that the

bailouts (which did nothing to fix the underlying problems with the economy) saved a damn thing.

Idiotic question fail.

[NJmaverick]

74. "bailouts (which did nothing to fix the underlying problems with the economy)"

That's like saying you have no respect for the person that saves another's life by performing CPR because they didn't address the underlying heart disease that triggered the cardiac arrest.

[Raineyb]

93. Dealing with banks is not heart surgery. And here it is a year and a half later

and the underlying problems with the economy STILL haven't been fixed. But to go along with your asinine analogy, I wouldn't respect a doctor who treated the symptoms while ignoring the underlying disease either.

[Bluebear]

73. 'and reversed all the bailouts so that the economy crashed' - whatever.

[fascisthunter]

87. silly

[harun]

89. You sit on a throne of lies

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NY4bUP48RE8

[JackRiddler]

94. If it was all obviously because of Republican and Blue Dog obstructionism...

and he campaigned accordingly to increase the Democratic majority this year, rather than constantly adopting defensive positions (as was the case until the last week of the HCR debate), I do believe people would vote again the same way they did in 2008: for change.

However, what if he went for single payer, green energy and control of the banks and actually got them, or some of them? What if the economy didn't crash, but on the contrary began to transform in the way we need to survive the next century ecologically?

Wouldn't this be a great thing regardless of later election results?

I guess it's about whether the issues of single payer, green energy, and ending the bankster tyranny and blackmail are more important to you than having your favored political hero score "wins."

But I do believe:

Who dares wins.

[jgraz]

98. Congratulations on the most appropriate DU handle ever.

:toast:

[Greyhound]

101. All these false premises and scare tactics, is that all you people have?

And you wonder why "Democrat" has become such a derogatory label...

You act as if we were republicons, unable to comprehend and observe with no background knowledge, and with no motivation other than fear.

"The smoking gun may well be a mushroom cloud.":nuke:

[apples and oranges]

103. I didn't expect the defensive reactions

It was simply a yes or no question. I'm not judging anyone just trying to understand everyone.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

104. DUers who call bullshit on your carefully constructed OP...

are "defensive"? Try again.