Glad to see that the libs on BGP got a copy of the Democratic talking points following their "humbling" mid-term election. I listened to John Yarmuth on the Mandy Connell Show today and he was regurgiatating the same tripe. I think the Dems just don't get it. Most Americans do not like the health care bill that was force fed down our throats. To deny that is to have ones head buried so far in the sand an ostrich would be envious.

And what are these "Democratic talking points" to which you're referring?

Glad to see that the libs on BGP got a copy of the Democratic talking points following their "humbling" mid-term election. I listened to John Yarmuth on the Mandy Connell Show today and he was regurgiatating the same tripe. I think the Dems just don't get it. Most Americans do not like the health care bill that was force fed down our throats. To deny that is to have ones head buried so far in the sand an ostrich would be envious.

Just not true.

 

The exit polling in an election that saw massive Republican gains still had half of those that voted on Tuesday in favor of expanding the law or leaving it the same. Among the general population, it's a majority.

That the Democratic losses were not a reflection of Americans unhappiness with Obamacare.

 

That the results of the election do not mean that Americans want to revisit what the Dems spent that last two years shoving down our collective throats.

 

That the economy (which Obama inherited) was the driving force behind the massive Democratic loss.

 

That the American people want the parties to work together (funny how they didn't seem to think that when they had the numbers).

 

So far I've heard Obama, his press agent, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, John Yarmuth and now BGP libs all expectorating the same platitudes.

That the Democratic losses were not a reflection of Americans unhappiness with Obamacare.

It certainly seems to be more of an unhappiness with the economy, and the data backs that up.

That the results of the election do not mean that Americans want to revisit what the Dems spent that last two years shoving down our collective throats.

A valid opinion, whether you are with it or not.

 

Funny, some would say that the legislation passed over the last two years was the best efforts by our elected officials to address issues. Of course, you wish to characterize them as being "shoved down our collective throats" ... as if we didn't elect those officials and those proposals actually had very little support.

That the economy (which Obama inherited) was the driving force behind the massive Democratic loss.

Doesn't the available data support that assertion?

That the American people want the parties to work together (funny how they didn't seem to think that when they had the numbers).

Didn't the health care reform law contain provisions that had been proposed by Republicans in the past?

 

Some of think Obama has tried to work with the other side, which has openly stated that it would rather work to beat him than with him.

So far I've heard Obama, his press agent, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, John Yarmuth and now BGP libs all expectorating the same platitudes.

Maybe that's because they have some validity ...

Edited November 5, 201015 yr by westsider

That the Democratic losses were not a reflection of Americans unhappiness with Obamacare.

 

That the results of the election do not mean that Americans want to revisit what the Dems spent that last two years shoving down our collective throats.

 

That the economy (which Obama inherited) was the driving force behind the massive Democratic loss.That the American people want the parties to work together (funny how they didn't seem to think that when they had the numbers).

 

So far I've heard Obama, his press agent, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, John Yarmuth and now BGP libs all expectorating the same platitudes.

 

I agree with you that the economy is the driving force behind the losses. So why are McConnell and Boehner focusing on repeal of health care? As a poster above stated, if they head down that path and don't focus on the economy and deficit then they are repeating the same mistakes the Dems made the past two years and that the Repubs made in the Bush years before that.

I agree with you that the economy is the driving force behind the losses. So why are McConnell and Boehner focusing on repeal of health care? As a poster above stated, if they head down that path and don't focus on the economy and deficit then they are repeating the same mistakes the Dems made the past two years and that the Repubs made in the Bush years before that.

AT disagrees with that statement.

AT disagrees with that statement.

 

My bad. Misread his post. Thanks for the correction.

If the deficit really is the Republicans' newfound top concern, and the evidence is that the Bush tax cuts contribute to the deficit, then why are so many Republicans bent on extending them?

 

1) They fear the affect on the economy

2) They feel they can reduce the deficit through spending cuts alone.

 

That's my guess anyway.

True ... the Obama administration has been vilified for supposedly making health care reform a priority over addressing the job situation.

 

Are Boehner, McConnell and Co. in danger of doing the same thing?

 

Yes, Republican's screwing up, who would have thought it?

Maybe if you read my post above you'll see more of why I feel the way I do.

 

I did.

Glad to see this thread proving my main point when I started it. We are over 60 posts now and the focus of the thread is on the economy. So why are McConnell and Boehner listing repeal of health reform as one of their top priorities? They are headed down the same patrh the Dems went 2 years ago if they spend time and energy fosucing on health care reform.

 

I agree with you about the main issues of the election, but some (such as myself) see health reform & excess spending/budget deficits in the same light. The one leads to the other.

Nope. Like it or not, exit polling data doesn't support your conclusion.

Depends on where you are somewhat. John Boccieri, Ohio's 16th district, won 54% of the vote in 2008 to win his first term. This year he only got 40% of the vote, and lost 54-40.

The most frequently cited reason for the loss of support for this Democrat in Ohio's mid-section? His flip-flop on health care. There were plenty of cases like that. I recently read somewhere that 40% of those that voted cited health care as the reason they voted against Democrats. Granted, it's not the main reason, but 40% is large enough, like it or not.

Depends on where you are somewhat. John Boccieri, Ohio's 16th district, won 54% of the vote in 2008 to win his first term. This year he only got 40% of the vote, and lost 54-40.

The most frequently cited reason for the loss of support for this Democrat in Ohio's mid-section? His flip-flop on health care. There were plenty of cases like that. I recently read somewhere that 40% of those that voted cited health care as the reason they voted against Democrats. Granted, it's not the main reason, but 40% is large enough, like it or not.

 

So do we take it that 60% are ok with health care reform? That sounds about right to me. I would guess more like 55-45 in favor of health care reform. If people believed health care reform is revenue neutral, it would be even higher in favor of reform. IMO many of those that are against it are against because of their perception of added cost. If you took a poll on whether health care reform was needed, it would be extremely high in favor of yes, reform was needed. That is why I think McConnell and Boehner are making a big mistake spending any of their perceived political capital on health care.

So do we take it that 60% are ok with health care reform? That sounds about right to me. I would guess more like 55-45 in favor of health care reform. If people believed health care reform is revenue neutral, it would be even higher in favor of reform. IMO many of those that are against it are against because of their perception of added cost. If you took a poll on whether health care reform was needed, it would be extremely high in favor of yes, reform was needed. That is why I think McConnell and Boehner are making a big mistake spending any of their perceived political capital on health care.

 

I agree with this VOR!

 

The fact is you can't add 30 million folks to the health plans and waive pre-exisiting conditions and not add some cost. That is the problem with the proposal. It flies in the face of common sense at a time when many are looking to tighten their belts. This appears to have no choice, but to add costs.....

I agree with this VOR!

 

The fact is you can't add 30 million folks to the health plans and waive pre-exisiting conditions and not add some cost. That is the problem with the proposal. It flies in the face of common sense at a time when many are looking to tighten their belts. This appears to have no choice, but to add costs.....

 

I believe that cost is already being paid by all of us who have health insurance. Hospitals budget for indigent care and they pass that cost along to us. If more dollars get paid in and indigent care cost goes down, then our cost should go down.