Who's right, Democrats or Republicans?
- Thread starter Mike Zaman
- Start date
-
- Tags
- democrats republicans
Why would he? Everyone except the TP agree with his position. What sane person would change their position while enjoying near universal support? The Republican Party is imploding as we speak because of the idiots in the TP. And now that fool Cruz wants to not raise the debt ceiling? If things don't change the US won't exist by New Years having experienced a Soviet style collapse.
Irrelevant. Obamacare is law, not a bill and is funded independently. This shutdown over Obamacare is utterly pointless. THAT'S why Obama and the Dems are in such a good position, the Dems and independents are mostly for Obamacare and everyone else sees Obamacare as it's own issue and irrelevant to the funding and debt ceiling debates. As I said, nobody on the Dem side has any reason to 'negotiate'.
Honestly, while I do think it's stupid that the republican party has been wasting time trying to get rid of the law using this context with the federal government shutdown, Obama and his democrat colleagues are stuck on this false choice dilemma thinking they can't propose something that they CAN compromise on, even if it's not the ACA.
So Republicans certainly deserve blame for doing something pointless, yet the democrats have done nothing to try and direct that pointlessness into something productive. I see no reason they can't say no to the ACA changes but at least offer to work on something that has less party division instilled in it. Even if ultimately the effort were to be rejected still.
With people having different ideas about how the country should be run... compromise has to come from somewhere...
But that's the thing, the Dems HAVE agreed to negotiate once the gov't is funded (and the Senate invited the House to negotiate 74 times before the shutdown). It's the Repubs that are being simpleminded and putting the vary existence of the US at risk.
Would it not makes sense from a strategic standpoint for the democrats to demonstrate that while they can't agree on the ACA they'd be willing to work out a compromise on something else - like a long term solution to the debt ceiling issue - in order to pass a new budget?
I don't understand why this matter of "compromise" is viewed on the democratic side as such a false choice dilemma. Such a proposal might ultimately be symbolic, and a failure perhaps if the ACA is that much interest yo republicans, but it would relieve the blame on them, which I think would be beneficial considering they've been heavily partisan during this presidency on the voting patterns.
What blame? Even the Repubs are saying this is a stupid move, the TP is the only side here that's actually holding tings up and is the only side getting any blame. That might change as we approach the debt ceiling deadline but until then the Dems have NO reason to back down.
Neither, they both normally represent the opposing positions on things that don't matter and only agree in places were the people get screwed over.
They're getting blame because they aren't trying to propose anything to end the deadlock besides not negotiating... I understand they feel like the country's being taken hostage, over the ACA but they have other problems and they know it. Obama's open to changes to the ACA after the sutdown and debt are resolved... fine, but he has to deal the best he can with the current situation, and part of doing so is providing an added assurance to the public that he's not simply refusing to change the ACA at all over the debt, but willing to seek compromise elsewhere to leverage the changes. The republicans will get whatever blame they get but he always has opportunity to decrease it for his party.
90% of the potentially vote changing blame (the only kinds that matter to elected officials) they're getting is coming from the TP which would never have voted for them anyway. So again, until there ability to win elections is at risk the Dems just don't have any reason to back down. Despite the false outrage some politicians have displayed, politics IS a game.
Excellent point here....many Americans support the ACA, and even more simply want to see what it turns out to be. Republican Tea Party folks are NOT America, they are simply a part of it, and thus do not have the right to decide what the rest of the country gets. Yet, here they are damaging the entire country because they think they speak for the whole damn thing.
This is really starting to piss me off, and any pleasant impression I once had for these people.....has turned from Patriot to Pathetic.
But call it he ACA and those numbers suddenly go the other way. lol
"
A recent CNBC poll found more Americans oppose ObamaCare than oppose the Affordable Care Act. But more Americans support ObamaCare than the Affordable Care Act.
Confused?
That would be understandable given that these are two names for the same law. CNBC polled two different groups, using "ObamaCare" for one and "Affordable Care Act" for the other. Forty-six percent of the group asked about "ObamaCare" opposed it. But only 37% of those asked about the health law opposed it.
Conversely, ObamaCare had higher support than the law. As CNBC put it, Obama's name "raises the positives and the negatives."
As a rational matter, this is nuts. An informed person should have the same opinions — positive or negative — about a piece of legislation regardless of what it's called. But because politics is so often driven by our attitudes toward specific personalities, for many Americans, their attitudes toward a monumentally significant piece of legislation are driven by something as petty as whether "Obama" is in the title.
But it's worse than that. The same poll found that 30% of respondents didn't know what the Affordable Care Act is — while "only" 12% didn't know what ObamaCare is.
This after years of relentless debate, and both a midterm and presidential election in which ObamaCare was one of the central issues."
Jonah Goldberg: ObamaCare vs. Affordable Care Act
....Just Sayin'
Obamacare was pushed down the the American's throats by elitists who know better what the masses need than the masses themselves. that's called socialism son.
That said, the Republicans are fighting a losing battle here. The American public needs to see this healthcare system play out and succeed or fail on its own without contribution from republicans. Any compromise or ammending with republicans will only allow the democrats to point the finger when it fails.
if it fails untouched by republicans, the democrats will ultimately have to own the failure.
We as a country have gotten rich and fat and spoiled. We have had so much for so long we forgot what it feels like to lose anything (including freedom) We may need to experience the sting of socialism just to appreciate why our forefathers fought.
That said, the Republicans are fighting a losing battle here. The American public needs to see this healthcare system play out and succeed or fail on its own without contribution from republicans. Any compromise or ammending with republicans will only allow the democrats to point the finger when it fails.
if it fails untouched by republicans, the democrats will ultimately have to own the failure.
We as a country have gotten rich and fat and spoiled. We have had so much for so long we forgot what it feels like to lose anything (including freedom) We may need to experience the sting of socialism just to appreciate why our forefathers fought.
I still think the tea party had its place in the party considering the first two years of Obama's run as POTUS was a partisan hack job... he really didn't bring anything new to the table on governance like he promised vat length, but.... this split it's causing is a problem., and they aren't appreciating this as a diminishing returns battle. I think their ideas make reasonable sense but the execution... not so much, particularly now with their methods fracturing the republican party.
Whatever you you might think of conservatives in general I'm not keen on having the democrats hold a political monopoly... They got a tad power hungry when they had the near super majority. But then, I've had a low opinion of the two parties since Bush got out of office... The current state of affairs makes Bush and Clinton look real good by comparison.
Sad as it is it's true. But i think the government had been usurped by the servants. How dare that shut our government down.
It's both parties at fault. neither one will compromise.
John Boehner is not a tea partier. This impasse would have occurred even if the tea party had never existed. The PPACA is the most partisan piece of legislation in my lifetime. It was jammed down our throats entirely by the Democrats, it didn't receive one GOP vote, not one. The only reason the Dems got enough votes for it was because Obama lied about publically funded abortion to Bart Stupak. It's a horrible law that combines the worst of private sector and public sector and the GOP has been collecting a lot of money from their donors in order to overturn and/or defund the PPACA.
The GOP had no choice but to do what they've done because if they hadn't done this what message does that send to their donors? It says that the GOP leadership is going to take their money but not do anything with it. If that had happened not only do the donations go down but the GOP loses the ability in future campaigns to use the PPACA as the clear partisan wedge issue it is. They had no choice but to do this with or without the tea party faction in their Party.
I think it's unfair to focus on Obama because that lets Harry Reid off the hook and he is also someone who is not willing to compromise.
The Speaker isn't a TPer and that's the rub. The TP is a minority and so can't depose him but they can scare the moderates with a primary threat and get the votes they need. So the Speaker tows the party line despite publicly stating the ACA debate ended with Obama's reelection. If the TP didn't exist this wouldn't have been an issue.
This ignores the point I made which is that the non-TP GOP'ers have very good reasons of their own to do what they're doing. This would have happened even if the TP didn't exist.
Similar threads
