Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

If Obama went for Single Payer and failed,

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
apples and oranges Donating Member (772 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:21 AM
Original message
If Obama went for Single Payer and failed,
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?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:23 AM
Response to Original message
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?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #1
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.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dflprincess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #7
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.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #7
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #7
99. Same false premise, the appeal to consequence. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:37 AM
Response to Reply #1
8. In the world of politics you don't get do overs
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #8
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:52 AM
Response to Reply #14
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #20
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:57 AM
Response to Reply #26
28. Why wasn't I born with Cary Grant looks and a billion dollars?
Edited on Fri Apr-02-10 10:12 AM by NJmaverick
life is rarely fair. All we can do is make successful incremental efforts to improve it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #28
40. So you are saying pull yourself up by the boot straps you lazy bums?
That's your argument?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:11 AM
Original message
You know that's not my argument. If you are going to be that obtuse
I see little point in any further discussion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:14 AM
Response to Original message
47. Then how is someone living on $12.50 an hour supposed to pay for the mandate?
Edited on Fri Apr-02-10 10:15 AM by no limit
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #47
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:40 AM
Response to Reply #50
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #55
72. Let us see the monthly budget break out
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #72
76. You got it below, dont ignore it this time around. I want your reply
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muffin1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #72
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.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #77
80. That rent can be reduced with a room mate
which allows one to afford the insurance and all the other expenses you mention.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #80
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muffin1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #82
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #90
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muffin1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #50
64. A blind person could see how that person can't afford it.
Jeez, Louise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #64
71. Where is the monthly budget break out?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #71
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #79
85. I notice you do a whole lot of guessing and you are usually wrong
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #85
88. You seem totally foreign to the concept of living on $12 /hr. It was a rhetorical question
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raineyb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #50
69. You need a demonstration of what is generally simple math?
What a waste of electrons this sub-thread is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #69
70. Math with out numbers?
that's certainly a new one to me
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #70
75. Jesus fucking christ. So out of touch, here I'll do simple math for you
Edited on Fri Apr-02-10 11:22 AM by no limit
$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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #75
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #83
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muffin1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:51 AM
Response to Reply #86
95. You crazy librul!!11!!
Poor people should not have LEISURE activities!!11!! :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raineyb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #70
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:27 AM
Original message
The point is to drag this out as much as possible to have all this deleted
Edited on Fri Apr-02-10 11:30 AM by no limit
thats what he does time and time again. Then he acts as if this discussion never took place, repeating the same bullshit later.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muffin1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #28
41. Who is Carrie Grant? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
subterranean Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #14
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #32
39. Fair enough. Drop the income down to $12.50 /hr and they will have to pay $168 a month
Edited on Fri Apr-02-10 10:08 AM by no limit
Still unaffordable. And lets not forget that this $14/hr person will still be left without insurance.

Source: http://healthreform.kff.org/SubsidyCalculator.aspx
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #8
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.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:37 AM
Response to Reply #1
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.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #9
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #12
17. You're right, it would be better to fail and live with no hope of fixing a flawed system...
Edited on Fri Apr-02-10 09:48 AM by ClassWarrior
...for another 20 years.

:eyes:

NGU.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #17
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #22
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.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #30
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #37
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.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #42
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:49 AM
Response to Reply #46
57. It's never okay to hurt some people, contrary to your logic. But sometimes we need to advance...
Edited on Fri Apr-02-10 10:50 AM by ClassWarrior
...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.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #57
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).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #61
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.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #62
63. So do you think this bill should have failed?
Edited on Fri Apr-02-10 11:00 AM by no limit
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #63
67. Romneycare hurts a lot of people a lot of ways.
Edited on Fri Apr-02-10 11:09 AM by ClassWarrior
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.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #67
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #78
81. I told you not to put on the water skis, Fonzie...
:rofl:

NGU.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #81
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #84
96. And it doesn't change the fact that you are ok with hurting people to advance yours.
By your own logic.

NGU.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #96
97. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #22
31. If you truly can't afford insurance, the govt will help you get insurance
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #31
34. Absolutely not true. I just posted numbers after subsidies. $14/hr you pay $200 a month
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #34
51. Where are these numbers and were are you getting them from? THANKS! n/t
Edited on Fri Apr-02-10 10:29 AM by emulatorloo
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #51
56. I posted this in the thread above, sorry should have added it again. here:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #56
102. Thank for the link -- I appreciate it!
I will check it out the next couple days.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:27 AM
Response to Original message
2. are ou suggesting that if he failed with Single Payer there would have been no bill?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:29 AM
Response to Reply #2
4.  Yes. That would have angered Republicans and we wouldn't have...
obtained ONE of their votes.

Oh, wait...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nuclear Unicorn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:33 AM
Response to Reply #4
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
apples and oranges Donating Member (772 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:50 AM
Response to Reply #4
19. Would a majority of democrats have voted for single payer?
Do we have a list of 51 names in support of single payer?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #19
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:37 AM
Response to Reply #2
10. Not for another 2 decades based on history
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #10
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?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #15
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.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muffin1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #21
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenPartyVoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #53
59. Some states will do it long before others.The problem right now is the economy. I think
Edited on Fri Apr-02-10 10:53 AM by GreenPartyVoter
if things were better right now more states would do it sooner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #15
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #15
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.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:56 AM
Response to Reply #25
27. Because I feel most people reading this are smart enough to see past how you phrase something
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:02 AM
Response to Reply #27
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.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #33
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #43
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.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
apples and oranges Donating Member (772 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:57 AM
Response to Reply #15
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!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #29
36. Yeah, good thing everything went so smoothly by doing it this way.
Oh... waitaminnit...

:eyes:

NGU.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:28 AM
Response to Original message
3. Self Delete - Posted wrong spot.
Edited on Fri Apr-02-10 09:29 AM by Junkdrawer
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:30 AM
Response to Original message
5. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
spoony Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #5
38. Agreed.
It's just a pile of baseless assumptions and false dichotomies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:38 AM
Response to Original message
11. That pretty much sums up the difference between a pragmatist and an idealist
well done
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:42 AM
Response to Original message
13. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
apples and oranges Donating Member (772 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:48 AM
Response to Reply #13
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?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Birthmark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:44 AM
Response to Original message
16. Gosh...
...that sounds bad. But most things do when you assume failure. Difficult /= failure
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:04 AM
Response to Original message
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Echo In Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #35
44. Exactly...and on all counts
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LWolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:11 AM
Response to Original message
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?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:17 AM
Response to Original message
48. Not if he still has his wars going in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
high density Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:30 AM
Response to Original message
52. These all or nothing people would still vote for Kucinich. NM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #52
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tailormyst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:35 AM
Response to Original message
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"

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SocialistLez Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 10:50 AM
Response to Original message
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raineyb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:08 AM
Response to Original message
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #68
74. "bailouts (which did nothing to fix the underlying problems with the economy)"
Edited on Fri Apr-02-10 11:21 AM by NJmaverick
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raineyb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #74
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:12 AM
Response to Original message
73. 'and reversed all the bailouts so that the economy crashed' - whatever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:32 AM
Response to Original message
87. silly
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
89. You sit on a throne of lies
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 12:30 PM
Response to Original message
98. Congratulations on the most appropriate DU handle ever.
:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 12:47 PM
Response to Original message
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:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
apples and oranges Donating Member (772 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 01:35 PM
Response to Original message
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.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WorseBeforeBetter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #103
104. DUers who call bullshit on your carefully constructed OP...
are "defensive"? Try again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Dec 09th 2024, 05:46 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC