Niall Ferguson's scathing indictment of Obama

[TuffaloDeac10]

On point, all the time, at least until Akin showed up.

 

[WakeandBake]

The majority of Americans elected a Dem super-majority, one that ran on a central plank of comprehensive HC reform. The polls during the reform debate pretty much reflected the desired outcome of the pollsters -- if you framed the questions, one way ('government takeover," "socialized medicine," etc.), the public was against it; if you framed it the other way ("equal access", "increased coverage," etc.), the public was for it. In other words: the "majorities" bandied about were all manufactured by the lobbies arguing over the bill. The only objectively measurable aspect of whether HC reform was supported by the public was the previous election where it was a central issue, and the Dems pretty much demolished the GOP in that contest.

So color me unimpressed with the claims that no one wanted HC reform, and that the Dems shoved it down an unwilling public's throat. That's all posturing and PR. Though I will admit, when it comes to manufacturing statistical evidence of "public opinion" that supports a pre-determined position, the GOP can run circles around the Dems. They own that particular propaganda skill.

Boom. Death by perspicacity.

 

[beatrix]

The majority of Americans elected a Dem super-majority, one that ran on a central plank of comprehensive HC reform. The polls during the reform debate pretty much reflected the desired outcome of the pollsters -- if you framed the questions, one way ("government takeover," "socialized medicine," etc.), the public was against it; if you framed it the other way ("equal access", "increased coverage," etc.), the public was for it. In other words: the "majorities" bandied about were all manufactured by the lobbies arguing over the bill. The only objectively measurable aspect of whether HC reform was supported by the public was the previous election where it was a central issue, and the Dems pretty much demolished the GOP in that contest.

So color me unimpressed with the claims that no one wanted HC reform, and that the Dems shoved it down an unwilling public's throat. That's all posturing and PR. Though I will admit, when it comes to manufacturing statistical evidence of "public opinion" that supports a pre-determined position, the GOP can run circles around the Dems. They own that particular propaganda skill.

The 2010 mid-terms say hi.

 

[ArlingtonDeac]

The 2010 mid-terms say hi.

No one is trying to insulate an elected body from a voter backlash due to their choices. That's how it's supposed to work. The Dems did what they said they would and passed much-needed HC reform. The voters decided that a supermajority was a bad thing -- always true -- and gave one of the three elected prongs back to the GOP. As bad as the swing was in the House, the Dems still kept the Senate comfortably. So 2010 was more of a course correction than any revolt, IMO. The parties split the Congress in an election where the voters could have given both Houses to either one.

The amount of money spent by a desperate HC lobby from 2008-2010 to stop the first meaningful demolition of the insurance racket was breathtaking. I'm surprised the mid-terms weren't worse for the Dems.

 

[silk]

The GOP polling and messaging machine is unmatched. A thing of cynical beauty.

This be true. But to be fair the Dems don't have to be effective. The press does most of the work for them.

 

[jhmd2000]

If everyone loves Obama's signature piece of legislation so much, why isn't it front and center in his campaign?

 

[TuffaloDeac10]

If everyone loves Obama's signature piece of legislation so much, why isn't it front and center in his campaign?

Because it plagarized his opponent's plan?

 

[Junebug]

The 2010 mid-terms say hi.

Pos rep