Affordable Care Act Woes (Obamacare)

[Pointedstick]

I don't think McCain's problem was that he was "insufficiently conservative", as if conservatism is the only axis for Republican candidates and more is better. From my perspective, McCain's problems were as follows:

• He was a war hawk following a president who took us on one foreign military misadventure after another
• He expressed economic illiteracy during the worst economic crisis in generations
• He expressed technological illiteracy in the face of a candidate who mastered it and a rising cohort of younger voters
• He allowed his handlers to choose a running mate who highlighted his old age
• He was running against the first black presidential candidate with full media backing

I doubt that McCain would have faired any better against Obama had he been more conservative on abortion, gay marriage, gun control, and taxes.

[MediumTex]

I don't think McCain's problem was that he was "insufficiently conservative", as if conservatism is the only axis for Republican candidates and more is better. From my perspective, McCain's problems were as follows:

• He was a war hawk following a president who took us on one foreign military misadventure after another
• He expressed economic illiteracy during the worst economic crisis in generations
• He expressed technological illiteracy in the face of a candidate who mastered it and a rising cohort of younger voters
• He allowed his handlers to choose a running mate who highlighted his old age
• He was running against the first black presidential candidate with full media backing

I doubt that McCain would have faired any better against Obama had he been more conservative on abortion, gay marriage, gun control, and taxes.

I am imagining history students from far in the future looking back on the G.W. Bush/Obama administrations under some silly textbook writer-generated narrative like "The U.S. Presidency: 2000-2016 - The Cowboy and the Messiah" and asking a question like "If those guys were the winners, who were the losers?"  The common thread is John McCain, who lost to Bush in the 2000 primaries and who lost to Obama in 2008.

McCain would have likely made a fine President.  If he had simply opted not to attack Iraq and waited for more consensus to push a health care reform proposal, he would have been miles ahead of Bush and Obama in the "Effective Leader" category.

While it seemed to me at the time that the 2003 U.S. Iraq invasion and subsequent occupation would go down in history as one of the most tragic and outrageous exercises of military power in modern times, maybe it won't after all.  As stupid and sad as it was (and is), people don't seem too troubled by it today.  Bush is certainly getting off WAY easier for his foreign policy incompetence than LBJ did for his.  (Obama also seems to be getting off much more lightly than Nixon did for his surveillance state tactics and near-obsession with secrecy.)

But hey, maybe the unspoken rule among journalists and historians is that if one of the guys that as a group they tend to like (Clinton) can spurt semen onto various surfaces in the West Wing, including the front of an intern's dress, maybe it's okay to let his predecessor get away with one stupid war. 

The calculus of equivalence between those two expressions of stupidity is really interesting to ponder.  No one would ever admit to there being such equivalence, but the reality of the way the stories of the two administrations are being told sort of suggests that in the minds of the intelligentsia, there is some kind of rough equivalence that goes along the lines I am describing.

[Libertarian666]

I don't think McCain's problem was that he was "insufficiently conservative", as if conservatism is the only axis for Republican candidates and more is better. From my perspective, McCain's problems were as follows:

• He was a war hawk following a president who took us on one foreign military misadventure after another
• He expressed economic illiteracy during the worst economic crisis in generations
• He expressed technological illiteracy in the face of a candidate who mastered it and a rising cohort of younger voters
• He allowed his handlers to choose a running mate who highlighted his old age
• He was running against the first black presidential candidate with full media backing

I doubt that McCain would have faired any better against Obama had he been more conservative on abortion, gay marriage, gun control, and taxes.

I am imagining history students from far in the future looking back on the G.W. Bush/Obama administrations under some silly textbook writer-generated narrative like "The U.S. Presidency: 2000-2016 - The Cowboy and the Messiah" and asking a question like "If those guys were the winners, who were the losers?"  The common thread is John McCain, who lost to Bush in the 2000 primaries and who lost to Obama in 2008.

McCain would have likely made a fine President.  If he had simply opted not to attack Iraq and waited for more consensus to push a health care reform proposal, he would have been miles ahead of Bush and Obama in the "Effective Leader" category.

While it seemed to me at the time that the 2003 U.S. Iraq invasion and subsequent occupation would go down in history as one of the most tragic and outrageous exercises of military power in modern times, maybe it won't after all.  As stupid and sad as it was (and is), people don't seem too troubled by it today.  Bush is certainly getting off WAY easier for his foreign policy incompetence than LBJ did for his.  (Obama also seems to be getting off much more lightly than Nixon did for his surveillance state tactics and near-obsession with secrecy.)

But hey, maybe the unspoken rule among journalists and historians is that if one of the guys that as a group they tend to like (Clinton) can spurt semen onto various surfaces in the West Wing, including the front of an intern's dress, maybe it's okay to let his predecessor get away with one stupid war. 

The calculus of equivalence between those two expressions of stupidity is really interesting to ponder.  No one would ever admit to there being such equivalence, but the reality of the way the stories of the two administrations are being told sort of suggests that in the minds of the intelligentsia, there is some kind of rough equivalence that goes along the lines I am describing.

You are the first person I have ever heard voice that opinion.
My opinion is that the only good thing about McCain's candidacy is that the strain of being President would probably have led to a Palin Presidency in short order, which would at least have had the virtue of being amusing.
And no, I didn't like the other party's choice either.

[Pointedstick]

Personally I think McCain might have been a less bad president because he was an accomplished soldier, and the military is one of the few areas of government where there are shreds of competence, at least in the lower and middle ranks (because incompetence leads to actual consequences such as the death of friends) and some of that competence might have still been kicking around. By contrast, Obama had never demonstrated real competence in much of anything except running for office, and mostly succeeded because the stars aligned for him and/or he faced weak opponents.

See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois_ ... rack_Obama
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St ... nois,_2004
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St ... 008#Issues

[Benko]

McCain would have likely made a fine President.

Two words. immigration reform (which I had thought you weren't real kean on). 


PS I don't know that anyone could have beaten Obama (first election) and so perhaps McCain was not the best example, but the continued policy of the republican establishment ain't going to win elections, nor is it going to do anything to even slow down much the shift of the country left. 

[Pointedstick]

If you ask me, the Republicans need to do three things to be competitive again:

1. Field candidates with actual compassion
The Republican party has been greatly damaged by the perception that Republicans are cold and mean. It doesn't help that their candidates mostly reinforce this. I realize that conservatives themselves enjoy a blunt "tell it like it is" attitude but they need to realize that the rest of the electorate is turned off by this method of communication. Compassion is NOT a "liberals only" trait, and there are a lot of low-information voters who are instinctively turned off by a candidate who seems mean to them.

2. Drop social issues that do not benefit them
Social wedge issues can be beneficial to you when a majority of people agree with your stance, or if there is a substantial enthusiasm gap that favors your side. Being pro-gun is a good example. Gay marriage, not so much, and marijuana prohibition is fast becoming another one. Abortion is more mixed, but Republican candidates need to acknowledge reality that the majority wants abortion to be legal in at least some cases and sees a blanket ban on abortion as too extreme. Republican candidates need to generally stop talking about social wedge issues that do not benefit them, or reframe the issues in a way that puts them more in tune with the majority position. If their opponents try to bait them or set a trap they need to STFU!

3. Emphasize competence
One of the Democrats' big weaknesses as a party is their incompetence. They promise a lot and deliver a little at all levels of government, from the small-town mayor's office to the presidency. Republicans need to hammer them on this and tout records of actually doing things, not just promising things. Republicans really need to harp on this over and over again to drive the message home, because it will find fertile ground among the large numbers of medium-information voters (including many Democrats) who are irritated with Democrats' seeming inability to get much of any consequence done even when they control most of the levers of power. California is a great example: even with a Democratic legislative supermajority and a Democratic governor, they can't reform the prison system, legalize marijuana or gay marriage, fix the school system, balance the budget, reduce crime, or really do much of anything except raise the income and sales tax rates.

[Reub]

Chris Christie?

[Pointedstick]

No, Christie is too blustery and seems mean. Also, he's fat and ugly. That shit don't fly these days.

[Libertarian666]

Rand Paul.

[Pointedstick]

Not compassionate enough, communication style seems petty and arrogant. Not enough actual accomplishments yet.

[Benko]

PS,

Compassionate like the guy in the white house?  Slick WIllie?  Hillary?

Romney closed the firm he was working at so everyone could go look for the child of colleague who had disappeared.  I'm guessing he was too modest to let this be talked about.

I agree republicans have a PR problem, but I would suggest Rs need a leader i.e. an alpha who can withstand the media and democrat sliming, more then some warm and fuzzy beta.

Obviously competency is important and should be stressed.

[Pointedstick]

PS,

Compassionate like the guy in the white house?  Slick WIllie?  Hillary?

Romney closed the firm he was working at so everyone could go look for the child of colleague who had disappeared.  I'm guessing he was too modest to let this be talked about.

I agree republicans have a PR problem, but I would suggest Rs need a leader i.e. an alpha who can withstand the media and democrat sliming, more then some warm and fuzzy beta.

Obviously competency is important and should be stressed.

Being compassionate doesn't have to be a beta trait; this mode of thinking is in fact part of the problem, that you can't be a tough leader without being gruff and no-nonsense. Look at Reagan. Definitely an alpha type, right? But also a lot of genuine compassion. That's what's needed.

As for Romney, it helps if you don't secretly harbor negative feelings about 47% of the population. Now you can say, "he didn't harbor negative feelings about them, he was just telling the truth about the reality of dependency in America and low-information voters!" to which I would reply, "you just proved my point."

The reason why that video was so devastating to Romney was because it confirmed what Romney was fighting against and what a lot of people already thought--that he was a cold, calculating greedy-guts. It doesn't matter that they're all like this. You have to play the game and make people think you're different. You think Obama doesn't look down on the 47% of America that clings to guns and religion? But he managed to make people think he was different, which is all that matters.

[Libertarian666]

PS,

Compassionate like the guy in the white house?  Slick WIllie?  Hillary?

Romney closed the firm he was working at so everyone could go look for the child of colleague who had disappeared.  I'm guessing he was too modest to let this be talked about.

I agree republicans have a PR problem, but I would suggest Rs need a leader i.e. an alpha who can withstand the media and democrat sliming, more then some warm and fuzzy beta.

Obviously competency is important and should be stressed.

Being compassionate doesn't have to be a beta trait; this mode of thinking is in fact part of the problem, that you can't be a tough leader without being gruff and no-nonsense. Look at Reagan. Definitely an alpha type, right? But also a lot of genuine compassion. That's what's needed.

As for Romney, it helps if you don't secretly harbor negative feelings about 47% of the population. Now you can say, "he didn't harbor negative feelings about them, he was just telling the truth about the reality of dependency in America and low-information voters!" to which I would reply, "you just proved my point."

The reason why that video was so devastating to Romney was because it confirmed what Romney was fighting against and what a lot of people already thought--that he was a cold, calculating greedy-guts. It doesn't matter that they're all like this. You have to play the game and make people think you're different. You think Obama doesn't look down on the 47% of America that clings to guns and religion? But he managed to make people think he was different, which is all that matters.

This is why I believe the US is doomed: the electorate is too ignorant and apathetic to change things while it is still possible without a total collapse.

[Reub]

It sure seems to me that Christie can display the necessary compassion. He spoke last night in his victory speech about not forgetting about any of Hurricane Sandy's victims (I wish I was in NJ because NY sure has forgotten my plight). He also spoke of the wisdom imparted by his deceased mother upon him and about working together across party lines. He knows how to tug at the heartstrings and is a compelling speaker.

I did hear that there was a straw poll yesterday where he lost to Hillary in NJ and if that is indeed the case then he may not be a viable candidate for his party. He also would have a lot of difficulty winning over the religious right.

[RuralEngineer]

The fact that everyone thinks compassion is a prime characteristic in a President is why I no longer support Democracy.  The electorate is the problem.  We don't need a compassionate President, we just need competence, the ability to make good decisions, communicate clearly, and since we are not a dictatorship, collaborate/compromise with a bunch of asshats in Congress.  How you find anyone with the last one is beyond me, but individuals with the other traits are not that rare.  There are plenty of leaders in the private sector with these qualities.  It's just that none of them run for President. 

[Pointedstick]

The fact that everyone thinks compassion is a prime characteristic in a President is why I no longer support Democracy.  The electorate is the problem.  We don't need a compassionate President, we just need competence, the ability to make good decisions, communicate clearly, and since we are not a dictatorship, collaborate/compromise with a bunch of asshats in Congress.  How you find anyone with the last one is beyond me, but individuals with the other traits are not that rare.  There are plenty of leaders in the private sector with these qualities.  It's just that none of them run for President.

I have a book recommendation for you: Democracy: the God that Failed

For the record, I don't think we need a compassionate president. How anyone who seeks control over the most powerful military force in world history could possibly have real compassion is beyond me.

Rather, I think an aspiring president needs to at least feign compassion well enough if he wants to be an actual president. It can't be too obvious. He has to have been doing it his whole life, like most liberals have. He has to believe it.

That was Romney's problem. He got into the feigned compassion game too late. He could drop the charade too easily, and he clearly didn't believe his own BS. Rejected! He needed to hire some liberals to teach him how to imagine yourself as compassionate while actually considering yourself superior to most people you encounter and actively despising large parts of the population. They're masters of it.

[clacy]

What a train wreck this has become. 

What was once the problem of the very few, those who were uninsurable due to pre-existing conditions and those that chose to forego insurance due to affordability (although most of those same people likely had cell phones, game systems, TV's, drank lattes, etc)...  Has now the problem of everyone.  What we're finding out when you decide to subsidize 30 million people many of whom are sick, it raises costs significantly on everyone else's health care, to the point of unaffordability. 

[Libertarian666]

What a train wreck this has become. 

What was once the problem of the very few, those who were uninsurable due to pre-existing conditions and those that chose to forego insurance due to affordability (although most of those same people likely had cell phones, game systems, TV's, drank lattes, etc)...  Has now the problem of everyone.  What we're finding out when you decide to subsidize 30 million people many of whom are sick, it raises costs significantly on everyone else's health care, to the point of unaffordability.

No one could have predicted that!
Other than everyone who knows anything about insurance, that is...

[Reub]

Obama said he's sorry today:

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/11 ... erage?lite

""I am sorry that they are finding themselves in this situation based on assurances they got from me," he told NBC News in an exclusive interview at the White House.

"We've got to work hard to make sure that they know we hear them and we are going to do everything we can to deal with folks who find themselves in a tough position as a consequence of this."

That makes it all better, doesn't it?

[Pointedstick]

The best thing Republicans can do right now is just get out of the way.

[flyingpylon]

The best thing Republicans can do right now is just get out of the way.

What are the chances of that happening?

[clacy]

The best thing Republicans can do right now is just get out of the way.

What are the chances of that happening?

Probably not good.  They can't seem to get the hang of this political game.  The IRS/NSA scandals are still going against Obama, and they decide to shut the government down (not learning the lesson of the 90's).  I'm sure they will overstep on this too, when all they have to do is allow gravity to crush Obama and the Dems.

An extreme example of how idiotic some of the R politicians are, is the 2012 Senate election in Missouri.  The R candidate (Todd Akin) was up by double digits because McCaskill was tied to Obamacare, when Akin decides to talk about being against abortion of rape victims.  A position that has no upside.  He makes a complete fool out of himself when he claims that "the body knows when to take care of these problems itself" and withing a week he was down by 5 points.

[RuralEngineer]

One of the guys I work with is a recent Republican convert as a result of the mess the Dems have been making of things in the last few decades, mostly Obama.  So he's pretty gung ho.  He gleefully proclaimed to me this week that some of Obama's "chickens were coming home to roost!"  I promptly informed him that the entire GOP caucus is standing between them and the coop with loaded shotguns.

EDIT:

Additionally, I loved Obama's apology.  What great political spin for "sorry I lied."  I mean, "I am sorry that they are finding themselves in this situation based on assurances they got from me,"????  Seriously?  That's just inspired.  He gets to "feel our pain" without taking any responsibility for misleading us.  Brilliant!

[clacy]

Obama is now giving out the 800-number for the ACA helpline in his speeches.  Oh how the mighty have fallen....

"Call now, and the first 100 callers will receive 2 Obamacare Snuggies with every order.  While supplies last"

[clacy]

From slowing the rise of the oceans and healing the planet, to trying to hawk more expensive health plans that cover less.