Obama says Sanders' supporters helped undermine Obamacare

[DonViejo]

Source: Reuters

06 JAN 2017 AT 16:27 ET

President Barack Obama said on Friday that criticism from the left wing of his own Democratic Party helped feed into the unpopularity of Obamacare, his signature healthcare reform law.

Obama has been spending part of his last two weeks in office urging supporters to speak out against plans by Republicans – who will soon control both the White House and Congress – to dismantle the 2010 Affordable Care Act.

At a town hall event with Vox Media, Obama acknowledged the politics have been stacked against his reforms, mainly blaming Republicans who he said refused to help make legislative fixes to Obamacare, which provides subsidies for private insurance to lower-income Americans who do not have healthcare plans at work. But Obama also said Liberals like former Democratic presidential candidate Senator Bernie Sanders had contributed to the program’s unpopularity.

During Sanders’ campaign for the presidential nomination, he proposed replacing Obamacare with a government-run single-payer health insurance system based on Medicare, the government plan for elderly and disabled Americans. “In the ‘dissatisfied’ column are a whole bunch of Bernie Sanders supporters who wanted a single-payer plan,” Obama said in the interview.

Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/2017/01/obama-says-sanders-supporters-helped-undermine-obamacare/

[astrophuss42]

1. The increase in premiums did not help

[pnwmom]

15. Since almost all of those increases were paid for by the government,

not the individual -- for the vast majority of people who were on subsidies -- the attention to this by Sanders and his supporters was overblown.

Of course the Rethugs would have been complaining, because they complain about the government paying for anything. But these increases were ALREADY happening under the old system, and Sanders knew that.

[astrophuss42]

49. Anecdotally I heard a lot of folks

Upset at forking out more.

Sorry.

[pnwmom]

73. Rates had been increasing for decades. But since the ACA subsidized payments

so they wouldn't be more than a set fraction of a person's income, most people weren't directly affected. Of course, if they listened to talk radio, they might have thought they would be.

[astrophuss42]

81. They had solid numbers

I guess trivializing their experience is the route I should have taken.

[OKNancy]

84. our premium went up a lot ( Oklahoma) but with the subsidy we pay less

In fact our premium went from 150.00 per month to zero.

---

[Hekate]

95. We don't trivialize their experiences. We just have an inconvenient habit of looking past ....

...the horrifying "and then the nurse stomped on my helpless kitten" narrative, and asking further questions.

Like the person who posted that their friend had a broken arm, went to the ER, and it cost a bajillion squillion dollars. For a simple fracture! Damn that Obama!!!!!!111!

Turns out, on further questioning, the arm in question was so severely broken that it required extensive surgery to treat, plus a hospital stay, plus nursing home, plus rehab.

Not quite as advertised at first glance.

So bring it on, my friend. Bring your anecdotes from your friend of a friend and from your brother in law. Just be prepared to supply details. If we can help with information and how-tos, this community will help. But if it is just more bullshit, we will say that too.

[tblue37]

117. Reminds me of someone's POSUCS post. nt

[Hekate]

119. Uh-huh

[sheshe2]

125. Bingo.

[mcar]

263. Oh yeah

[sheshe2]

126. This

[NastyRiffraff]

128. I guess checking facts (remember them?)

is the route you should have taken, rather than repeat a RW talking point.

[fleabiscuit]

156. Non sequitur. nt

[SlimJimmy]

186. My daughter-in-law's premiums went up by about 40% this year.

None of that was subsidized. Her out of pocket also increased by several thousand dollars. Basically making the insurance unusable. I understand what you're saying, but the reality on the ground was much different.

[Sedona]

228. "Out of pocket"

Is the maximum amount you'll pay out of your own pocket.

This is not the same as the deductible. You can still "use" the insurance before hitting the out of pocket amount or the deductible for that matter.

The insurance is "usable" for preventative care, prescriptions and doctor visits with small co pays. It's also usable for a catastrophic event where ALL you'll pay is the maximum "out of pocket"

These terms are clearly spelled out on the Healthcare. Government Web site, but let's not confuse you and your daughter in law with the FACTS.

[SlimJimmy]

273. When I was referring to out of pocket I was meaning her deductible.

What she pays before any coverage starts. The relatively minor preventative coverage doesn't help her with much in the way of care for her daughter that has many issues that aren't covered by preventative care or doctor visits. But feel free to snark away with the "facts" you presented.

We, the more sane part of the Democratic party, have been talking about the need to reform the ACA (fix it) for years. This has fallen on deaf ears by the Congress and the President.

[Cryptoad]

75. Pre- ACA increases,,,,,

were far greater than the increases now...... of course this was all reported by the gubermint and the MSM but we all know they all lie according to the GOP,,,,,. Problems is too many people who are not cognitively capable of purchasing their own insurance.....

[Hekate]

90. Anecdotally we've had a few here

Search: POSUCS

Debunked. Needed some help navigating the complexities and reading the big words. Needed reminding just how it was before the ACA and how much the GOP had done to cripple it.

When the GOP is done with it now that they have all the power, people will be sick to their stomachs at what their future looks like. But, as good as the GOP is at pointing the finger of blame elsewhere, those same people will just blame Obama as they die of pre-existing conditions and diseases with expensive treatments, like diabetes.

[Eliot Rosewater]

106. I heard Hillary was a flawed candidate, also, from the same people who now OWN

the election results.

[Thinkingabout]

279. Good point, wonder how many progressive ideas will pass in the next two to four years.

[zentrum]

145. The government subsidy

....is our taxes. It's our money. Of course we wanted single payer, which would have made health care cheaper for all, rather than healthcare for profit. Insurance companies lobbied for and wrote the ACA. Which, in its previous incarnation, was known as RomneyCare.

I'm with the Nurse's Union: Single payer is the healthiest, most ethical way to go.

We didn't over blow anything. I know many families too well off to get government subsidies but who nonetheless could not afford the care they needed or the premiums.

Why is there a rich CEO at the top of an insurance company making any money at all off the heath care of people?

[CanSocDem]

229. Well said. (eom)

[RazBerryBeret]

289. Exactly...

"While the five largest drug companies made a combined $50 billion in profits last year, one out of five Americans between the ages of nineteen and sixty-four were unable to fill the prescriptions their doctors wrote." -B Sanders

[sherihah]

149. Except for most people that's not how it works.

The subsidies are a fixed amount based on your income. The subsidies came nowhere near the increases in almost all cases.

Still, I don't think Bernie supporters blamed Obamacare for the higher premiums, but the fact that ACA had few provisions to limit the increases.

To make things worse, many of the published rate increases were misleading--they did not take into consideration the many loopholes insurers found such as higher deductibles, higher max out of pockets, fewer preventative tests covered, and the dropping of many prescriptions that were previously covered.

Don't get me wrong, the ACA saved my life. It's just getting to the point where I can barely afford it now.

[Ohioblue22]

39. yea potus shouldnt have raised premiums like he did

thanks obama

[blm]

59. Between 2000 and 2010, premiums rose up to 150% - who did you blame then?

Wouldn't they be the same ones responsible now, except now they have the ACA to blame because so many dumbed down RWers believe RW propaganda sites that are saying it's Obama's fault?

[Ohioblue22]

63. i blame the insurance companies for the rates they set

[blm]

66. they could've chosen to NOT raise rates, but, they get cover from RW media blaming ACA

.

[Hekate]

103. Oh damn, another inconvenient truth

[LiberalFighter]

43. And you think premiums wouldn't rise if ObamaCare was not in place?

Check out the 85/15 and 80/20 rule regarding premiums under ObamaCare.

[astrophuss42]

55. It was bad timing is all

But my head is here to be bit off.

[NastyRiffraff]

130. Oh please stop with the victim whining

"Bad timing?"

[astrophuss42]

134. Right, it had no impact on the election

[Akamai]

290. Rubio is responsible for much of the increase in insurance premiums by eliminating

the "Risk Corridors" portion of the ACA.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/feb/25/marco-rubio/rubio-we-wiped-out-obamacare-bailout-fund-insuranc/

[astrophuss42]

51. He even got Politifacted over it

[George II]

98. The nominal increase in premiums overall (yes, there were some that were large, but...

...for the most part they were surprisingly reasonable) did not affect the support of the ACA by a majority of Americans.

[TexasBushwhacker]

112. Not to mention that the increased premiums paid for better insurance

My guess is that, without the ACA guidelines, lots of people were paying for junk insurance and just didn't realize it.

[George II]

114. Precisely. Remember when there were a couple of hundred thousand people who had to change...

....their plans, I think primarily in the Northwest?

The reason was NOT that what Obama said about "if you like your plan you can keep it" was untrue. The fact is that the insurance companies were not giving their policyholders the coverage that they were claiming they did.

[Sunlei]

231. my basic obamacare plan still had a $75 a month premium. another plan was no premium costs.

[Gothmog]

2. Sanders' attacks on President Obama did not help his cause with some demographic groups

[Cha]

160. BS wanted President Obama primaried in 2012.. he just didn't want to

to it himself.

Wonder why?

[Me.]

164. Hmmmmmm

Oh hmmmmm

Aloha

[Cha]

165. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm backatcha

Me. lol

Aloha~

[LisaM]

3. I'm pretty sure both Obama and Hillary would prefer single player.

In this world, you just can't let perfect be the enemy of good.

[George II]

10. Like the minimum wage - they railed against Clinton because she back first an increase to $12....

....and eventually to $15.

They bashed her for that and now they won't even get the $12.

[Amimnoch]

50. Exactly.

The disconnect from reality can be really irritating.

Instead of voting OUT the republicans that killed the government option, let's just give them the entire legislative and executive branches.. that'll get us affordable health care..

[hughee99]

116. How did republicans kill the government option? Nt

[Amimnoch]

123. 3 bills passed by Dems in the House, but killed by cloture and the Senate finance committee.

The three versions of the ACA in the house HR3962, HR3200, and HR 4789 all included versions of the Government option, with the final bill being dubbed "Medicare you can buy into".

Due to a lack of cloture numbers required to close the deal, the public option was dropped by the Senate finance committee as a result of "drop it or nothing passes" stance taken by the Republicans AND Lieberman. It's pretty much attributed that Lieberman was the final nail in the public options coffin.

This is why it pisses me off to no fucking end every time those shitheads on the right complain about the increasing cost when it was their own fucking party that stripped the ACA of the one thing in it that would have assured affordability.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

175. The repigs and Lieberman had some help ...

... from "good Democrats" - you know, the kind that have a "D" behind their name - like Ben Nelson, who said he would filibuster anything with a public option.

So holy Joe, the guy our conservadems supported when Joe ran against the guy who actually won the Democratic Senate nomination, and "good Democrat" Ben Nelson fucked us over.


By the way. The raw story headline is complete bullshit. Obama is saying Sanders supporters are in the dissatisfied column as it pertains to the unpopularity of the ACA. He's not saying they are a cause of the unpopularity.

In other words, he's correcting the spin that a 46% unfavorable opinion doesn't mean 46% want to repeal the ACA.


It would be funny, if it wasn't so pathetic, that there are people on this very thread glomming on to this bullshit spin because it fits their agenda that Bernie is responsible for everything from the Lindbergh kidnapping all the way to the HRC loss to well known and very unpopular buffoon, Donny Tinyhands Trump.


So here is the relevant quotes. Mea culpas should be posted below. Yeah yeah, I know.... but but but BERNIE!!!!!!!!!



"And the third thing is that the polls — whenever you look at polls showing 40 percent are supportive of the law, 40 percent or so are dissatisfied, in the dissatisfied column are a whole bunch of Bernie Sanders supporters who want a single-payer plan. The problem is not that they think it’s a failure. The problem is that they don’t think it went far enough. That it left too many people uncovered, the subsidies were not as rich as they should have been, that there was a way of dealing with prescription drug makers in a way that would drive down those costs. All of those things meant that even after the law was passed, there were still going to be a lot of tough politics."

[LiberalLovinLug]

305. Right on!

Worst kept secret...progressives have always been dissatisfied with how the ACA is structured to keep it for-profit, and in the control of private industry when in every other western democracy, health care is right, not a privilege.

Sorry Obama, but you could have done more. You once promised to put your second term on the line by holding fast on the public option. With the bully pulpit behind you, still in your honeymoon phase with the majority of Americans at least, I think you could have won that battle. Now you want to blame those that had your back then and believed your self-portrayal of a hope and change progressive. Instead you hire a CoS that almost immediately called the liberal wing of the party "fucking retards".

[suffragette]

346. "In other words, he's correcting the spin that a 46% unfavorable opinion doesn't mean 46%

Want to repeal the ACA."

Exactly so, Hassin.

THAT is what the headline SHOULD be instead of the misleading crap that it is.

[Dream Girl]

78. Or free college tuition.

[Hekate]

99. Now they'll get a big fat nuthin'

[George II]

100. Instead of progressing slower they're going to be going backward.

[Hekate]

102. And downhill. In a go-kart.

[Charles Bukowski]

118. And blaming Clinton and DWS the whole way.

[NastyRiffraff]

132. Some of them would rather see the world burn

than give up their "purity." So now we're looking at the possibility of the world burning. And all they can do is scream "Bernie woulda WON!! We know it!"

[OrwellwasRight]

188. And some would rather feel superior

and mock the change makers, who are the only ones who have ever changed society. Rosa Parks didn't fight to sit in the 'middle' of the bus. Gandhi didn't fight for freedom just for the upper castes. Debs didn't fight for slightly less degrading conditions of work. But feel free to insult the fighters. I bet it makes you feel good.

[NastyRiffraff]

267. Fighters?

Are you REALLY comparing Bernie Sanders to Rosa Parks and Gandhi? Don't forget Dr. King. And god, if you believe in one!

Sheesh.

[OrwellwasRight]

270. As I said, some like to feel superior.

[NastyRiffraff]

335. To be sure, I do feel superior

to you. Not to most people, though.

[OrwellwasRight]

336. Keep feeling' it.

That's the essence of the Democratic Party. Not.

[NastyRiffraff]

337. Deepak Chopra?? Really?

[OrwellwasRight]

338. Superiority, really?

It's the hallmark of classist thinking.

Keep being proud. I'd be embarrassed.

[NastyRiffraff]

339. Stuck on the "superiority" thing, eh?

Keep on keepin' on!

[OrwellwasRight]

340. Yes, it's despicable. And embarrassing for a Democrat.

I love that you have to keep posting to maintain your apparently rather fragile sense of superiority. As if you stopped, you might not be "winning" any more. It's kind of cute when you really think about it. You could be using DU to discuss ideas to build party power, but instead you continue to stroke your own ego by stating and restating your superiority to Bernie supporters and clicking multiple times on the rofl smiley. I bet that takes effort, huh? Boy, you really showed me. You've in fact convinced me to waste all my time defending the status quo and mocking the change makers, screaming at them in all caps, even. NOT.

[NastyRiffraff]

342. "I love that you have to keep posting"

OMG, that's rich, coming from you!

I'm done here. I don't like a battle of wits with an unarmed person; it's not fair. You get the "last word."

[OrwellwasRight]

343. Oh yes, please threaten me that you won't respond any more.

By all means, please stop posting. Otherwise I'll have to admit that you've beaten in terms of all time rofl smilies posted.

Oh wait, I forgot that the more personal insults you use, the more it must mean you are "winning." So I guess you beat me there too.

[LanternWaste]

344. There is a measure of irony in your allegation that "some like to feel superior..."

There is a measure of irony in your allegation that "some like to feel superior..."

The important thing however, is that you continue to make the allegation rather than focusing on the substantive. Your narrative depends on doing as much.

[OrwellwasRight]

345. I think it's been years since you've weighed in on one of my threads.

And I think you miss the entire point of this thread. It has to do with using DU for productive uses or not. There are those, like the person that I'm debating here, who are so taken aback by HRC's loss that, instead of looking for ways to learn from the outcome and do better next time, they would prefer to find scapegoats, as in ("Some of them would rather see the world burn than give up their "purity."&quot .

After all, only perfect people have no room for improvement. And this poster apparently feels there is only room for derision, not improvement. Rather than figure out what it is that attracted voters to Bernie, or Jill Stein, or to just staying home as alternatives to voting for HRC, this other poster wants to insult them.

That, to me, is feeling "superior." I have no such allusions. I would prefer to stop with the hating and divisiveness and labeling and get on with the learning of lessons and being more effective. I find that productive, not superior. If you think that productive is superior, then perhaps you should join the side of the productive. We're out here every day trying to act, not to blamestorm.

[OrwellwasRight]

22. But this is a case of letting the good be the enemy of the perfect.

Bernie wanted to do better than good, and what he got was ridiculed for even daring to talk about it. That's f'ed up.

[LisaM]

32. I don't recall anyone ridiculing single payer.

I know that many Democrats hope that this is a step towards single payer. I know people whose lives literally depend on the ACA at the moment. Do you want them to wait until single payer materializes? My BF works for a mammogram company and the ACA is letting a lot of women get mammograms who couldn't afford it before (and they are lining up at the moment because they are afraid of losing the benefit). Can they wait until single payer materializes?

I am pretty sure most Dems prefer to get these people covered while working towards a better system.

[OrwellwasRight]

41. Excuse me?

A) Obama's comments ridicule single payer. The point of his comments is to say that it was the fault of people who want single payer that HRC didn't get elected. That is ridiculing, belittling, blamestorming, and a whole host of other BS in my book, just trying to deflect blame off himself for his contribution to her defeat -- which consisted primarily of barnstorming the country on behalf og the TPP, which he knew was unpopular and that HRC opposed. But he didn;t give a shit that he was sending mixed messages abotu teh Democratic position on the TPP. he just wanted his TPP. Now he looks for someone to blame. shit, it must be the peple that dared to talk about single payer.

B) THIS: FROM His very own WHITE HOUSE:

"Fucking Ret*rds": Why Didn't Rahm Emanuel Apologize to Liberals?

Last week, the Wall Street Journal reported that during a private conversation in August 2009, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel said that liberal critics of conservative and moderate Democrats were "fucking ret*rds." Cute. According to ABC News, however, Emanuel has offered an apology to the "disabled community" for his remarks. Although he has acknowledged making the statement, Emanuel has not apologized to liberals.

Emanuel and other close advisers of President Obama have frequently criticized liberals. After the White House instructed Senate Democrats to capitulate to Senator Joe Lieberman's request that they drop the public health plan option, many liberals denounced the move and demanded that Democrats in turn reject the Senate bill. In response, White House senior staff separately referred to liberals as "irrational" and "insane." By describing liberals as "fucking ret*rds," Emanuel is simply towing the White House line in an effort to isolate politically and to show contempt for progressives.

http://dissentingjustice.blogspot.com/2010/02/fucking-retards-why-didnt-rahm-emanuel.html

[brer cat]

82. It may be

"ridiculing, belittling, blamestorming, and a whole host of other BS in my book" but your book appears to be fiction. Further he didn't claim that is was the fault of people who want single payer that Hillary wasn't elected. If you really want to discuss BS try looking in a mirror first.

[OrwellwasRight]

168. OK, sure.

Just pretend the OP doesn't exist. Then I guess you are right that he didn't do it. But in fact, he did. '

Obama should not blame actual progressives for anything. We are the only ones fighting for a better, non-corporate world.

[George II]

92. That person obviously had/has something against Obama, and those comments are "anecdotal"*

*unsubstantiated and obviously subject to "filtering". We don't know that any of that is really true (i.e., "during a private conversation&quot .

[OrwellwasRight]

173. What world do you live in?

Rahm Emanuel has nothing against Obama. He was Obama's COS. They are two peas in a pod. He said it and he meant it.

Here are just four reports, from the Wall Street Journal, ABC News, the Washington Post, and Politico, that he said it. you are free to do a google search and find dozens of other sources. Your weird and unsubstantiated claim that the comment was "anecdotal" and "unsubstantiated" is incorrect and off base. And you don't seem to be using the word anecdotal properly. This is not a stats exam. Perhaps you meant apocrvaphyl? Which is was not.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703808904575025030384695158
http://abcnews.go.com/WN/rahm-emanuel-retarded-comment-puts-offensiveness-spotlight/story?id=9738134
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/02/emanuel-apologizes-for-retarde.html
http://www.politico.com/blogs/ben-smith/2010/02/palin-goes-after-emanuel-on-retarded-slur-024754

[George II]

177. I was referring to the author of the blog to which you linked, not Rahm Emanuel:

http://dissentingjustice.blogspot.com/2010/02/fucking-retards-why-didnt-rahm-emanuel.html

THAT person obviously has a problem with Obama.

[OrwellwasRight]

181. And the comments are they still unsubstantiated

or are you going to ignore the fact that you told me I made something up?

[George II]

237. So then, who was in that "private meeting" where that was said?

And no, I never said you "made something up", but your source, Darren Lenard Hutchinson, certainly did.

And just to demonstrate that blogger's negative attitude toward Obama and his administration, here is the list of other essays referenced right on the page you cited:

Just a Little Note: People Closer to Obama -- Not the Clintons -- Are Calling Liberals "Insane" and "Irrational"
While White House Condemns Liberals, Congressional Moderates Remain Inflexible
NYT's Adam Nagourney Peddles New White House Attacks on Progressives
Rahm Emanuel Tells Liberals To Kiss His Arse
Why Is Obama Still Protecting Lieberman?
White House Shows Its True Colors on Healthcare Reform
Liberals Battle White House Over Healthcare Reform
Irrational Robert Gibbs Says Howard Dean Is Irrational

You're not going to tell us that Darren Lenard Hutchinson is a fan of Obama and his administration, are you?

[OrwellwasRight]

285. OMG. Look at the LINKS.

NO ONE MADE IT UP. WHY DID EMANUEL APOLOGIZE FOR USING THE WORD R*TARD IF HE DIDN'T SAY IT?

I will report them for you:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703808904575025030384695158
http://abcnews.go.com/WN/rahm-emanuel-retarded-comment-puts-offensiveness-spotlight/story?id=9738134
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/02/emanuel-apologizes-for-retarde.html
http://www.politico.com/blogs/ben-smith/2010/02/palin-goes-after-emanuel-on-retarded-slur-024754

Please, please, no matter what you do with the rest of your life, please start living in the real fucking world.

[LisaM]

93. Hold your powder! I support single payer.

Because Rahm Emanuel (whom I don't particularly care for either) said something inflammatory, what, 7 years ago, about a vote that was occurring shortly after the Bush administration, doesn't imply to me that Obama is ridiculing single payer. I also don't recall him going on the stump talking up TPP as a means to help HRC get elected, frankly, I don't think he was on the stump for her much at all, but that's a different issue.

He's talking about the imminent dismantling of the ACA and its unpopularity and the contributing factors to that. And it might rankle with Obama that Bernie called his a "failed presidency" during the debates.

[George II]

96. I actually don't recall any of Clinton's surrogates even bringing up the TPP...

..(not that it didn't happen).

[OrwellwasRight]

180. List

Obama: http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-obama-trade-tpp-20160904-snap-story.html (September)
Froman: https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/speechestranscripts/2016/september/remarks-us-trade (October)
McAuliffe: http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/27/politics/hillary-clinton-trans-pacific-partnership-terry-mcauliffe/ (July)
Kerry:

(October)
Perez:

(July)

Whether or not you think these people are "surrogates" of Clinton, they are to the general voting public. They are ALL well known Democrats and are they are taking time in the months and weeks before the election saying how great the TPP is--and Obama instructed them to do it (except McAuliffe who was just freelancing). So what are voters supposed to think? HRC says she is against it, but everybody else on her team (the Democrats) is for it. That's confusing, and many voters decided she wasn't really against it. The votes that she didn't get for that reason are Obama's fault, not Bernie Sanders fault.

[George II]

236. Two VERY bad examples! Both of those (Kerry and Perez) are members....

...of the President's cabinet, NEITHER of them were "on her team" and NEITHER campaigned as Clinton surrogates or campaigned for any other candidate, either.

If you don't realize that there's really no need to continue this discussion.

And then you have the nerve to claim that "many voters decided she wasn't really against it" and turn around and blame it on Obama.

Sorry, that's ludicrous.

[OrwellwasRight]

286. Voters confusing what Obama supports for what Clinton supports is ludicrous?

Interesting. Right.

No voter would ever confuse Democratic President Obama's beliefs--especially as he campaigns actively for Clinton---for Democratic Presidential candidate Clinton's beliefs.

Try watching the Perez video from the convention when in the same interview he says how he is there to support Clinton and how great the TPP is. Try watching the video of McAuliffe at the convention saying she will flip flop on the TPP. Try watching Obama give interviews and press conferences about the TPP during September and October.

You pretending that all voters can effectively and clearly distinguish between the views of the President and of the would be president of the same party is what's ludicrous.

IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT, there is really no need to continue this discussion.

[George II]

321. Jerry Seinfeld: "I wish I had the last 20 seconds of my life back". Have a great night!

[OrwellwasRight]

326. Oh snappy.

That really convinced me.

[AtheistCrusader]

97. I believe Obama supported single payer.

I believe the ACA was intended as a first step in that direction, by him.

I do not believe Hillary was of the same mind.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-clinton-single-payer-health-care-will-never-ever-happen/

If she wanted single payer, she had a funny way of saying it. And that got national coverage during the primary. It wasn't even 'it's infeasible at this time', or 'maybe after we work through the problems of the ACA' or maybe even as 'a fix to the ACA's problems', nope. Not even that much. "Never ever".

[LisaM]

142. Her being a realist does not mean that she doesn't think it's the best system.

It's unrealistic to think that it's currently an option. It's not. Not the first time HRC was criticized for telling the truth (another time that springs to mind was when she said coal jobs weren't coming back. They're not. That led to a spate of attacks too).

What we wish we could achieve and what we can achieve in this climate are simply not the same thing.

[riversedge]

143. I think Hillary's reason for opposing single payer at that time -Jan, 2016 is valid-and she clearly

made it clear the reason why!!!



......Just a few days before the Iowa caucuses, Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton stressed to voters in Des Moines just how unfeasible she considers her opponent Bernie Sanders' plan to pursue a single-payer health care system.

"I want you to understand why I am fighting so hard for the Affordable Care Act," she said at Grand View University after hearing from a woman who spoke about her daughter receiving cancer treatment thanks to the health care law. "I don't want it repealed, I don't want us to be thrown back into a terrible, terrible national debate. I don't want us to end up in gridlock. People can't wait!"

She added, "People who have health emergencies can't wait for us to have a theoretical debate about some better idea that will never, ever come to pass."

Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders spar on health care, Wall Street

[OrwellwasRight]

174. No one who fought for single player or who supported Sanders

caused Trump to win the election. To imply that we did is grotesque and should not be defended. Defending Obama's comments is not something I will ever agree with no matter what your personal views on single payer are.

[lapucelle]

253. Anyone who voted Stein or didn't bother to go to the polls helped Trump.

People need to own their roles in this election. Some who could have been heroes chose to be spoilers. They need to get used to the blame and concomitant contempt that is the result of their choices. To my mind, that includes former candidates with strong followings who were largely absent from the general election campaign.

Those of us who lived through 2000 told them this could happen. We were right.

[OrwellwasRight]

280. And you have no evidence that the people

that you blame supported single payer and didn't vote because of that reason. You should just as well also blame the lackluster HRC campaign that failed to visit Wisconsin and Michigan and therefore didn't drive more votes for Clinton there. Just as Gore's failure to win his own home state is the real reason he lost (even Mondale won his home state and he was a super shitty candidate). And the reason you are so quick to blame Nader than examine the Democratic Party's own failures is what exactly? You seem to conveniently forget that had the mistaken Pat Buchanan votes on Broward County's butterfly ballot not occurred, then Gore would have won Florida. But you want to forget that those things happened so that you can blame voters you disapprove of.

So keep blaming "spoilers" but spoilers can't spoil if the main candidates do a good enough job attracting the votes they need and monitoring confusing ballots as they should. You are just scapegoating against people who are fighting for single payer. And to what end? What purpose does your unsubstantiated blamestorming serve except to prevent the Democratic party from learning and growing and doing better the next time around?

Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.

[lapucelle]

288. "Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it."

My point exactly. Third party voters cost Democrats the elections both in 2000 and 2016. That's why Clinton, Obama, Gore, Michael Moore, and even Sanders begged the spoilers not to do it again. They didn't listen. They have little (if any) right to complain now. There's a reason why they're sharing the blame.

Now, on to something else. Someone said both of these things on the same thread:

"So he (Sanders) voted for the last, best offer... He voted for what he could get when he could get it.

and

"And some would rather feel superior and mock the change makers, who are the only ones who have ever changed society. Rosa Parks didn't fight to sit in the 'middle' of the bus. Gandhi didn't fight for freedom just for the upper castes. Debs didn't fight for slightly less degrading conditions of work.

Many political leaders work for major changes incrementally, pragmatically, strategically in steps and stages. Only some are vilified as "sell outs" by fiery progressives and their followers for doing so.

[OrwellwasRight]

292. You continue to claim third party voters being responsible while

ignoring all the rest of the evidence of what happened in this and the 2000 elections. Myopia and making up causes that fit your preferred solutions is not "learning from the past."

Keep defending the status quo as good enough. Keep insulting people who fight for better. It will get you a great sense of superiority, but it will accomplish little else,

[lapucelle]

296. I'm not insulting people who fight for better.

I'm insulting idiots who voted for Stein or stayed home on election day and questioning the double standards of those who only see a strategy as a reasonable, viable option when their guy employs it.

Nor am I saying that third party voters are wholly responsible, but anyone who helped put W or Trump in the White House are not getting a pass. At least Michael Moore had the good sense to admit his 2000 mistake and lobby the potential spoilers not to throw the election to Trump.

I'm a New Yorker who worked hard on weekends in PA to re-register Democrats and canvas for Democratic candidates. I'm at peace with my role in this election. Not everyone else is.

[OrwellwasRight]

300. Um, you are.

There were millions more who didn't vote for Stein and whose vote Clinton never fought for. She REFUSED to chow up in WI and MI even when operatives on the ground warned that she was in trouble there. Instead she wasted time in AZ.

But keep refusing to learn and change. Blame people who, in a democracy, exercised a vote you didn't approve of rather than learning how to put out a product that will gain more votes, which is the job of parties in a democracy.

I'm at peace with my vote and with your contempt. Bring it on.

[lapucelle]

303. "Put out a product"?

Is that how you saw the candidates? As merchandise to be sold to the public? Was the former pragmatist a "new and improved" revolutionary? It was all a marketing campaign?

I think it's safe to say at this point that that we see things very differently. Thankfully, some who were fooled in 2000 weren't so gullible this time around. Hopefully, if anything like this ever happens again, those who were misled in 2016 will have learned from the consequences of their mistake.

And as for this:

"I'm at peace with my vote and with your contempt,"

my list of contemptibles is limited to third party spoilers and narcissistic no shows who weren't "inspired" enough to exercise a right that some people are still fighting to secure, so I'm sure you're safe from my approbation.

[OrwellwasRight]

304. Narcissistic no shows?

Wow, your contempt just keeps showing through.

And yes, parties compete for votes and put out products. Voting is not mandatory in the US so parties must inspire people to make the effort to vote for them. If you don't see that, you actually don't participate in politics much do you? This isn't 8th grade civics class, this is the real world, in which marketing, social media, fake news, and October surprises determine the outcomes of elections. And this isn't new. Kennedy beat Nixon in 1960 in large part because he looked better on TV.

[lapucelle]

312. Yes, narcissistic no shows not inspired enough to get off their butts and go to the polls.

I worked with impoverished voters in PA for whom getting to the polls is a genuine hardship. They were busy working in advance to devise voting plans that would get them where they needed to go on election day. And there are untold numbers whose votes were suppressed in North Carolina and uncounted in Detroit.

"Not being inspired" enough to do the right think is a first world problem I have little patience with.

Or as Eichenwald put it:

"Of course, there will still be those voters who snarl, “She didn’t earn my vote,” as if somehow their narcissism should override all other considerations in the election. That, however, is not what an election is about. Voters are charged with choosing the best person to lead the country, not the one who appeals the most to their egos."

http://www.newsweek.com/myths-cost-democrats-presidential-election-521044

[OrwellwasRight]

315. In your view it was the right thing.

Talk about narcissism.

In theirs, it wasn't the right thing. Had the Democrats run a better campaign, including going to Michigan and Wisconsin, which I have mentioned repeatedly and you keep ignoring it, then more people would have decided it was the right thing and followed your direction.

Instead, these people weren't reached. They weren't convinced, they did not believe that their vote would have made a difference in their lives or to ward making the country better. That is not their fault. It was the party's.

But I will repeat for the umpteenth time: Keep blamestorming. Refuse to improve. It seems to working out so well for you that you have to keep posting to defend it. Me, on the other hand, I am at peace with your refusal to try to improve the party. Good luck with it.

[lapucelle]

318. You don't get to define my view, and I don't have to engage

with those who feel entitled to do so. Any third party spoilers or narcissistic no shows who thought they would be hailed as the saviors of Democratic principles after helping to put Trump in the White House spent much too much time whatever echo chamber they were frequenting.

They could have been heroes, but chose to be spoilers and they deserve every measure of contempt that they face.

Now excuse me a moment. There's a dissembler that I'd like to put on ignore.

[OrwellwasRight]

319. I'm not trying to define your view.

I'm trying to tell you that you are the one exhibiting narcissism when you say that people chose not to vote or not to vote for HRC were being "narcissistic." No, they weren't. They were doing what seemed to begin their best interests at the time. If the Democratic Party wants to change that opinion, it can work to learn why it didn't reach these voters and do better in the future. Or it can sit in an ivory tower and call them names and change nothing.

By the way, just because you use a three syllable word, it still means "liar." More hilarious elitism is just what the party needs to expand its reach.

But keep calling names. As I said, it must mean you are winning.

[truebluegreen]

327. So the 300,000+ Democrats in Florida

who voted for George W Bush are somehow less responsible than the 24,000 Democrats who voted for Nader?

Or consider Democrats, thirteen percent of whom voted for Bush. In all, Gore lost 308,000 voters from his own party to W., while losing 24,000 Dems to Nader. Now sure, if Gore gets even half of that 24,000 who voted for Nader, because Nader never runs, or drops out at the last minute, then he wins Florida. But by the same token, if he gets even one-half of one percent of the Dems who voted for Bush, he also wins. Why are we only focusing on the votes he didn’t get from the much smaller Nader pool, than the votes he didn’t get from the much larger Bush pool?

http://www.timwise.org/2000/11/no-more-mister-fall-guy-why-ralph-nader-is-not-to-blame-for-president-bush/
http://www.prorev.com/green2000.htm

And if you look, the postmortem in 2000 sounds remarkably like this one in some very important ways:
http://www.salon.com/2000/11/28/hightower/

Pretty sure you won't look though: the fantasy is much more comfortable.

[lapucelle]

330. Why would they be less responsible?

Anyone who helped W or Trump get into the White House is responsible.

As for the Salon article, of course Jim Hightower was looking to deflect blame in any way he could. He campaigned heavily for Nader and against Gore. Gore in 2000 (like Clinton in 2016) had a populist message, but the press chose not to report it. The media decisions concerning what to cover and how it chose to frame it's script were instrumental in making sure that Gore's message was ignored. Krugman warned us back in September that the media was doing the same thing again:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You see, one candidate, George W. Bush, was dishonest in a way that was unprecedented in U.S. politics. Most notably, he proposed big tax cuts for the rich while insisting, in raw denial of arithmetic, that they were targeted for the middle class. These campaign lies presaged what would happen during his administration — an administration that, let us not forget, took America to war on false pretenses.

Yet throughout the campaign most media coverage gave the impression that Mr. Bush was a bluff, straightforward guy, while portraying Al Gore — whose policy proposals added up, and whose critiques of the Bush plan were completely accurate — as slippery and dishonest. Mr. Gore’s mendacity was supposedly demonstrated by trivial anecdotes, none significant, some of them simply false. No, he never claimed to have invented the internet. But the image stuck.

And right now I and many others have the sick, sinking feeling that it’s happening again.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Clinton, Obama, Gore, Michael Moore, Paul Krugman, and even Sanders warned voters not to ignore the lessons of 2000. They should have listened.

For Krugman's premortum, go here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/05/opinion/hillary-clinton-gets-gored.html?_r=0

For the transcript of a premortum debate between Hightower (for Nader) and Paul Wellstone (for Gore) moderated by Gwen Ifill, go here:
http://commondreams.org/headlines/102500-04.htm

For a book length treatment (by Bob Somerby, liberal media critic) on the media's role in getting W to the White House, go here:
http://howhegotthere.blogspot.com/

I'm pretty sure you won't look though. Denial is much more comfortable.

[truebluegreen]

331. First my apologies. I responded to the wrong post.

But my point remains: both Gore and Hillary did not connect with the voters on economic issues. I blame the message before the messengers. I think Obama's personal popularity obscured the problem, but it is clear to me from the debacle of lost state and national seats since 2010 that there is a problem.

We need to look at that, and address that, rather than blaming voters (that always works well).

[mcar]

264. That is not ridicule

And Obama's HRC campaign rallies were not "barnstorming the country on behalf of TPP."

Good heavens!

[OrwellwasRight]

275. It is.

Democrats who consider themselves smarter than the riff raft who dare to support single payer love to mock and ridicule us.

Example:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/02/rahm-apologizes-for-privately-calling-liberal-activists-retarded.html

I'm tired of it.

And yes, the Obama administration barnstormed the country on behalf of the TPP right in the middle of the election. Pay attention.

From the NY Times in August:

Among those who will hit the road will be Secretary of State John F. Kerry; Secretary of Defense Ashton B. Carter; retired Admiral Michael G. Mullen, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under Presidents George W. Bush and Obama; Admiral Harry B. Harris Jr., commander of the United States Pacific Command; and William Cohen, a former Republican senator and defense secretary under President Bill Clinton.

More here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/22/business/international/trans-pacific-partnership-obama.html?_r=0
https://www.memphisdailynews.com/news/2016/oct/31/us-trade-chief-touts-tpp-benefits-for-tennessee-whiskey-exports/
https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2016/May/USTR-Froman-highlight-TPP-benefits-LA-economy

[mcar]

291. Obama did not ridicule

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/ridicule?s=t

speech or action intended to cause contemptuous laughter at a person or thing; derision.

[OrwellwasRight]

293. Apparently because you feel the same as he does,

you don't view it as ridicule. As a single payer supporter, I feel ridiculed, derided and held in contempt by comments like this.

I will not give up my support for single payer and I did not cost HRC the election. I voted for her. As did most single payer supporters.

[mcar]

297. Umm, what?

You are taking this a bit personally. I, too, support single payer. But I was happy to have the ACA passed as a start.

Bernie did advocate for gutting the ACA and seemed to think that would somehow move RWNJs straight to single payer. I disagree.

And people on the left (not you, apparently), who constantly argued against the ACA since it's inception and during the primary, did not help.

[OrwellwasRight]

298. Whatevs.

You misrepresent what Bernie campaigned on. Saying something is not good enough and that we need single payer is not "advocating for gutting it."

But sure, the election is all my fault. Blame me and by all means never, ever look in the mirror.

[mcar]

299. What in the holy hell are you talking about?

Please point to where I said that the election is all your fault?

[OrwellwasRight]

301. See above:

And people on the left (not you, apparently), who constantly argued against the ACA since it's inception and during the primary, did not help.

I can read btw your lines. Since I already admitted I don't think the ACA is good enough and that I will keep fighting for single payer, I am included in your group, despite your attempt to stay in the TOS.

I don't really care. Too few people on DU are remotely interested these days in improving the party and learning from unsuccessful election outings. Everyone wants to live in a cocoon in which the Party changes nothing and 100% of the blame goes on the "other" (be they Stein voters, Bernie voters, single-payer advocates, or whomever).

That's pointless to me. So Id rather accept your blame than continue a useless discussion in which you refuse to try to make constructive changes. I happy to be your scapegoat and move on to more productive pastures.

[mcar]

306. No, you can't read between my lines

[OrwellwasRight]

311. As I said previously, whatevs.

You cannot see past your own blamestorming.

No need for the Democrats to do anything better. Let them keep doing exactly the same, and you can keep blaming Sanders and single payer supporters for suppressing votes on to infinity. Good luck!

[calimary]

104. THIS!

[Cha]

309. Of course they would.. and that's why they started out with something

they could get.. use it as a stepping stone to single payer.

But, now they will be nothing.

[WhiteTara]

4. Truth is truth.

Bernie hasn't acted as a friend to our Party, ever (as far as I can tell.)

[YOHABLO]

7. Perhaps your 'side' of the party.

[WhiteTara]

11. You mean an actual Democrat?

[ciaobaby]

68. You mean the corporate dems.

[WhiteTara]

76. your name says it all

[mpcamb]

85. You win the back and forth, but...

The fact is you had an old school FDR Democrat vs a current middle-of-the-roader.

The stuff that Sanders espoused is what the Democratic Party used to and SHOULD be about:

Working people, wages, rights, no one left behind.

[tonedevil]

210. Does someone...

who registered Democrat in 1974, first year I was eligible,to vote Jerry Brown as Governor and has voted a straight Democratic ticket since then count as an actual Democrat? Because I am much more sympathetic with Senator Sanders than anything I've seen you spew.

[WhiteTara]

240. So go follow

Sanders and leave me alone.

[tonedevil]

257. Not going anywhere...

just pointing out you don't have a monopoly on being an actual Democrat and some of us have different opinions.

[WhiteTara]

259. Well, that is a less rude

comment than your first post. And differences are what makes the world.

[tonedevil]

260. Actual Democrat...

is a trigger phrase for me. I find it highly presumptuous and offensive to assume to speak for us all.

[WhiteTara]

262. Good to know.

[putitinD]

86. Bernie is the best friend our party has ever seen, he is only trying to steer us in the right (left)

direction, where most people's hearts really are. He pulled Hillary way left of where she would have ran, She would have just been a republican lite. That is why she won the popular vote by nearly 3 Million, is because of Bernie.

[Cha]

226. No, he's not. Hillary Won the Primary by almost 4 Million Votes and

Hillary Won the Popularity Vote in the GE because of those who wanted her.

Don't try to rewrite history.

[Cha]

151. Exactly Tara.

[YOHABLO]

5. Well the ACA was a Heritage Foundation contrived plan in the first place.

Obama, who was all for a single payer health care system, changed his mind and would not put it on the table. The insurance companies had to get their piece of the pie.

[OrwellwasRight]

13. How dare you undermine it by pointing out it was a Republican plan!

[emulatorloo]

135. The "Republican plan" that no actual Republicans supported in the '90's

Other than Lincoln Chaffee.

Who turned into a Democrat.

[OrwellwasRight]

166. And Romney.

Who didn't.

[George II]

16. What we have now is so much better than what we had before the ACA.....

An insistence on "single payer" would have resulted in no legislation.

[DonViejo]

17. Any idea why President Obama "changed his mind?"....

Do you think then Sen Joe Lieberman's refusal to vote for the ACA if it was single payer had anything to do with it? How about Sen Max Bachus' threat to vote against it for the same reason as Liberman?

[OrwellwasRight]

25. Who said he "changed his mind"?

[DonViejo]

26. Here you go...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141658121#post5

[OrwellwasRight]

44. You miss my point. Not who on DU typed that,

but what makes you believe he ever supported single payer and therefore needed to "change his mind"?

[Akamai]

294. I remember Obama supporting single-payer health system as he first ran for president.

https://thinkprogress.org/flashback-obama-repeatedly-touted-public-option-before-refusing-to-push-for-it-in-the-final-hours-380cbf31b6e0#.quxjdq2rx

[OrwellwasRight]

295. You do know that the public option

is not the same as single payer, right?

[cstanleytech]

33. My bet is because he probably didnt see a viable way to a single payer system that those

opposed to it (mainly Republicans) wouldnt be able to block.

[OrwellwasRight]

48. They couldn't block anything at the time

We had a majority of the House and 60 votes in the Senate.

[cstanleytech]

83. There are plenty of ways to make passing bills difficult either procedural or politically

the Democrats just tend to avoid them as they are more willing to compromise for the betterment of everyone rather than the Republicans who are only out for themselves and don't care if they throw the American people under the bus.

[OrwellwasRight]

167. Actually, there aren't.

No procedure can block a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate or any bare majority in the House. None.

[Ligyron]

109. Ah, those were the days, eh?

I wonder if we'll see such again?

I sure hope so and will go down swinging.

[OrwellwasRight]

189. Ditto. nt.

[pnwmom]

18. So? It was the only thing we could get past a filibuster. The 60th vote

came from an independent, Joe Lieberman,, and he wouldn't support single payer or even a public option.

[mdbl]

69. Lieberman was such an ass

What a manchurian senator he turned out to be.

[lapucelle]

52. Nobody forced Sanders to vote "yes" on the ACA in 2009.

He had an opportunity to lead. He didn't.

[OrwellwasRight]

193. That doesn't even make sense.

Before the final budget reconciliation bill, he voted and worked for far better plans, but those were all tossed by the wayside on the altar of Joe Lieberman. So he voted for the last, best offer. Voting NO would have been what everyone keeps accusing Sanders of doing: "making the perfect the enemy of the good." That's exactly what he did not do. He voted for what he could get when he could get it. And then instead of being complacent, and saying "I have fixed health care for all time," he continued to work for better. He was not satisfied with a little progress. He wanted to keep moving and making greater progress. But yes, please insult him for voting FOR the ACA.

[brer cat]

239. So when President Obama

takes what he can get passed, it is "a case of letting the good be the enemy of the perfect"...bad, bad Obama. But when it is Bernie voting for the ACA it is wonderful that "He voted for what he could get when he could get it."

"That doesn't even make sense" is right.

[killbotfactory]

247. Bernie didn't run on overturning the ACA

He consistently said it was better than what we had, that it was a step in the right direction, but we could do better.

[lapucelle]

251. I guess two Pinochios isn't really that bad.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/11/23/bernie-sanderss-claim-that-he-would-expand-not-dismantle-the-affordable-care-act/?utm_term=.0e77f010fc2c

[killbotfactory]

265. From the completely neutral Washington post

http://fair.org/home/washington-post-ran-16-negative-stories-on-bernie-sanders-in-16-hours/

[lapucelle]

272. Were the stories false?

Was the reasoning behind the Pinochios flawed?

While the Post might not have been neutral, it was certainly not pro-Clinton.

[lapucelle]

249. Pragmatism is a strategy that only some are allowed to embrace. Others get villified.

Fiery progressives who talk, talk, talk about leading revolutions? Check!
Democrats who seek to accomplish broad policy changes incrementally? No so much.

[brer cat]

250. Fascinating how that works, isn't it?

Hypocrisy comes to mind also.

[OrwellwasRight]

281. Wow -- your statement again makes no sense.

If you have fought for single payer and not gotten it, then you vote to get what you can get because it will increase coverage, that is an example of not "letting the perfect be the enemy of the good." Voting NO because it was a shitty bill that benefited insurance companies more than anyone else would have been "letting the perfect be the enemy of the good."

Sanders voted for the ACA. He did not let the enemy be the perfect of the good. He never said it was wonderful. It isn't wonderful. People having to pay $2100 a month for health insurance that still has $2000 deductibles is not wonderful.

Nor was Bernie complacent and saying the ACA is good enough. It isn't and never was. So he continues to fight for better. He's not cool with the status quo of the ACA. And neither are most progressives.

That's why it makes ZERO SENSE AT ALL to say he should not have voted for it.

[brer cat]

307. I have never said he shouldn't have voted for it.

LisaM posted: : "I'm pretty sure both Obama and Hillary would prefer single player.
In this world, you just can't let perfect be the enemy of good."

To which you replied: "But this is a case of letting the good be the enemy of the perfect."

My point, which you totally missed, is that you are critical of President Obama for accepting what he could get passed, but praise Bernie because "He voted for what he could get when he could get it."

That is what all of them did: they took what they could get. President Obama could have saved himself a lot of grief and waited until the tooth fairy or Santa Claus put that perfect bill on his desk to sign, but he faced reality and got what he could. And that "shitty bill" as you consider it has saved a lot of lives and given millions of people access to affordable healthcare which would never have happened if we had waited for Bernie or anyone else to craft perfection.

[OrwellwasRight]

313. I do understand. That's what you don't understand.

Bernie Sanders voted for it, but never stopped fighting for better.

You, on the other hand, are supporting the good as against the perfect. You just want people to shut up and be satisfied with the status quo ACA and blame Bernie and single payer supporters for fighting for better than what was up for offer back in 2011.

No, thank you. I will keep fighting and you keep being satisfied. We'll see who makes more progress.

[brer cat]

314. I never told anyone to shut up

or be satisfied with the status quo. I merely pointed out your hypocrisy which keeps zooming over your head.

This is a wasted conversation.

[OrwellwasRight]

316. I agree this is wasted effort.

You didn't point out my hypocrisy because I have none. All I was doing was pointing out the hypocrisy of another poster who said that Bernie was letting "the perfect be the enemy of the good" and then posted that he voted for the ACA, which proves he did NOT let the "perfect be the enemy of the good." That's hypocrisy and it's not my position.

And yes, anyone who wastes time defending the ACA, and condemning Bernie for continuing to fight for single payer, which is what you are doing, is letting "the good be the enemy of the perfect." And criticizing people for criticizing the ACA is the equivalent of telling them to shut up. But keep pretending you don't know this.

But keep calling me a hypocrite. It means you're winning.

[PoliticAverse]

61. Obama campaigned on his plan having a "public option"....

saying:

Any plan I sign must include an insurance exchange: a one-stop shopping marketplace where you can compare the benefits, cost and track records of a variety of plans - including a public option to increase competition and keep insurance companies honest - and choose what's best for your family.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/07/obama_says_health-care_reform.html

[Cha]

152. You are just bashing.. you have no idea what happened.

[Jane Austin]

6. Not me.

I supported Sanders and I talk up Obamacare and Medicare every chance I can.

Premiums had increased a great deal before Obamacare. If you don't want premium increases, rein in the pharmaceutical and insurance companies.

[Turn CO Blue]

8. It's the outrageous premiums each month that undermined Obamacare. $1500/mo for two people!

and that's with the employer chipping in $450!!!!

[Turn CO Blue]

14. But I still am happy with it as a first step - especially the pre-existing condition part. n/t

[mopinko]

21. i am a single person on a cobra and consider myself lucky

to be able to take a great cobra for $700/mo.
no subsidy available for me.
but very glad obama care was there if i needed it. and the aca has brought many improvements in my plan and my healthcare.

[pnwmom]

23. You haven't ever paid COBRA payments or you wouldn't find that outrageous.

Yes, they are high, and there's a lot more we have to do to rein in costs. But that's not the ACA's fault.

[calimary]

28. True. And when I had to pay COBRA payments, it cost me about $700/month.

After the company's maternity leave coverage ran out. I thought that was horrible at the time. But we did it. We needed it. It was a big bite, though.

[pnwmom]

37. I had to do the same thing for the same reason. And we were both

young enough to be pregnant then.

The ACA insurance rates are based on a person's age, so they go up as you get older.

[treestar]

70. Meaningless without knowing the person's income

as to whether that is reasonable or not. Also it's an employer plan. People wanted to keep those. Maybe if they went to the exchange they would do better.

[Turn CO Blue]

89. Premium costs are based on age. It's a third of our income.

The Exchange is utterly irrelevant. No one in Colorado can shop on the Exchange if either spouse has a group plan at their employer.

A third of our income, and we don't have any retirement savings. None. And we paid in another $20K the year (and the year after) hubby had cancer because our "gold plan" barely pays for shit, 30% out of pocket.

[Kilgore]

163. I hear you

$1,350 for the two of us in WA state

Our costs went nuts since obamacare and getting worse each year.

[OrwellwasRight]

9. The Chicago apple doesn't fall too far from the tree.

Everything is always the fault of people who don't believe in selling out to corporations. Deflecting blame onto the people you are supposed to be serving is a tried and true political trope.

But we've been insulted far worse than this before.

Remember this one from 2010?

"Fucking Ret*rds": Why Didn't Rahm Emanuel Apologize to Liberals?

Last week, the Wall Street Journal reported that during a private conversation in August 2009, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel said that liberal critics of conservative and moderate Democrats were "fucking ret*rds." Cute. According to ABC News, however, Emanuel has offered an apology to the "disabled community" for his remarks. Although he has acknowledged making the statement, Emanuel has not apologized to liberals.

Emanuel and other close advisers of President Obama have frequently criticized liberals. After the White House instructed Senate Democrats to capitulate to Senator Joe Lieberman's request that they drop the public health plan option, many liberals denounced the move and demanded that Democrats in turn reject the Senate bill. In response, White House senior staff separately referred to liberals as "irrational" and "insane." By describing liberals as "fucking ret*rds," Emanuel is simply towing the White House line in an effort to isolate politically and to show contempt for progressives.

http://dissentingjustice.blogspot.com/2010/02/fucking-retards-why-didnt-rahm-emanuel.html

As FDR said, "I welcome their hatred."

Bring it on.

[orleans]

29. i *don't* remember this

(there was a death in my family and i flew away from politics and as many sources of news as i could for several years)

thanks for posting this.

[Skittles]

12. I'm no Bernie swooner, but I didn't feel like he trashed ACA

yes, he promoted single payer, but plenty of Hillary's supporters think that's the way to go too

[elleng]

20. Thanks, Skittles; with you, as I wrote below,

supporting single payer is not undermining ACA.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

194. You are correct. Read this full quote and see if the headline of this op is not...

.... complete bullshit spin.


(Not the poster. The Raw story clickbait headline)

Obama is obviously correcting the spin ACA is so unpopular that 40 percent want it repealed.

He is saying, in that dissatisfied column are people who want it enhanced, not repealed. Those people include Sanders supporters.

Funny to see who gloms on to the spin for any opportunity to bash Sanders supporters. In their zeal to bash, they buy repig spin.

"And the third thing is that the polls — whenever you look at polls showing 40 percent are supportive of the law, 40 percent or so are dissatisfied, in the dissatisfied column are a whole bunch of Bernie Sanders supporters who want a single-payer plan. The problem is not that they think it’s a failure. The problem is that they don’t think it went far enough. That it left too many people uncovered, the subsidies were not as rich as they should have been, that there was a way of dealing with prescription drug makers in a way that would drive down those costs. All of those things meant that even after the law was passed, there were still going to be a lot of tough politics."

[Skittles]

325. I believe your assessment is correct, Hassin Bin Sober

I do believe that is "complete bullshit spin"

[Bradical79]

268. It's a chicken and egg thing, imo

If someone on the left is trashing Obamacare, it's probably because it's not single payer. Naturally, they're going to go for the politicians most agressively pushing that.

[elleng]

19. Sorry, Sir, I must take issue

with any suggestion, by you or any, real or fake, that those seeking Single Payer have undermined support for the ACA.

[LisaM]

27. That's the headline. Obama doesn't seem to have used the term "undermine"

he said that it contributed to some of the unpopularity.

[elleng]

38. I suspected that to be the case, LisaM.

Nothing like 'headlines,' eh?

[LisaM]

47. Don't get me started!

LOL, that's a whole other discussion. My BF for a time took to looking up the entire text of blurbs on the front of books to see how they were misused (I wish he'd go back to doing this, it was so funny). The best was a book with a quote that said it was the "best American book since "Moby Dick" or "The Old Man and the Sea&quot . This sounded suspect to John, so he googled the whole review and found out that it had left out two words, "about fishing".

[elleng]

53. HA!

[guillaumeb]

31. But in all of the "examination" of events,some insist that no matter the issue,

it seems that it is Sanders fault. And the fault of his supporters.

The ACA was compromised because many politicians vote their contributions.

[elleng]

42. Right, guill.

[Duppers]

221. Exactly. +100

[jalan48]

24. Isn't Obamacare really just Romneycare from the 90's?

Romneycare was the Republican health care plan before the Republican's moved further to the right and the Democrats followed.

[LovingA2andMI]

36. Exactly....This

[CentralMass]

58. It also ran over budget and saw double digit annual increases

[pnwmom]

170. So did ALL insurance plans. And they will until we control drug costs. n/t

[CentralMass]

172. Yes, but the issues was that both plans were sold as reducing costs.

[pnwmom]

176. They still might have. When other states were having 20% annual increases,

yours were probably lower.

I remember, when they were voting on the ACA, that the experience of MA was being used to show that the relative costs WERE being reduced with Romneycare -- where they were going through the roof in NY where they didn't have a mandate.

[CentralMass]

192. I was a life long Ma resident until 2015.. My own HMO + others

saw double digit premium increases each year. I pulled my online paystubs to look st my payroll decutions years back. The public plan also saw double digit increases and ran over budget. Deval Patrick actually put a cap into law around 2010 where insurers could only raise premiums by single digit percentage per year.
http://commonwealthmagazine.org/health-care/patrick-vows-soft-cap-on-health-premium-hikes/

The insurers sued over the effort to cap increases.

http://www.fiercehealthcare.com/healthcare/health-insurers-sue-massachusetts-over-premium-rate-caps

The bottom line is nothing was done to reduce the cost of medical care and the promised savings by insuring all tbe uninsured people did not materialize
They added millions more to a broken system.

There were studies that showed although MA had one of the lowest rates of unisured people in the country we had one the highest rates of people using the ER (the highest medical costs) as their primary care stop in the country.

Among those forced to purchase RomneyCare, there was a very low percentage of prescription and Doctors vist co-pays. The conclusion is that pro5ple couldn't afford to use the plan after paying the premiums.

[pnwmom]

200. Your experience with multiple years of double digit increases doesn't seem typical.

Romneycare was actually working out well in MA, after some initial bumps.

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/03/romneycare-facts-and-falsehoods/

What Happened to Premiums?
Claim: Premium costs increased.

One of the main claims Republicans make about the federal law is that it will drive up premiums. (In fact, as we’ve often noted, the Congressional Budget Office predicts the federal law won’t have a significant impact on premiums for most people.) But what has actually happened in Massachusetts?

The truth about premiums is that they’ve gone down for those who buy their own insurance (in what had been the so-called “individual market’), and the health care law is given credit for several reasons. And while premiums have gone up for large employers who buy coverage for their workers (the so-called “large group market”), there’s no clear evidence that the law was the cause. As we mentioned, the law attempted little cost control, and Massachusetts premiums, and those nationwide, have been rising for years before the law was passed. The law has had one clearly negative impact on small businesses who bought coverage in the “small group” market. Their premiums have risen faster than before, a small part of which can be attributed to the law’s workings. This has been a major disappointment because small businesses had been hoping for a decrease.

Let’s start with the individual and small group markets: After the law was passed, the state merged these markets, which benefited individual rates and hurt small business rates. It’s simply a matter of a less-healthy risk pool getting a boost from a more well-rounded risk pool. “The worst risk pool is the individual risk pool all by itself,” explains Brandeis’ Doonan. If you add the small group market to that, it’s “better for individuals and worse for small business.”

How much did that raise premiums? It’s not clear. One prediction, cited in a report conducted for the state Division of Insurance, estimated a 1.0 percent to 1.5 percent impact, but there’s not good information on what exactly the impact turned out to be. Jon B. Hurst, president of the Retailers Association of Massachusetts, told us: “It was a factor.” But, “I don’t know that there’s any one major silver bullet” for increasing premium costs.

SNIP

The individual market, meanwhile — the one MIT’s Gruber had called “deeply broken” — saw a major drop in premiums, as much as a 40 percent decline, according to some figures. The individual market itself more than doubled in size, says Gruber. Young, healthy people came into the market and bought less generous (hence, cheaper) plans than the sicker individuals who had been in that guaranteed issue market. “The typical nongroup market in the country has people buying really crappy products,” Gruber says. But in Massachusetts, the opposite was true — the sick were buying good products. With the health care law and the individual mandate, “people were buying down,” says Gruber, “not buying up.”

Premiums would show a smaller drop if adjusted for the less generous average policy, he says. But however you want to look at it, premiums went down. Let’s compare what people in the pre-merger individual market spent per person per month for a premium in 2006 and what those in the post-merger market spent in 2008. Those numbers went from $437 to $360, an 18 percent decrease. (See page 103 of this Division of Health Care Finance and Policy report.)

[CentralMass]

207. The issues us that both RomneyCare and the ACA promised to

reduce cost. I wont try to google past history but RomneyCare went way over its forecasted budget.

I wont go through my personal history but i was marrird with 3 children making a decent pay and we struggled to afford medical care. I am still covering my daught6ets now in their early 20's on my high deductible plan and i have skipped my own medical care numerous times to be able to afford theirs along with other family expenses over the years . I'm not alone, there are a lot of working insured people who cant affird to use their insurance

While its great that people who can't afford it are getting insurance it sucks that the cost model is broken.

ACA did not reduce costd.

[pnwmom]

211. For a short period of time costs went up but then costs went down.

The question is: “cost more” than what? We’ll take that to mean, “more than was predicted.”
Unfortunately, there’s no Congressional Budget Office in Massachusetts that can give us a solid look at spending projections specifically attributable to the law. Experts we spoke to said the Taxpayers Foundation was the best source for this, and the foundation says state spending is in line with what it expected.

It certainly takes money to create a subsidy program and expand Medicaid coverage. But is the Massachusetts law “bankrupting” the state? The foundation says no. In May 2009 it put out a report called “The Myth of Uncontrolled Costs,” which concluded that the net added cost to Massachusetts taxpayers was $353 million in 2010, or roughly 1.2 percent of the state budget. (The total cost of “reform spending,” beyond what Massachusetts was already paying for uncompensated care before the law, was $707 million, with federal dollars covering half of that.)

The state Executive Office of Health and Human Services estimated that Massachusetts needed $172 million more from the general fund in 2009 than it spent in 2006 to cover “reform.” But the 2009 budget also used an unspecified number of federal stimulus dollars.

Costs for the subsidies did grow more than was expected at first. More people signed up for subsidized insurance more quickly than officials predicted — there was a point when there was great concern that the state had vastly underestimated the number of the uninsured. Costs “at the beginning rose dramatically and much faster than people assumed,” Widmer of the Taxpayers Foundation says. But enrollment in the subsidized plans leveled off. It reached 176,000 in mid-2008 and is down somewhat, to 154,000, after the state reduced coverage for legal immigrants (illegal immigrants were never covered).

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/03/romneycare-facts-and-falsehoods/


Again, living in MA with Romneycare I don't think you realize how bad it was in other states.

[CentralMass]

219. Admittedly im no policy expert here but my anecdotal experience

During tbe RomneyCare years with a employer subsidized HMO are accurate. My plan saw doublr digit increases.The issue of a percentage of both privately and publicly insured people not being able to afford to use their insurance it is also a reality.
As it is now with the dominate high deuctible plans.
Being in that sort of ecomnic situation tends to taint ones opinion on the subject of Healthcare. Many of us are struggling to afford it.

.

[treestar]

74. If so Republican opposition now is suspect

What is their problem with it, then? Things that make you go hmmmmm.

[jalan48]

88. They have moved further to the right as have the Democrats.

[OrwellwasRight]

182. This

Too bad too many people here don't get that.

[AtheistCrusader]

105. Because a Black President signed it into law.

Many of the ACA provisions were comparable to the 1993 proposal by the right wing Heritage Foundation.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/the-heritage-foundation-disowns-its-baby

[treestar]

108. Bingo!

[Cha]

154. That's what those say who want to bash the Presidentl

[jalan48]

245. Not sure who "Those" are but in any event, I'm not into group think.

[Cha]

310. Nevertheless that's what they say.

[pnwmom]

169. So? Romney managed to get elected Gov. of one of the most liberal states in the country.

He didn't do that by being very rightwing.

And there is no state in the country that passed ANY comprehensive plan. The Massachusetts plan was better than the nothing that 49 other states got.

[jalan48]

244. So, that is the health care program Obama chose to copy for his program.

He pulled single payer/medicaid for all off the table before there could even be a debate on it. If you believe a Republican health care program was the way to go-good for you-I would have preferred to at least see single payer get a public airing.

[pnwmom]

317. No, and I know YOU know it. We couldn't have passed ANYTHING

except over a 60 vote filibuster, and during the tiny window we had to do that (before Ted Kennedy died of brain cancer), one of the 60 votes belonged to Independent Joe Lieberman, who was from CT (insurance capitol of the world) and was dead seat against single payer or even a public option.

We had to act and we had to act fast and the ACA was the very best we could do under difficult circumstances.

[Bigredhunk]

30. -

He's right.

For better (we're not sheep) or worse (we're not as united), the left doesn't unite in lock-step behind Democrats or Democratic legislation. R's wouldn't criticize health care legislation signed into law by r's. They also wouldn't start off admitting fault the way Democrats do ("ACA isn't perfect, but..." - before listing all the positives).

[Ohioblue22]

62. this is why dems lose

[MindPilot]

54. IKR? Wouldn't even discuss single payer, then a public option was off the table.

So we ended up with a massive giveaway to the health care parasites (otherwise known as "insurance companies&quot for which we were supposed to be mightily grateful because ACA had a few concessions like no denials for pre-existing conditions.

But we mustn't "let the good be the enemy of the perfect".

Thank you sir, may I have another?

[Cha]

225. Single Payer couldn't even get passed in Vermont. President Obama

got what he could and it was a stepping stone to Single Payer but so many people bad mouthed it that now there will be will consequences of those who will suffer with pre-existing conditions.

[George II]

243. Thanks to those continually bashing the lack of single payer we'll be without the ACA altogether.

[Hekate]

107. That's a term that has no currency any more. Probably not for a couple of decades.

Are you saying Bernie and his followers are hippies? Is he really that retro and stuck in a time warp? I would not have said that of him, much less of his youthful followers who wouldn't know a hippie if one stuck flowers in their hair.

Hippie bashing? The only place I have ever heard that term post 1969 is here at DU.

[cannabis_flower]

146. You have got to be joking...

They may not use the word hippie that much, but the practice is still being used. As a marijuana policy reform activist I have heard hippie bashing many times.

People have told me that the only reason anyone would support marijuana legalization is because they want to use it. I had an assistant district attorney in Houston, Texas tell me one time as I as handing out leaflets need the courthouse that "I wish we could just shoot 'people like you'. " He was on foot waiting for the light to change so he could cross the street. I kind of leaned over to look at him and I looked him up and down real hard. He asked me what I was looking at. I told him I wanted to be sure I was able to identify him if I just happened to get shot. He really did look a little pale and crossed the street without saying much else. I think he said "oh!" and then the light changed and he hurried away.

I remember when we were trying to get a medical marijuana plank in platform of the Texas Democratic Party and one of the amendment's opponents said that the Republicans would be drawing pictures of John Kerry with a joint in his mouth. The motion to put it in the platform passed on a floor vote after a hard fight anyway.

[Cha]

157. President Obama is speaking the truth.. too bad for those

who can't handle it

[LovingA2andMI]

35. This Is BS....

Flatout. The desire for a Single-Payer Healthcare Program for ALL does NOT "Undermine" the Affordable Care Act one iota.

Blame the Republicans for any "undermining" of ACA. Maybe POTUS Obama needs to put that blame squarely where it belongs and leave Senator Sanders out of it.

[Cha]

223. I'm glad President Obama is telling it exactly like it. Too bad everyone is

in denial.

[HassleCat]

45. We have to be realistic.

We knew the bill would be watered down, so perhaps it wasn't a good idea to ask the president push for a stronger bill. On the other hand, there were plenty of "Democrats" who pushed to weaken the president's proposal. Maybe he could give them a mention, too?

[TheCowsCameHome]

56. So who doesn't want single-payer?

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

57. I am in awe of Bernie Sanders' remarkable power.

He single handedly cost Hillary Clinton the election. And he undermined Obamacare without any help from anyone else.

Wonder what next he'll do?

[lapucelle]

87. Continue to barnstorm the country in the service of selling books

is my guess

[brer cat]

252. !

[BunkieBandit]

101. Mr. Hammer meet Mr. Nailhead.

NT

[Cha]

158. No, he didn't do it single handedly.. if you're paying attention there

were many contributors.

You're putting words President Obama's mouth.

[QC]

208. He made Baby Jesus cry!!!

[Tarheel_Dem]

60. He's right. We witnessed it right here. We've never been further away from single payer than we...

are right now.

[Cha]

159. Yeah, now they're all in denial.

[Tarheel_Dem]

178. What's really sad is that ACA could possibly have been the best stepping stone to single payer.

The "activists" kept attacking it, and now many of them are declaring that BS is "leading the fight" against it's repeal.

[Cha]

184. Right.. excellent point.. it very well could have led to Single Payer

but now with all the attacks from both sides of the spectrum.. all those poor people who are on it with pre-existing conditions and everyone else will be without anything.

It's sickening and President Obama is right to call them out.

[Progressive dog]

64. There was no realistic chance for single payer

So we ended up with a large number of self described liberals who would rather 20 million people have no health insurance than they didn't get their way. President Obama is right.

[Dustlawyer]

65. While most Democrats were disappointed Obama bailed on Single Payer before

he even started, most felt it was way better than nothing. Everyone spoke of a start we could improve on over time. By the time this campaign came around the ACA was in trouble due to lack of participation from healthy young people and greedy insurance companies. Bernie and the rest of us only spoke of single payer being the goal, but were not attacking Obamacare. This is pure scapegoating!

Look in the mirror Obama, you didn't market it worth a damn! You let the Republicans trash it unopposed for years! Don't go out this way Obama.

[JudyM]

323. Right there with you, Dustlawyer.

[SidDithers]

67. DU rec...nt

Sid

[ciaobaby]

71. Way to to go Obama - divide the party further.

[SammyWinstonJack]

122. +1

[retrowire]

127. This.

Slow clap for Obama calling out all the Bernie supporters like that.

This Bernie supporter voted Hillary in the general. I wasn't throwing my vote out in a tantrum, Bernie himself said to go with the "lesser of two evils" if that is ever the case.

And yes people, I'm so sorry, I did believe Hillary to be the "lesser of two evils." That's not to say she was evil, just to say that she wasn't on the same spectrum personally to me, as Bernie was.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

187. The thing is, the headline doesn't even accurately describe the point Obama is making.

Obama is discussing the the polls that show forty plus percent are dissatisfied with the ACA.

He is saying - in that dissatisfied column - there are people who DON'T want the ACA repealed but enhanced. Those people being Bernie supporters.

What's pathetic is, people buying in to the repig spin of how unpopular the ACA is just so they can pin the unpopularity on Bernie supporters.

Repigs are saying the polls show 46% want the ACA repealed. Obama tries to correct the spin.

And people look for a reason to blame Bernie.

[OrwellwasRight]

195. There will always be people who want to blame Bernie.

He is a threat to the status quo, as every good lefty should be. The status quo is never good enough. That is the basis of being on the left.

[Cha]

155. The Presdient is speaking the truth.. too bad for those who can't

handle.

[OrwellwasRight]

196. +1

[Cha]

205. Oh President Obama isn't the one who divided the Party.. don't you

try to blame this on him.

[bravenak]

72. He is spot on

[treestar]

77. He is right. The general air of unpopularity

All Democratic candidates should have ran defending it.

And yet polls show a majority don't want it repealed.

The proof is in the fact is it more popular when called the ACA than when called Obamacare.

[elmac]

79. Yep, its all Bernies fault

there, I got that off my shoulders. Now, if I could just embrace our new president who will save us from all those nasty socialist programs like single payer medicare and single payer VA.

[sheshe2]

137. There were never enough votes for single payer.

Sanders: Single Payer Never Had A Chance

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) reminded the progressive media gathered on Capitol Hill today that single-payer health care reform was dead before it started in the Senate.

"It would have had 8 or 10 votes and that's it," he said, addressing a topic central in the minds of many who the bloggers and left wing talk show hosts gathered for the 4th annual Senate Democratic Progressive Media Summit in Washington reach everyday.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/sanders-single-payer-never-had-a-chance

[Tarheel_Dem]

328. I noticed you didn't get a response to Bernie's own words. Wonder why?

[sheshe2]

329. Lol....no clue????!!!1?

Love ya Tahheel

[Cha]

209. Nope.. you're putting words in President Obama's mouth.. he didn't

say that.

But, he did speak the truth.

[hollowdweller]

80. I think sort of misleading article title

I think it would be more fair to say that both conservatives and liberals had complaints about the ACA.

But that's anything anybody passes. Nobody is going to be 100% satisfied with anything.

I'd say the main thing that erodes support for the ACA is making having insurance mandatory, people hate to be told to do something, and having the premiums rise.

I don't see how to do anything about the mandatory part. I guess you could pass a law that would require hospitals to refuse treatment to anybody without insurance. But even the fear caused by that would still not get people to buy insurance.

[yallerdawg]

94. "The mandatory part"?

Critical for any resemblance to universal coverage! Everyone pays in.

Anyone get to opt out of Medicare and Social Security? Do we call those programs "mandatory"?

[Historic NY]

91. Now all the complainers sold out to the banksters and the corporates......

by staying home or voting for that green thing, so enjoy Trumpistan . The same whiners that complained about the Hillary paid talks, the same whiners that complained about the Wall St talks....Hail Trump he made sure he filled the swamp with the ilk you despised. The cat food commission will be serving Frisky's at Trump tower.

[Roland99]

110. No. Obama undermined the American public when he gave up the public option

And he did so at the very beginning!

[sheshe2]

138. No

There were never enough votes for single payer.


Sanders: Single Payer Never Had A Chance

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) reminded the progressive media gathered on Capitol Hill today that single-payer health care reform was dead before it started in the Senate.

"It would have had 8 or 10 votes and that's it," he said, addressing a topic central in the minds of many who the bloggers and left wing talk show hosts gathered for the 4th annual Senate Democratic Progressive Media Summit in Washington reach everyday.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/sanders-single-payer-never-had-a-chance

[OrwellwasRight]

197. You do realize that single payer and the public option are two different things, right?

[Roland99]

235. Facts get confusing at times

[Cha]

222. You've exactly made President Obama's point. Get your facts straight

now you're just bashing Obama with a false narrative.

[Roland99]

234. Except I'm not. The public option was tossed aside at the beginning

Revisionist history does you nor I any good. Stick to the facts.

[Scalded Nun]

111. If he had tried pushing the corporate owned Dems we could have had the single payer

but that was too hard for him.

Of course Bernie was unhappy as was every other true Democrat.

Since that time the GOP has tried every possible stunt to fight ACA. What has Obama done? Shake his head as if he is the only adult in the room (which, but the way, was true). But that was never enough. The GOP for years has stoked the hatred while using ACA as a bellows without any real pushback. Head shaking? Yeah, that tactic has worked so well for Democrats...NOT

Now, on the way out the door he is willing to point blame at Bernie and other real Dems? Give me a break!

[sheshe2]

139. They never had the votes for single payer.

See above.

[Bettie]

113. Saying that single payer would be better is not

"undermining" anything.

From the start, I wanted to see a public option at very least.

And yes, I supported Sanders in the primary.

Doesn't mean I didn't think the ACA was a good start, just that it could and should be better.

Everyone I know who was a Sanders person in the primary is about where I am on this: Good start, could be better.

Also, every single Sanders person I know voted for Clinton in the election.

[ananda]

115. As well it should!

Single payer, Medicare for ALL, would be so much better.

Get insurance companies out, and regulate pharma to the hilt.

[NastyRiffraff]

136. Of COURSE it would be "so much better"

Would it have passed? Nope. Not a chance.

Wanting something and getting it through a recalcitrant Congress are two very different things.

[sheshe2]

140. I posted above, twice.

We never had the votes for single payer. The quote is from BS in 2010.

[NastyRiffraff]

266. I know, my friend

but some people here refuse to see it. You'd think that quoting Bernie Himself would convince them, but no. Single Payer or Bust! So they choose Bust.

[moondust]

120. He's wrong to take it personally.

LOTS of people WANT single payer and know it's possible because other countries do it and it makes sense. Probably every single one of those Sanders supporters he's blaming would vote to keep Obamacare rather than replace it with any GOP disaster.

[Cha]

190. President Obama is not wrong.. he's speaking the truth.

[moondust]

256. What you and he are saying

is that if you ever manage to get "half a loaf" then that's it. That's the end of it. You must never try to improve on that because your wicked political opponents will seize upon your efforts to do better and turn it into the propaganda meme that even YOU know it's no good...and therefore must be repealed (rather than improved upon).

That's just playing into the hands of the wicked, bowing to their propaganda.

[Cha]

282. President Obama speaks the truth.

[INdemo]

121. Bull Shit..What Obama got with his Obamacare was nothing more than a bill

that subsidized Big Insurance companies and the only major benefit was that it allowed those with pre-existing health issues to get insurance. The damn legislation was written by insurance companies and lobbyists..and many Democrats that voted for it really didn't like it but all of them said "its a start"..It gave bragging rights to Obama so he could say he got universal health insurance passed..
Ever try to get insurance through the ACA?..it sucks..with very high premiums and very high deductibles...

[Cha]

227. What President Obama got was helping People who couldn't afford Health

Insurance. He gave people with pre-existing conditions a chance with their lives.

It let kids be on their parents' insurance until they were 26

He got a stepping stone to single payer if it hadn't been bad mouthed so much by the rw and exactly what the President is saying.

Now there will be nothing.

[INdemo]

241. i think I mentioned that advantage ...but the ACA

would have been very successful if the states would have taken the funding which was approved to increase the Medicaid for those that qualified.
Instead the Republican states controlled by Republicans purposely denied those funds and threw the ACA in a tailspin.

But still Democrats and Obama should have continued to push for a better plan that was not so easily trashed by Republicans.

[hrmjustin]

124. There is enough blame the go around.

[otohara]

129. Ha Ha, After All The Shit Sanders Has Said About Obama

and Democrats - this made my day.

[Cha]

161. You Win the DAMN Thread! Exactly, Otohara!

[otohara]

274. Thanks Cha

Did I tell you I met her?

I have a lovely picture of Hillary, me and my son.
I am heartbroken, disgusted, depressed.

I also lost hearing in my right ear a few days before the election. I am completely deaf in one ear.
It was late at night and it was as if a light bulb went out in my head and poof gone.

[Cha]

284. No, I didn't know you met Hillary!

That's great.. you'll have that moment in history with a pic!

I met her in upper state New York in 2000.

Sorry, about your ear.. I know how weird things can happen with our health instantly out of the blue.

[LS_Editor]

131. That's absurd.

The same people he tried to work with for months on healthcare - the Republicans - have been vowing to destroy his presidency before it began. Counterproductive to blame the left. And bullshit.

Let's not forget Obama tried and failed to bridge the gap between himself and Republicans. He was ready to sacrifice Social Security and Medicare earned benefits on the alter of bipartisanship. If the GOP wasn't so short-sighted it would have realized it was getting everything for pretty much nothing.

So Obama blaming the left he would have betrayed for his legacy is the ultimate irony.

[dae]

198. You are correct, if not for AARP & other groups sounding the alarm on

SS, Medicare, Medicaid cuts Obama was giving Repubs what they wanted.
POTUS was selling out in the name of bipartisanship and has a lot of nerve for calling out the left for his weakness.

[MichMan]

133. A few things that really hurt public opinion of the ACA IMO

There were a few things that really hurt the message. All of these may have been taken out of context, but the optics were terrible and hurt popular opinion right from the get go.

1) During the campaign, Obama made repeated promises that premiums for the average family would go down $2500. While it was obviously true that costs had been going up every year and the ACA slowed the growth, when you promise people a reduction that turned into an increase, it isn't going to play well.

2) The oft stated promises about "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan." The only ones who could control this happening were the insurance companies as obviously the administration did not have the power to do so, but everyone who was forced to change plans and doctors thought they were sold a bill of goods

3) Majority leader Nancy Pelosi making the statement "We have to pass the bill so you can find out what's in it, away from the fog of the controversy" This became a RW talking point that was taken totally out of context, but fanned the flames for people already skeptical of Washington politics.

It appeared to me at the time that it became more important to pass anything that was called the "Affordable Care Act" than the specific details on what it might actually accomplish. As far as the complaints that the Republicans later refused to fix it, anyone that believed that would occur was naïve. Since the bill passed under reconciliation, it only took 51 votes and as long as the costs were construed to be contained, the Republicans could do nothing. It could have been written correctly the first time with a public option

[SleeplessinSoCal]

141. left/right extremes always hurt.

The masses still believe, while maybe not "Great", this nation's tremendous success is based solely on Capitalism. Their 2 homes, 3 cars, 5 bathrooms, and 10 tv's would not exist with single payer healthcare. Taxes would cut out at least a few of those.

[Talk Is Cheap]

144. The problem is not that they think Obamacare is a failure."... per the rest of the quote

“The problem is not that they think Obamacare is a failure. The problem is that they don’t think it went far enough and that it left too many people still uncovered,” Obama said.

The 'undermine' terminology is from the Reuters.

Yes, Obamacare doesn't go far enough. It should and must be Medicare for All.

But, like Sanders, people (including me) wanted Obamacare as a first step to a legitimate health care system.

[underpants]

254. Yep bad headline. Obama does have a IDGAF attitude also. n/t

[Politicub]

147. My premium went down

The increases were overblown.

[MadamPresident]

148. Yes, a point we've tried to make for six years.

Much of the disapproval for the ACA was that it hadn't gone far enough, which is a fair point. That doesn't mean that it isn't better than what we had before. The problem is, no one ever asked that. There was no nuance in the polls. Wishing it was better doesn't equal wishing it didn't exist.

[Cha]

150. Sanders wanted President Obama Primaried in 2012.. but, he didn't

want to do it himself.

"But Obama also said Liberals like former Democratic presidential candidate Senator Bernie Sanders had contributed to the program’s unpopularity."

Good for Obama.. he is my President!

So I hope everyone is happy now that the assholes are taking everyone's healthcare away.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

199. The only thing is, that isn't remotely the point Obama was making.

President Obama is trying to defend the ACA by correcting the spin that 46% want the ACA repealed. He's saying among that 40% dissatisfied are people who want the ACA improved and not repealed. Those people are Bernie supporters.

Poor President Obama, the guy is a smart politician who would never make a major part of his campaign about bashing the other candidate's supporters.

This one of many reasons he now goes by the name President Obama.

Poor guy can't even try to correct repig spin on the polls without having people from his own party twist his words to bash Bernie supporters.

Raw Story is at least getting ad revenue out of this clickbait bullshit. Everyone else should be ashamed.

"And the third thing is that the polls — whenever you look at polls showing 40 percent are supportive of the law, 40 percent or so are dissatisfied, in the dissatisfied column are a whole bunch of Bernie Sanders supporters who want a single-payer plan. The problem is not that they think it’s a failure. The problem is that they don’t think it went far enough. That it left too many people uncovered, the subsidies were not as rich as they should have been, that there was a way of dealing with prescription drug makers in a way that would drive down those costs. All of those things meant that even after the law was passed, there were still going to be a lot of tough politics."

[BainsBane]

217. Bernie supporters aren't the victims here.

The victims are those who will be without health insurance, and we will see deaths as a result. Propaganda and sloganeering has real life consequences. The self-righteous on both sides of the isle set their sets on destoyng the status quo, and they succeeded.

[Fearless]

153. Which plan is better? The ACA or Single Payer?

I'll wait.


If giving a better option undermined your plan... then why didn't you pick up the better option? Because Republicans and Democratic corporate donors didn't like it?

[pnwmom]

171. The only plan that was politically POSSIBLE was better. n/t

[Fearless]

191. At no point would anyone who was voting for the ACA not vote for it

Due to the fact that single payer was (and is) a better option. The entire argument is faulty logic.

[dogman]

162. I think he put the cart before the horse.

I, others I know, and people I follow were dissatisfied with the Heritage health plan before Obama adopted it and before Senator Sanders began his campaign. It was actually one of the reasons so many of us became supporters of Senator Sanders campaign. The problem was that polls about dissatisfaction were binary and the dichotomy was never explored or explained.

[SunSeeker]

183. K & R

[napi21]

185. Obama is right that Berniue was promoting single payer, as were a lot of us from day one.

The problem I see is for the people who have to buy their own insurance be aren't eligible for subsidies. My son was in that position. He checked every option he could find and the cheapest insurance he could find was $2,100 A MONTH! With a mortgage and a family, if he signed up for something like that, he wouldn't be able to buy anything else. Never go out to eat; never go to a movie; never take a vacation, and on and on. On top of the premium, the deductible was $2,000 per person. He finally found insurance through some off beat company that explained that he may have to pay the $160 penalty because the ins. they offered didn't cover pregnancy coverage so it wasn't in compliance with the ACA, BUT, the premium was $350/mo. and a $1,000 deductible. People like him are the people who HAT Obamacare. I don't understand why there aren't an affordable insurance policies available for individuals like my son.

He got lucky and is now working for a company that offers insurance, but him getting a job doesn't fix this mess for everyone else in the same spot he was in.

Maybe no one has told the President about the people who aren't eligible for subsidies but work for a company that doesn't offer insurance.

[Cha]

201. President Obama is right.

[LittleGirl]

202. Listen

For the first time, I have signed up for Obamacare in AZ and the premium is over 670 bucks a month with a 4700 deductible. Out of pocket max is over 8000. I'm not going to tell you how much that hurts me because anyone that see those numbers knows that is crazy. I am being charged for my spouse's income bracket and I don't even have a job. His insurance abroad is 200 a month, with a 2500 deductible and it covers 90% after that.

This is outrageous. Even if single payer was an option, a 3%-5% hit on our taxes would be lower than that! WTF?

[Lil Missy]

203. No surprise there. Although, his supporters were following the standard set by Sanders himself.

[Cha]

212. I know Lil Missy.. it's a fact and now they're trying to deny it. don't

like to be called on it.

[HassleCat]

204. I like the president

And I like the ACA, but he may be trying to deflect attention away from other mistakes that occurred, some of which might be his own mistakes.

[JNelson6563]

206. Rabid zealots rarely do good in any situations.

Because they are rabid zealots.

[underthematrix]

213. I have to agree with President Obama on this one. I thought it was strange because

Bernie could've built on Obamacare by fixing it and then move the country toward a public option. His posture on this issue was puzzling given that we weren't going to get a filibuster proof Senate or a majority in the House.

[ucrdem]

214. It took 80 years to get it passed

but like everything else Barack did it wasn't good enough for the "socialist" who couldn't get single-payer in his own state.

[Hekate]

218. [phone]

[Cha]

224. Excellent response, ucr.. thank you!

[Lil Missy]

248. In all fairness - the pony wasn't included. n/t

[ucrdem]

258. And it wasn't called Berniecare.

Dealbreaker.

[Hoyt]

215. He's right. Calling Obama and the ACA a "POS," did not help. Hopefully, GOPers will be

forced/shamed into improving on critical aspects of ACA. It might lose its association with Obama, except to those who appreciate his efforts in get something passed.

[Eric J in MN]

216. The headline misrepresents the Obama quote.

“In the ‘dissatisfied’ column are a whole bunch of Bernie Sanders supporters who wanted a single-payer plan.” - Obama

Obama is making the point which people (including talk show host Bill Maher) have been making since the early days of Obamacare: those polled as disliking it include those who want MORE government involvement in health care, and there isn't a mandate for the government doing less about health care.

[phleshdef]

220. This headline vs the actual context are not in agreement with one another at all.

[Larkspur]

230. My health insurance got worse after ACA was passsd, not better

Also, if Obama had not bowed down to Joe Lieberman over the public option, the ACA would have been stronger.
interesting that Obama caves to a R-lite Dem, Joe Lieberman, instead of criticizing and pressuring him to support the public option.

[Sunlei]

232. I remember when Hillary said something like, 'Medicare for all, can not happen' it hurt her campaign

So yes, Medicare for all (single payer type insurance), is something every real D would love to have for Americans.

Obamas right, Sanders did push against Hilary's "no statement" and Obamacare as dump-able.

When really imo, SOME INSURANCE (Obamacare) is BETTER THAN NOTHING, IMO.

[Lunabell]

233. So we are not allowed to criticize?

Just sit back and take whatever crumbs they send us? We the people spoke up about single payer or universal healthcare and all we got was the lousy ACA!

[Cha]

238. There weren't the votes for single payer.. you can criticize but

Obamacare was a stepping stone to single payer and now those who couldn't afford insurance will have nothing. Those with pre-existing conditions will be without insurance.

Those are the people who are the victims.. That's who President Obama is looking out for.

[still_one]

320. Well said Cha, thanks

[Cha]

322. Thank you stillone for appreciating what we had.

[betsuni]

242. K&R

[turbinetree]

246. Really, Lets talk about what Joe Lieberman did to single payer

and not how FDR Democrats wanted to expand Medicare and to give the people the means to have a "public" (citizens) to have a option to fight against single source corporations called health care not providers but deniers CEO's worried about stock prices. Since the "public" is really bigger than some corporations if looked in the total aggregate of the masses.

Let's talk about how that one point was pulled and by "whom".

Let's talk about how one man a Senator and his girlfriend from Montana took the ability for the government (Public people, the citizens as a whole since we pay and own the government) to not be able to negotiate prescription drug prices from the drug corporations

[Generic Other]

255. I thought his plan should be tweaked to make it single payer

As it was the plan did not seem to go far enough to fix the mess, but I gave him credit for having implemented a plan! I wonder if he had forced the single payer expanded Medicare approach if he would be facing GOP opposition today. Maybe it was worth the fight back then. I doubt Americans would be so quick to oppose a Medicare for all plan, and GOP would have no leg to stand on.

As it is I don't think they are going to be able to dismantle ACA because too many of their constituents depend on it. Eventually, I suspect the boneheads will figure that out.

[mcar]

261. He is correct, as usual

[MindPilot]

269. I'm no longer conservative enough to be a Democrat.

Threads like this make that very clear.

Party over principal is what has gotten us to where we are today.

[yurbud]

271. if Dems think bashing progressives is a winning strategy, they are in for another beating in 2018

Instead of bashing, address their concerns, especially those that overlap those in the middle and right.

[truebluegreen]

276. Maybe he should have fought harder

for a public option instead of leaving us all to defend a system proposed by a right-wing think tank.

It would have had greatly enhanced cost control aspects too.

[HopeAgain]

277. Keep trolling the Bernie people, how could that do anything but help the mess we are in? n/t

[OrwellwasRight]

283. Welcome to DU!

And keep calling out the BS when you see it.

[Cha]

308. President Obama is speaking the truth.. and you call that trolling. the

damn denial is thick.

[HopeAgain]

332. Denial...

is claiming that Hillary's campaign was not a failure because she won the popular vote while we watch the most unpopular President Elect in history get sworn in.

[Cha]

333. Hillary won the Primary by almost 4 Million Votes.. She won the

GE by almost 3 Million Votes and lost the Electoral College by just 100,000 votes.

There was Voter Suppression, Voter Purging, Comey, the Russians Hacking and a huge Lying Hate Campaign run against for over a year..

And, the gd m$m running a negative campaign on her while they were giving trump billions of $$$$$ of free PR.. and normalizing him.. he couldn't have done it without them.

You're the one who's in denial.

[lunatica]

278. I totally disagree

I'm a Progressive Sanders supporter who believes that Obama care should be expanded and made into a Socialist system like Social Security and Medicare.

[JudyM]

324. We all want that, as far as I've seen. Seems like a misguided smear on his part, disappointed in him

[Akamai]

287. A major reason for the rate increases was Marco Rubio's passage of "a poison pill."

That is, Marco Rubio ontroduced a provision that stripped out of the ACA the Risk Corridors which had been part of the ACA since the beginning. The Risk Corridors are a system of payment to major insurance companies that will recompense them for teh initial losses they would take in preparing for the ACA.

But in removing the Risk Corridors, Rubio made ACA premiums much more expensive.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/feb/25/marco-rubio/rubio-we-wiped-out-obamacare-bailout-fund-insuranc/

Job done for the Republicans who are interested only in making life as miserable as it can be for the average Americans. Check and Check!

[m-lekktor]

334. How fucking ridiculous. I am surprised he resorted to this level of idiocy.

As long as insurance companies (whose whole point of involvement is to find ways to deny people what they need so they can profit) are involved, the program is ultimately going to SUCK and that is not the fault of the people who are only pointing out the obvious. This is "the dog ate my homework" type of stuff.

His gift to the insurance companies has backfired and he has to find scapegoats to blame. How fucking CLASSY.

[JonLP24]

341. I don't know what Sanders supporters have to do with the unpopularity from the left wing side

Sanders proposing that has been a long time goal while this plan was adopted from Republicans who proposed to counter a universal health care type of proposal with the mandate to purchase from private insurance.

Al Gore in a debate said he would like to eventually move to a universal health care type of program but had no plans to do that at the time. I understand something like that is difficult and ACA was the alternative and it isn't like I heard much criticism, it was mainly at the time it was passed 2010 so I don't understand how Sanders' supporters enters into the equation since at the time criticism was independent of Sanders. As far as Sanders I don't understand the problem with what he said because what's wrong with that as a policy goal?