Skip to main content

Another poll, and more confirmation that people really don't like Obamacare but ...
(Reuters) - Most Americans oppose President Barack Obama's healthcare reform even though they strongly support most of its provisions, Reuters/Ipsos poll showed on Sunday, with the Supreme Court set to rule within days on whether the law should stand.

Fifty-six percent of people are against the healthcare overhaul and 44 percent favor it, according to the online poll conducted from Tuesday through Saturday.

They don't like it—that is, until they hear about what's in it. Same old story. Greg Sargent got the partisan breakdown from Reuters/Ipsos on this poll.
* Eighty percent of Republicans favor “creating an insurance pool where small businesses and uninsured have access to insurance exchanges to take advantage of large group pricing benefits.” That’s backed by 75 percent of independents. [...]

* Fifty two percent of Republicans favor “allowing children to stay on parents insurance until age 26.” That’s backed by 69 percent of independents.

* Seventy eight percent of Republicans support “banning insurance companies from denying coverage for pre-existing conditions; 86 percent of Republicans favor “banning insurance companies from cancelling policies because a person becomes ill.” Those are backed by 82 percent of independents and 87 percent of independents.

* One provision that isn’t backed by a majority of Republicans: The one “expanding Medicaid to families with incomes less than $30,000 per year.”

Just don't call it "Obamacare" and it's all good, even with Republicans—except for that bit about making things a little easier for the working poor, because that's practically anti-American.

The problem, of course, is that you can't separate the law from the very effective (albeit shockingly untruthful) narratives the Republicans created against it. As of now, Republicans have decided they won't do anything to reinstate these popular elements. Even if they change their minds, they'll be relentlessly attacked by the even further Right.

But polls like this show what President Obama is going to have to do politically if the law is overturned. He's going to have to run against the activist, extremist Republican majority on the Supreme Court and what it has done to overturn these provisions, provisions that even normal (non-elected) Republicans support.

Originally posted to Joan McCarter on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 01:57 PM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  What it really shows though (23+ / 0-)

    is how bad our side is at selling our agenda and how good the other guys are at selling theirs.

    People like our side... they just don't know it's our side.

    "Do what you can with what you have where you are." - Teddy Roosevelt

    by Andrew C White on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 02:13:34 PM PDT

    •  But it also means that people (18+ / 0-)

      form opinions only on what they have been told/lied to about/heard from RW talking points and not based on any facts they find out themselves. An ill-informed public is very scary - as we are witnessing right now.

      This is a nightmare.

      Working on a dream to come true.

      by redstella on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 02:29:45 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  It shows how completely disconnected from (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      quince, wsexson, Brown Thrasher, TimmyB

      reality the supporters of this bill still are, and how far they'll reach to find reason to believe they're somehow superior in their capacity for reason.

      People hate the mandate more than they like subsidies and an end to rescission.

      That doesn't mean they're ignorant, or that you and yours need better propaganda.

      It means they understand their own financial situation much better than you do.

      Thinking the "food stamp challenge" teaches you about being poor is like thinking a camping trip will give you insight into being homeless.

      by JesseCW on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 04:26:10 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  It's political malpractice not to appoint a p.r. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      New Rule, tb mare, MPociask, Fury

      spokesperson to explain the ACA. Instead, just let the Repigs bash it in hopes that during the 2012 election cyle you can at the last minute salvage people's perceptions of it, and don't figure that the Supremes, looking at the polls, can now just destroy the entire thing.

      24/7, it's all 'Great news for Romney!'

      by doinaheckuvanutjob on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 08:00:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  1000 IGNORED radio stations, that's all. this is (0+ / 0-)

      a common take on it- the admin is doing a lousy job selling it. bullshit. their problem is that even if the president mentions talk radio in the state of the union , as he did, the left continues to ignore it. he needs to go all out on it but then even the left will call him an out of touch whiner.

      what PR pros and what giant microphones are louder than the billionaire's think tanks feeding a thousand coordinated radio stations reaching 50 mil a week?

      This is a list of 76 universities for Rush Limbaugh that endorse global warming denial, racism, sexism, and partisan lying by broadcasting sports on Limbaugh radio stations.

      by certainot on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 09:17:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm not sure what you're saying. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KingTag, Brown Thrasher, celdd

        What about talk radio is the left ignoring? We all know talk radio is a cesspool that has been poisoning the minds of the country for decades, and we have been begging for somebody to do something about it, since nobody out here has enough money to buy enough stations or legislators to change the regulations.

        "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

        by bryduck on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:25:57 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  buying stations is not the solution (0+ / 0-)

          There is NO organized opposition to it. It has to be challenged. It's getting a free speech free ride. Waiting for 'market'  or legislative solutions is not going to work.

          This is a list of 76 universities for Rush Limbaugh that endorse global warming denial, racism, sexism, and partisan lying by broadcasting sports on Limbaugh radio stations.

          by certainot on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:53:53 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Challenged by what, exactly? (0+ / 0-)

            If legislative solutions don't work, what else is there? Protests? How many people do you think would take to the streets so that they can have their radio stations change ownership?

            "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

            by bryduck on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 02:17:13 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  here are a few suggestions (0+ / 0-)
              i can think of several things never tried (0+ / 0-)
              1) treat stations as the GOP headquarters they actually are- protest radio stations, and treat the talkers as the leaders of the GOP. mention the main names regularly- limbaugh especially, and give them credit for the shit the GOP is doing- they play a main part selling it, and they don't have any credibility when directly challenged.

              2) pressure universities off RW radio. as in my sig, many universities have associations with RW radio. if a few pull out others will have to follow. they shouldn't be able to claim they have to keep mocking their own high and lofty mission statements just so they can reach a few more listeners, or because they've always used a particular station (which was likely why they were bought for RW radio). there are probably hundreds of RW radio stations that depend on those associations for community cred and local ad money. RW radio could be devastated, IMO. as many as 1/3 to 1/2 of the main stations get university endoorsements this way- while they do their best in those states to defund education to privatize it, attack teachers and professors, etc.

              3) and transcribe the main local and national shows and make the transcripts available in a searchable database. there are copyright concerns so the transcripts can be scrambled and searched for frequency. The actual context is apparent for RW radio anyway. if the terms "death panels", "obamacare", "fast and furious" "weapons of mass destruction" "acorn" "van jones" etc could could have been searched for frequency by date, and noticed before they were 'catapulted' into the mainstream it would say a lot. making media aware of how this shit starts, and  that the buzz made up and not genuine, would go a long way toward ending the think tank's ability to dominate messaging in the US. there is a service - tveyes.com - that makes transcripts on some shows available, but only to companies/orgs. it would also indicate the coordination involved.

              most of the left has no clue how important and dominant RW radio has been the last 20 years getting us into this mess so they ignore it, trivialize it, while it kicks their ass and makes their efforts much less effective and they end up reacting after the  alternate reality has already been established.

              there will be no significant reforms or legislative fixes as long as the left ignores RW radio- and that's a catch 22 for those who want to beat an entrenched monopoly with 'market' solutions, or legislation that has to get past a bunch of rabid idiots screaming about 'free speech'- the corporate version.

              any significant effort to challenge RW radio will pay off big for the left.

              This is a list of 76 universities for Rush Limbaugh that endorse global warming denial, racism, sexism, and partisan lying by broadcasting sports on Limbaugh radio stations.

              by certainot on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:17:19 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  1 and 2 are protests. See my above. (0+ / 0-)

                3 has nothing directly to do with challenging anything.
                And why would any station owners change anything based on protests that don't actually threaten their income? I thought you were going to go for boycotts, at least, which affect pocketbooks, but can easily be countered since supporters of RW radio have far more $ than any group of concerned citizens is likely to have.
                I disagree wholeheartedly that "the left has no clue how important and dominant RW radio has been." You might want some data to back that assertion up, because there have been voluminous surveys, studies, and books published that show the phenomena over the decades. Anybody who doesn't already know that is being willfully ignorant.
                If you aren't "challenging" owners' income one way or another, you aren't doing jack, and to do that you need more than what you're alluding to here, I'm afraid. College radio? A sideshow at best.

                "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

                by bryduck on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:57:29 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  any attn via protests or universities finding alts (0+ / 0-)

                  for sports broadcasting will create boycotts and in the case of the unis an exodus of local advertisers. it's possible as many as half of all major RW stations have some sports endorsement.

                  I disagree wholeheartedly that "the left has no clue how important and dominant RW radio has been." You might want some data to back that assertion up, because there have been voluminous surveys, studies, and books published that show the phenomena over the decades. Anybody who doesn't already know that is being willfully ignorant.
                  there have been very few protests at RW radio stations.

                  most of the people i've talked too have no clue what radio's been doing in this country the last 20 years and the lack of any organized opposition to it verifies that the left generally ignores it. they analyze their losses and lick their wounds and blame their reps while allowing the giant megaphone to take pot shots at them all day, with nary a peep of complaint. they  blame money, they blame fox, they blame everything but those 1000 coordinated megaphones. which is really stupid because it makes everything progressive groups and politicians harder- wastes volunteer time and dollars on a broad scale. the constant analysis of politics and media with no factoring of RW radio, except as an afterthought, is more evidence. radio seldom is factored into polls that would be much more valuable with such factoring. something like "do you listen to talk radio" would go a long way to explaining the source of much of the misinformation and many opinions. the constant blaming of fox news, talk radio's puny sister, for a lot of radio's successes is more evidence. because they can't read it and it hurts their heads to listen to it it has been routinely ignored the last 20 years, while it has been used to short circuit our normal democratic feedback mechanisms, destroy the GOP by making thinking moderates a thing of the past, and beat  the left like it's an invisible political 2x4.

                  This is a list of 76 universities for Rush Limbaugh that endorse global warming denial, racism, sexism, and partisan lying by broadcasting sports on Limbaugh radio stations.

                  by certainot on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 04:36:17 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I think you may need to (0+ / 0-)

                    get our more--and I really don't mean that in a snide way--if most of the people you talk to have no clue about radio's pernicious influence. (Unless, that is, you are referring only to Republicans. They are notoriously ignorant, and I can see what you are saying if that is the case.) Historians and journalists have been analyzing the media and its increasingly unhinged biases for a long, long time, and I would say that nearly 100% of us on dKos know all about it. Yes, that doesn't mean that all Dems, or even a majority of Dems, know it, but we probably represent a good sized batch of the most active members of the party.
                    Eric Alterman's What Liberal Media? came out in 2003, and it was merely the most well-done study; others pointed to his conclusions throughout the 90s as well. Robert Emtman, in Democracy without Citizens, covered something of this in 1990, and even the purely media-focused (iow, not addressing politics per se) Three Blind Mice, by Ken Auletta (1991), recognized that consolidation was perverting news reporting by the broadcast networks as they began treating the news as a profit center instead of a public service.
                    On one of your smaller notes, I think we--at least I--use "FNC" as synecdoche for "right-wing media"; any time I say "FNC", I am including rightwing radio in whatever condemnation I am throwing around.
                    I think you are confusing ignorance and learned helplessness; it's not that we don't know enough to attempt protests against radio stations, it's that it has been nearly impossible to rally enough support against them to do any good. It took Rush Limbaugh's disgraceful treatment of Sandra Fluke to get any traction from advertisers despite all the clamor we raised, and I bet sooner rather than later, as long as his ratings stay solid, almost all of those advertisers will flock back. Protesting radio doesn't work because ratings trump all in that realm as it fights being killed off completely by the internet. Raising consciousness is great, but we can't get to the consciousnesses of those who listen to Limbaugh and his cronies and keep their ratings up, because they refuse to listen to our side at all. We have to go at it from the other angles where we have at least some sway.

                    "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

                    by bryduck on Wed Jun 27, 2012 at 10:48:46 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  the recognition is just not there- the result is (0+ / 0-)

                      the same as if it ignored because there is still no organized reaction to it- the lack of a written record and the constant blaming of RW radio damage on fox and the RW media in general greatly undervalues its dominating part in one disaster for the left after another.

                      This is a list of 76 universities for Rush Limbaugh that endorse global warming denial, racism, sexism, and partisan lying by broadcasting sports on Limbaugh radio stations.

                      by certainot on Thu Jun 28, 2012 at 06:05:25 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

    •  And the Iraq War was sold, to public cheers (4+ / 0-)

      for years, before it became a deadly PR albatross.

      Go figure.

      "..The political class cannot solve the problems it created. " - Jay Rosen

      by New Rule on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:23:12 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  If you had 1000 radio stations (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ZedMont, Fury, celdd

      and god literally knows how many churches, plus all the other media money can and does buy, you'd be a marketing genius too.

    •  So once again (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      foucaultspendulum

      framing is everything.

    •  What it really shows (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      fuzzyguy, celdd

      is there is no librul media.

      Romney - making sure the American dream stays a dream.

      by jackandjill on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:44:23 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Also means that American people are stupid (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      celdd

      The fact that they are so easily swayed to go against their best interest by paid ads and GOP bullshit is truly amazing.

      •  All those "stupid" people (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Brown Thrasher, TimmyB

        Single Payer.  Affordable guaranteed healthcare.  

        THAT is what those "stupid" people wanted.  

        Do not fault the American people when they see that this is not what they wanted.

        Somebody said Party! I got excited. I love Parties! Especially Parties with exclamation marks! Now I'm sad because there's not a Party! h/t AnnetteK ;-)

        by EdMass on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 10:37:21 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Stupid people will believe Single Payer=Communism (0+ / 0-)

          Don't kid yourself. While many voters agree that Single Payer is the way to go, a boatload of ads funded by Rove and the insurance industry will make sure that the stupid beats the wise!

  •  Sugar Daddies (6+ / 0-)

    If our side had the resources the right had we too could drive the narrative.  Our side is up against the right wing media, the traditional conservative corporate media, the Koch Brothers, Americans for Prosperity, and a barrage of propaganda paid for by unlimited right wing sources. That there are still, today, a large segment of the population that get their news from Fox is bad enough, but when the corporate media refuses to give our side equal time, is there any wonder the public is so misinformed?

    "The most authentic thing about us is our capacity to create, to overcome, to endure, to transform, to love and to be greater than our suffering."

    by rlharry on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 03:00:58 PM PDT

  •  Give 'em Hell, Barack (5+ / 0-)
    He's going to have to run against the activist, extremist Republican majority on the Supreme Court

    "Think of something to make the ridiculous look ridiculous." -- Molly Ivins

    by dumpster on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 03:47:11 PM PDT

  •  No, they don't support your mandate. (7+ / 0-)
    Sixty-one percent of Americans are against the mandate, the issue at the center of the Republicans' contention that the law is unconstitutional, while 39 percent favor it.
    Three parts chocolate and one part dog shit is dog shit.

    You keep pretending people are somehow ignorant, when the simple fact is that they are not willing to make the same trade-offs you are.

    Brutally fucking working people by offering them a choice between huge bills for junk insurance or a giant tax hike isn't something most Americans go for.

    Even if they approve of other parts of the bill.

    Thinking the "food stamp challenge" teaches you about being poor is like thinking a camping trip will give you insight into being homeless.

    by JesseCW on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 04:23:58 PM PDT

    •  There's still 3 parts chocolate. (5+ / 0-)

      Instead of tossing all of it in the trash since there's a bit of dogshit in it as you would, the smarter thing to do is to separate the dogshit out and keep the chocolate. You'd rather side with Republicans and kill it all.

      24/7, it's all 'Great news for Romney!'

      by doinaheckuvanutjob on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 08:02:35 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You'd rather side with Bob Dole, and support the (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        quince, MPociask, fuzzyguy, TimmyB

        plan he proposed in 1996.

        Because you just don't care about working people making more than poverty and less than enough.

        It's increasingly clear that shitting on us and chortling while doing it is almost a prerequisite for membership in the modern Democratic Party - a Party that was once ours.

        It's been taken over by selfish white-collar assholes who screw us for their own advantage at every opportunity.  

        This is just one example.  Seeing it for what it is, and calling it what it is, doesn't mean "siding with Republicans".

        It just means understanding that it's not just 1%'ers who are trying to hurt us.

        Thinking the "food stamp challenge" teaches you about being poor is like thinking a camping trip will give you insight into being homeless.

        by JesseCW on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 02:28:54 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Take your shot elsewhere. (0+ / 0-)

          I bet I know more about working people making more than poverty and less than enough in one day than you have in a lifetime.

          Your comment is hysterical it shows how ungrounded your thinking and being is. I'd attend to that before unloading a string of idiocy at someone here.

          There's surely a bathroom nearby where you can dump your hostility and flush it so no one around you is harmed by it.

          24/7, it's all 'Great news for Romney!'

          by doinaheckuvanutjob on Wed Jun 27, 2012 at 11:58:24 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •   I 'm gonna vomit. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Brown Thrasher
    •  It is not "a giant tax hike." (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      foucaultspendulum, KingTag

      It's a pretty damn small penalty fee.

      A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen, and philosophers and divines. ~Ralph Waldo Emerson

      by tb mare on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:30:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Brutally fucking working people by giving them (4+ / 0-)

      subsidies and a chance to live through the fatal illness that will at some point confront them?

      History merely repeats itself; it doesn't cure its own ills. That is the burden of the present.

      by ZedMont on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:34:21 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Chocolate isn't free (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingTag

      If you are really informed, and realize that the good stuff has to get paid for somehow, then integrity demands that you also disfavor requiring the insurance industry to cover pre-existing conditions, etc.

      Those who think the mandate is unconstitutional mostly can't spell unconstitutional.

      If the mandate had been sold with RW rhetoric (as Romney sold it in Mass), that it is making the freeloaders pay their fair share, the word "mandate" would be as unassailable a concept as "upperdownvote" used to be.

    •  But when the (giant?) tax hike comes in, (0+ / 0-)

      the mammoth paycheck deductions for healthcare go out. As long as the tax increase is less than the deductions were, they win. Better healthcare, more money on payday. Problem is, no one is stressing this to the doubters.

      There would need to be numbers...

      I believe in democracy, civil liberties, and the rule of law. That makes me a liberal, and I’m proud of it. - Paul Krugman

      by Gentle Giant on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:11:07 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  talk radio works great, doesn't it? (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    drmah, New Rule, MPociask, KingTag, wordwraith

    this is the power of the talk radio monopoly, power basically ignored by  the collective left and  the multitude of liberal/progressive groups that continue to waste their volunteers time and money merely because there is no organized opposition to the right's best weapon.
    the one that's beee pounding the country with the term 'obamacare' for years, and birthed death panels, palin, teabaggers, etc.

    This is a list of 76 universities for Rush Limbaugh that endorse global warming denial, racism, sexism, and partisan lying by broadcasting sports on Limbaugh radio stations.

    by certainot on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 09:08:31 PM PDT

  •  Medicare for All (12+ / 0-)

    if ACA is struck down, then time to go for broke. Medicare, unlike Obamacare, is a name that polls well. even with Republicans.

    http://www.patheos.com/...

    City of Brass: principled pragmatism at the maghrib of one age, the fajr of another

    by azizhp on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:17:57 AM PDT

    •  Won't happen, not now...not for a long while. (0+ / 0-)

      Health care reform will be political poison for who knows how long.

    •  azizhp, I suspect you're on to something. (0+ / 0-)

      Who in their right mind would think a mandate would pass muster in today's social climate?
      It could be the ACA was over-comprimised to afford the opportunity to say, "Okay, we've tried it your way," and then, as you said, "go for broke". ( not in financial terms, I'd hope )

      I believe in democracy, civil liberties, and the rule of law. That makes me a liberal, and I’m proud of it. - Paul Krugman

      by Gentle Giant on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:16:02 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Let's poll how BainCare does. (7+ / 0-)

    Anyone think Americans are clamoring for Health Care the Bain Way?TM

    Bet the data would say, "Not just no, HELL no!" to borrow a phrase.

  •  Fnords (0+ / 0-)

    As mentioned above, Obama is seriously losing the messaging battle.  The GOP, supported by the conservative news media, rarely does much but repeat Orwellian buzzwords like "Obamacare" until they're like fnords:  Just hearing the word makes you mad.

    And if they have a few seconds, the right wingers will simply lie, over and over, until the gullible morons just eat it up.

    Oh, if we only had a liberal media.

    "What doesn't have credibility today is the truth." -- Bill Moyers, The Daily Show 6/22/05

    by Baron Dave on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:22:43 AM PDT

  •  Most support single payer (6+ / 0-)

    But the damned worthless conservatives of both parties convince folks to oppose it.

    Same story, different day.

    Democratic messaging sucks, mostly because the party leadership spend too much time mimicking conservative talking points.  If the mainstream of the party would actually come out and forcefully push a message (and eject the moronic conservadems who undermine it) then they might actually have direct public appeal.  

    "Money is like manure. You have to spread it around or it smells." J. Paul Getty

    by Celtic Pugilist on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:23:58 AM PDT

  •  Barack Obama/Jackie Robinson (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ZedMont

    Compare these two great Americans. The indignities they have gone through do have similarites.  

    •  Except we are the ones feeling the pain (0+ / 0-)

      in BHO's case. Something tells me he'll be fine after his 1-2 terms in office. We may not be . . . (And no, I'm not blaming him!)

      "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

      by bryduck on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:31:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Legislating from the Court (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ZedMont, TimmyB

    The Court really has only two options:

    1)  Approve the Affordable Care Act in its entirety;

    2)  Throw the entire Health Insurance Industry into a state of Crisis.

    If the Court starts to Disassemble the Affordable Care Act, then the Court will be legislating from the Bench.  Is the Court ready to act as legislators?  What parts of the Act will the Court decide are unconstitutional and what parts are not?  

    If the Court decides that the Individual Mandate is unconstitutional, the private insurance industry will lose a large customer base that it is counting on to rack up profits.  If the Court decides that requiring insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions without the individual mandate that will be forcing an expense without the offsetting income.  If the Court decides that allowing 26 year olds to stay on a family plan, that will involve another legislative function.

    How much legislating will the Roberts' Court be ready to perform from the Supreme Court?  That is a conundrum that John Roberts will have to answer to his corporate supporters.  If he decides to deny the insurance companies their new profits, then again he will face his puppet masters.

    "As long as Corporations control Government, there is no reason for Government to regulate Corporations!" John Roberts, Citizens United (SNARK)

    by NM Ray on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:26:51 AM PDT

  •  Unbelievable (5+ / 0-)

    I just had this very conversation with one of my coworkers. I am still shaking at the ignorance that surrounds his version of "Obamacare" - like if more people get insurance my family will have to wait in line to see a doctor. My family won't get any healthcare because the lazy people who don't have insurance will get there first. I shouldn't have to pay for someone's heart transplant. Oh, and the people on the public option will get it all for free. (there is no public option dumbass). He totally missed the point that everyone is already paying for the uninsured.
    This was a mid-30's educated person talking to me. Of course, we tag teamed with facts and statistics - not sure if it did any good. He said he didn't want to talk politics and I told him it shouldn't be political - it's the biggest economic and social issue of our time and all Americans should be searching for a solution.
    I asked him what we should do with the millions of people in this country that don't have insurance and he jokingly said let them die a slow death. That was the end of my conversation.

    •  We have to figure out why lies are heard clearer (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      hulibow

      than truth

    •  I mentioned in passing at my mother-in-law's house (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      hulibow, Fury

      the other day that insurance companies were already experimenting with the Ryan privatization plan with some of their Medicare supplement policies.  I was reading the paper at the time and didn't see the look forming on her face.

      I looked up when she screamed at the top of her voice:
      "That's OBAMA!!  I hate OBAMA!!  The look on her face was sort of like near the end of one of those werewolf transformations.

      When I tried to tell her it was Paul Ryan's and the Republican's plan, she screamed "NO IT ISN'T!!"  She then screwed up her face and refused to say another word to me.

      She has a bunch of old lady Republican no-nothing friends with the same attitude.  I'm thinking about throwing a party and getting them all drunk on election day

      History merely repeats itself; it doesn't cure its own ills. That is the burden of the present.

      by ZedMont on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:44:43 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's a disease. I know a few older women like (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ZedMont, Gentle Giant

        that.  Interesting thing is they were never all that interested in politics before Obama was elected.  Now they're glued to Fox and full of anger, bitterness and outright racism.  It's scary, isn't it?  Hate is scary.

        Got Social Security? Thank a Democrat!

        by Fury on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 10:20:22 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Ack! Ack! I just re-read my comment. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Gentle Giant, Brown Thrasher, Fury

          "Know-nothing," not "no-nothing."

          I have even had a relative like this tell me that not only does she not know anything about it, she does not want to know anything that conflicts with what she already knows about it (which, by her own words, is...nothing).

          History merely repeats itself; it doesn't cure its own ills. That is the burden of the present.

          by ZedMont on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:13:46 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  I had the same conversation with my co-worker (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kovie, Fury, hulibow

      I finally told her I couldn't talk to her any more about anything not work related, because every time I did, I liked her a little bit less. It was corrosive and toxic to our work relationship. But she said all the same things your did.

      Arizona: Remember the good old days, when we were just known as the Grand Canyon State?

      by AZ RedWingsFan on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:51:23 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I have this theory (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Gentle Giant

        that a huge percentage of self-described conservatives support conservative positions less out of substantive policy reasons (and seriously, how many people actually know what they are and why they're allegedly better?) than out of a combination of a lack of empathy for others, deep narcissism, and serious anger issues that they vent in such passive-aggressive ways (and what is modern conservatism if not rechanneled passive-aggressiveness?).

        I.e. modern conservatism is basically a manifestation of psychological unwellness.

        "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

        by kovie on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 10:16:14 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  That, and/or (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kovie

          they buy into the facade of moral superiority and righteousness the conservative movement wears. They identify with what cons pretend to be. Without looking too deeply, they make the assumption that, if they are like-minded in these important social factors, the uninformed voter on the right can rest assured all his/her best interests will automatically be attended to by those they elect. No need to check that they are. One hand knows not what the other is doing.

          Therefore, anything that challenges that perception is a challenge to their moral standing and must be ignored or denied in order to maintain their comfort level with their affiliation. And the extension may well be that such a challenge further attacks all they see as proper and decent in our society/nation.

          The simplification of the equation residing in the primitive areas of their brains boils down to:

          Right=Good, Left=Evil.  

          Glenn Beck et al have been leading them by this simplistic & symbolic nose ring for decades.

          I believe in democracy, civil liberties, and the rule of law. That makes me a liberal, and I’m proud of it. - Paul Krugman

          by Gentle Giant on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:34:57 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  My husband had to tell his brother that. He was (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AZ RedWingsFan

        beginning to seriously hate him.

        Got Social Security? Thank a Democrat!

        by Fury on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 10:21:03 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Well, they're not all wrong. (5+ / 0-)

      Consider the fact that you often have to wait weeks for appointments already, then make it more likely that people will seek medical attention, and those waits get longer yet.

      The problem is not that people will seek unneeded medical attention - they do need it.  The problem is that we didn't build the infrastructure in advance, (ie, lots and lots of money for new doctors and nurses) and much of what was in the bill has been chipped away at by Republicans over the last couple of years, rather than added to.  It's pretty simple math - unless you actually have more clinics, more doctors, more nurses to provide treatment, then of course wait times will increase if more people can afford the treatment they need.

      Republicans haven't just been talking the ACA down since it passed, they've been working relentlessly to defund the pieces of it so that it would end up working far less well than it would have.

      •  Every health care system entails waiting (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Brown Thrasher, AZ RedWingsFan

        It's simply unrealistic and inefficient to expect a next day appointment in most situations except for emergencies, and we have special facilities for those and even there there's a fair amount of waiting except for life-threatening cases. What does it matter if your colonoscopy is tommorow or in 2 months if you don't have presenting symptoms and it's routine preventive diagnostics?

        And most men go out of their way to delay or avoid medical visits, making this even more of a red herring issue. The GOP's got nothing here.

        "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

        by kovie on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 10:20:18 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Don't know about you, (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AZ RedWingsFan

        but I don't make appointments for sudden serious illness or injuries. I show up.

        For regular appointments or minor complaints, I can wait. My needs are no greater than my neighbors'.

        Whether we continue with our current healthcare clusterflub or go to single payer, I will continue to do the same.

        I believe in democracy, civil liberties, and the rule of law. That makes me a liberal, and I’m proud of it. - Paul Krugman

        by Gentle Giant on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:38:04 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The problem is that sometimes serious things (0+ / 0-)

          don't look serious.  I had a swelling on the back of my left ankle for several weeks (after I noticed it.  I don't know how long it was there before I noticed it.).  It didn't hurt, so I kept telling myself 'I'll wait and see if it gets better'.  Well, it didn't, and turned out to be a partially torn Achilles tendon that I should have been immobilizing as much as possible and icing 4x a day to avoid making it worse.  So for several weeks, I continued to make it worse, because it 'didn't look serious to me'.  (What finally got me to go in was digging out a physiology text and realizing there was nothing back there other than the tendon - from the way the swelling was oriented, I had vaguely assumed there was a connective tissue sheathing similar to that in the wrist area that I must have forgotten about, but no, nothing but tendon there.)

          And for women, for example, actual heart attack symptoms are often dismissed as 'minor', since they don't always show the 'classic' symptoms that are trumpeted about.

          Kind of makes me think our educational 'health' requirements are totally inadequate.  Citizens need to have a much stronger grounding in anatomy, physiology, and pathology simply to know when a healthcare issue actually is important or trivial.

  •  Obama needs to attack the Republican party for (0+ / 0-)

    getting rid, not of Obamacare, but these specific individual components that people love.  And he needs to rally people to bombard their congressmen with DEMANDS that these pieces be reinstated.

    Let McConnell and Boehner figure out how to pay for it.
    It's time to put up or shut up.

    History merely repeats itself; it doesn't cure its own ills. That is the burden of the present.

    by ZedMont on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:30:15 AM PDT

    •  okay (0+ / 0-)

      1.  coverage till 26 under parents policy

      2,  no exclusion based on pre-exising condition

      Then what?  2,700 page bill, that doesn't really start to go into effect until 2014 and stretches out over the next 10 years.

      Let's "attack" on provisions that no one knows what they are...

      This'l work.

      Somebody said Party! I got excited. I love Parties! Especially Parties with exclamation marks! Now I'm sad because there's not a Party! h/t AnnetteK ;-)

      by EdMass on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 10:46:49 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Bob Dole says, people would like it better (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kovie, MPociask, Fury, Gentle Giant, TimmyB

    if it was called Bob Dolecare.

    NOW SHOWING
    Progressive Candidate Obama (now - Nov 6, 2012)
    Bipartisan Obama returns (Nov 7, 2012)

    by The Dead Man on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:33:02 AM PDT

  •  the mandate wasn't mentioned at all in this diary (6+ / 0-)

    until you find a why to make people want that then the health care law will be unpopular.  Why should people be forced to buy private health insurance from the same greedy and broken private health insurance companies this law was suppose to be fixing?

  •  The problem is the shitty provisions not the good (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Brown Thrasher, TimmyB

    Atrocities like the mandate sour support for the other elements of reform.

  •  Yes, there is widespread support (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MPociask, Brown Thrasher, TimmyB

    for covering "children" to the age of 26 under parents health plans and the pre-existing prohibitions from denying coverage.

    But, other policies don't even begin to come into effect until after 2014.  And, no one out here in the hinterlands really knows what's coming. And based on the fluxing CBO estimates what it may cost.

    Look, healthcare should not be an issue in the US.  Yet, it is.  Deals with Pharma and Insurance?  A fragile coalition based on signing up 30 M people to cover/profit from the action.  We "wonder" why the electorate is still skeptical?

    The worst thing Nancy ever said was "We have to pass the bill to find out what's in it."

    Somebody said Party! I got excited. I love Parties! Especially Parties with exclamation marks! Now I'm sad because there's not a Party! h/t AnnetteK ;-)

    by EdMass on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:40:37 AM PDT

  •  This is why we can't have nice things... (0+ / 0-)

    The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. --George Orwell

    by jgkojak on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:46:11 AM PDT

  •  Can someone explain.. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MPociask, Brown Thrasher

    why the left (center left) has adopted the name "Obamacare?"  Every time I read that name I think "one more little win for the right wing noise machine."

    Obama had very little to do with the actual legislation, other than pushing to get "something" done.  The details were totally Congress's dealing.  I hated the name Obamacare when Republicans came up with it, and I hate it now.

    Not surprising people don't like ACA based on the name, because the name suggests something it's not.  The name was created to do just that, and lo and behold, the left(ish) establishment falls in hook, line and sinker and adopts it.

    •  Well (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TimmyB

      When one spends the first 18 months of office on the legislation, then doesn't "sell it" after the fact and now only gives it passing mention toward re-elect because the Congress is still divided over what they have done, how they did it and where it is going, you're surprised there's a kerfuffle about how to name it?

      Could the problem be...

      Obama had very little to do with the actual legislation, other than pushing to get "something" done.  The details were totally Congress's dealing.
      Not agreeing with this.  So it's only Congresses' fault?  Does the President blame Congress for this as he is doing for so much else?

      Sheesh...

      Somebody said Party! I got excited. I love Parties! Especially Parties with exclamation marks! Now I'm sad because there's not a Party! h/t AnnetteK ;-)

      by EdMass on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 10:19:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Obama called it that himself. n/t (0+ / 0-)
  •  This Just In! Most Americans are unfit (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingTag

    to have a meaningful opinion on anything other than Kim Kardashian's marital status and who should have won last night on Dancing With The Biggest Loser Bachelor Survivor. Topline poll results are bogus. It's all in the crosstabs.

    "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

    by kovie on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 10:08:24 AM PDT

  •  My brother summed it up pretty well (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Fury, wsexson, Brown Thrasher, TimmyB

    He said, "Prior to the ACA, I was one of millions of Americans who could not afford health insurance.  Now, two years after the ACA passed, I am still one of millions of Americans who cannot afford health insurance.  Why am I supposed to be in love it?"

    •  Because it takes effect in 2014 (0+ / 0-)

      Maybe if our messaging had even attempted to convey this basic fact, it would have helped. 98% of the law starts in 2014. It doesn't take 2,800 pages to tell insurance companies to cover kids until age 26. That just isn't the main part of the bill, but I bet "Joe Average" thinks Obama is cutting Medicare to pay for kids staying on insurance until age 26 when that provision of the bill basically costs nothing.  

  •  Our Dem and/or Progressive Leaders MUST (0+ / 0-)

    take the lead on this:

    On Sunday morning talk shows, press briefings interviews, they must stand firm and...

    REFUSE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTION IN WHICH 'OBABMACARE' IS USED.

    They can simply reply, "Are you talking about the Affordable Care Act? Oh, well then...."

    It's probably too late already. But I cringe every time I hear one of the 'good guys' use that term.

  •  Another example of the clueless general public. (0+ / 0-)

    Without the interest or capacity to educate themselves on issues that have enormous direct impact on their lives.  It's so much easier to kick back and let Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh tell you what to think and feel.

  •  A little creative editing: (0+ / 0-)

    Write the same thing. Hell, right a bill for single payer.

    Then, name it "Shiny New Happy Hot Fudge Free Money Sex" and EVERYone will support it.

    The conservatives have been doing this for years. That's how we got The Patriot Act and No Child Left Behind.

    I believe in democracy, civil liberties, and the rule of law. That makes me a liberal, and I’m proud of it. - Paul Krugman

    by Gentle Giant on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 10:56:00 AM PDT

  •  Americans are stupid nt (0+ / 0-)

    The radical Republican party is the party of oppression, fear, loathing and above all more money and power for the people who robbed us.

    by a2nite on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:52:05 AM PDT

  •  If the name was changed (0+ / 0-)

    to something like "Americare" and we all talked about how unpatriotic it would be to oppose something with "America" in the name, I'll bet we could turn this thing around.  Eventually.

    (aka NobleExperiments). ‎"Those who make a peaceful revolution imposible make a violent revolution inevitable" ~ John F. Kennedy

    by smrichmond on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:01:41 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site