As a good pseudo-Randian, I am at the logical conundrum where I must check my premises. Every poll I've seen regarding the Affordable Care Act (aka "Obamacare") describe polling samples of the general public, registered voters and likely voters.
Here's the contradiction; Everyone seems to agree that 80%+ of the insured public is covered through employment benefits, Medicare/Medicaid benefits, SSI or Tri-Care/VA for the military. That means that a majority of the polled pool will never notice anything changed. So, if 80%+ of the covered population can't/won't do anything that would bring them in contact with the (shudder) website, or the dreaded "Obamacare", who cares what they think?
Really. Who cares what they think? We're reading polls where 80% of the respondents are vegetarians and the question is, "What do you think of McDonald's new triple-cheeseburger?" Polls where 80% of white people don't mind Jim Crow laws. And don't make me break out the sex polls!
The R's keep whining about "defunding". Is it a matter of government expense? What does the ACA Act cost? Something more than a fighter jet and less than a nuclear submarine would be my guess. A website and a bunch of navigators aren't that expensive. Spending that money to drive customers into the greedy, grasping maw of Insurance United, IMHO, isn't the best way to spend our tax dollars, but still better than another sub.
As far as the polls of "registered" and "likely" voters, we're a little, tiny smidgen out from 2014, agreed. The thing with incumbency is that you want to keep it going. But, really where are the risks?
Primaries first. Democrats so far seem safe, both House and Senate. The only primary challengers so far seem to be for Republican seats being challenged from the right. Oops! Guess you're not "strong" enough...or something.
In the generals, we hope that the Republican primary challengers win big. If you're a Democratic incumbent and you're making noises about one of these "dismantle under another name" bills, shame on you. Do you really think the website will still be an issue next year? By all means, cover yourself, there will be a meaningless vote or two, something you can point at if this turns into another Bengazi/Kenya/Malia-tripped-on-her-way-to-school controversy. Take the vote but shut the &^%$ up. Have a vote you can point to, and take advantage of the fact that Congress couldn't pass a kidney stone right now. But standing on a soapbox you needn't stand on may turn around and bite you. Don't give a potential Democratic challenger footage they can use in a commercial against you. (I'm lying right now, anyone that wants to challenge a Democratic incumbent from the Left, call me.)