Skip to main content

View Diary: Did Bill just signal that Hillary is running against Obama(care) in 2016? (249 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Nope (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ian Reifowitz, doroma

    Obama attacked Obamacare from the center.

    This isn't the same thing that Clinton said.  

    If Obama starts saying the way we make sure people keep their policies is to let the insurance companies continue to collect money for useless coverage, he would be attacking from the right.

    If he says we make sure people aren't losing quality policies and being forced to pay more by curbing insurance company greed, he's attacking from the center.

    If he says we fix this by doing away with fucking insurance policies and go single payer, he's attacking from the left.

    There are subsets of people who are having their policies canceled.  

    Some because the policies are junk and need to go.  Insurance companies scam people by canceling them and redirecting them to higher cost policies instead of the exchange.

    Others because they have decent policies but the insurance companies are greedy and are using ACA as cover to move people to more expensive policies.  

    The ACA makes allowance for grandfathered policies.  That could be expanded as long as the policies are (a) quality and (b) affordable.  'Course that won't fly.

    But by no means should anything to be done to allow people to keep policies that afford no real coverage.  

    If Bill wants to help, he needs to be clear about which group of "canceled folks" he's referring to.  

    •  It isn;t? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      4kedtongue, TooFolkGR

      Boy that is some deep deep nuance.

      How come Clinton's statement is not compatible with Obama's statement?

      It completely is.

      This seems like a gratuitous attempt to divide Dems on this to me and to lock in some anti-Clinton fervor.

      I ike and respect Ian but this diary is unnecssarily divisive and just plain worng imo.

      It's looking for trouble.

      And for no good reason.

      •  Hear, hear. n/t (0+ / 0-)

        all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

        by 4kedtongue on Wed Nov 13, 2013 at 08:44:08 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  It completely isn't. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Ian Reifowitz, doroma

        The gop is now offering some bullshit legislation designed to "let people keep their policies".

        It's intent and result is the destruction of the ACA.

        Clinton says "let people keep their policies".

        Obama says "Let's help people whose policies are canceled obtain better policies".

        These are most decidedly NOT the same thing.

        Read Carney's language.  It is clearly not intended to "let people keep their policies".

        The solution to the cancelation issue may not have anything to do with "letting people keep their policies" at all.

        •  What the GOP is offering (0+ / 0-)

          has what to do with what Clinton said? Nothing.

          Again, if you want to react to what Clinton said, try listening to it.

          •  Well the Upton bill does allow people to keep (0+ / 0-)

            their existing policies.  However it does so by essentially destroying Obamacare as no insurance companies will participate in the exchange when they can make more money selling junk policies off the exchange.

            You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

            by Throw The Bums Out on Wed Nov 13, 2013 at 01:02:01 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site