The problem with Republican fixation on the 53% dislike of Obamacare is, as Inigo Montoya might say, “I do not think that disapproval means what you think it means.”
This recent survey from Pew shows when you break down the 53 per cent disapproval, 30% want politicians to improve it, 19% to make it fail and 4% don’t know. Ignoring the “Don’t know” responses, we have 71% of respondents Approving or wanting improvements.
The detailed breakdowns are mostly predictable, but the really disappointing part is how little understanding there is about the ACA.
That’s a nice way to comfort yourself, but what do those improvements entail? Ditching the individual mandate? Making sure people can still buy “inadequate” coverage that they liked before the law?
It could very well be that the improvements those voters want would undermine the law. In which case you’re stuck with disapproval.
If the law was actually popular with 71%, Democrats would be eager to run on the law, rather than from the law. It’s a frequently made argument, and it’s a nonsense argument. I’d expect better from Dopers.
Absolutely not. Inadequate insurance shifts the burden to taxpayers and people with real insurance when those with non-compliant plans get hit with medical costs not covered by their crap insurance, and declare medical bankruptcy. They have no right to shitty insurance when it increases medical costs for the rest of us.
Problem is, it was necessary to promise that people could keep those plans to give the law a hope in hell of passing, and the fact that people are losing their plans has created a toxic political situation. and it’s just the beginning. Ezekial Emmanuel, a guy who keeps on telling inconvenient truths and doesn’t pay attention to what his side needs, just said that the law is going to undermine employer insurance. We’re all losing our insurance.
One question I have, since Emmanuel says this was always the intention, is, did he lie to Obama, or did Obama lie to us?
So if you can’t let people keep their plans, the law will never be popular, at least not before everyone who is going to lose their plan has lost it and is happy with their new insurance. That’s going to take a long time. Especially since the President keeps on delaying the pain for political reasons.
And let’s not forget that some people had to lose their coverage because it was too good. They were getting too much for too little cost because they were healthy. They had to enter a sicker pool and pay more for less so that sicker people could benefit.
You keep chanting the “eliminate the mandate” like it is a mantra.
You do realize that phrase is a code word for ‘Destroy the ACA’. Right?
I have provided several cites which show that past reforms without a mandate have failed. You seem to ignore or not understand what happened to state level reforms in the 90s.
Health reform is a tripod of Guaranteed Issue, Community Rating and Purchase Mandates - remove one and the whole thing collapses.
Then a lot of those who would like the law with changes will continue not to like it.
Of course, the President is experiencing the worst of both worlds. The mandate exists, it’s an open sore, yet it’s not being enforced. The guy can’t think beyond the next election.
Bullshit, you have not shown that the individual mandate is the improvement those that want it improved actually want. You assume that is what they mean, and you are making declarations based on that assumption. Maybe they want improvements to make it more like single payer. You need to cite that getting rid of the mandate is what those polled meant when they said they approve of the law with improvements, or stop making declarations that come from your own ass. Maybe you can actually support your assertions this time? I know, I know, but a guy can hope can’t he?
Considering the heritage foundation came up with this plan originally, who exactly is it that you are accusing of not being able to think? Conservatives?
Honestly, do you ever get tired of being wrong? Tired of being one of the boards laughing stocks? For crying out loud your username itself has become a joke at this point. Are you capable of self reflection at all? The fact that you think you have any credibility at all with respect to judging the intellect of others is absolutely laughable.
The fact is, we don’t know what changes they want, we just know they don’t like the law. For me, that’s simple enough. Jasg and others tried to make it more complicated by just assuming that they actually do like the law if only some changes were made, which he just assumes are reasonable and possible. Problem is, Democrats aren’t actually trying to change anything about the law, except for a few who want to undermine it to save their own skins by letting people keep their insurance. If Democrats’ only choices are to leave the law as is or undermine it, they are stuck with the disapproval if they want to keep the law.
Now sure, there are some people who hate it because they wanted single payer. Guess what? They still hate it, and many of them see it as a threat to single payer, not something that will lead to single payer. I say they are absolutely right. No country has ever gone from universal multi-payer to single payer. Countries actually don’t change the basic outline of their UHC systems much at all. If ACA is successful, that’s our health care system for the next 100 years. If it fails, it doesn’t usher in single payer, it discredits UHC in America, a country that has long been skeptical of it and will only grow more skeptical if it’s tried and failed.
I was responding to the unsupported assertions that disapproval actually meant approval if the respondents wanted changes. I notice you don’t care if that assertion is supported? Well, it’s not. The people who disapprove of the law disapprove of the law. If you disagree with it, support that assertion. I know, I know, that will never happen.
Well, when a poster ignores unsupported assertions to attack the one who responded to the unsupported assertions, it does make you look a little uncredible.
Airbeck, this is inappropriate for Elections (or anywhere outside of the Pit). Commenting on someone’s past views is allowed, but this is insulting and it’s overly personal.
My apologies, I just have little patience for this sort of ‘debating’, and I think that self awareness is an important thing in this sort of forum, in order to allow for intelligent and constructive debate. At any rate, I’ll withdraw those comments and save it for the pit if it becomes necessary to reiterate them.
I’m with you in that I wish polling organizations would do a better job, especially with this issue. But since no changes are actually being considered, it is fair to just ask people how they like the law right now. It’s not changing anytime soon.
But yeah, I’d like to know what changes they have in mind too. That’s a really important question that says a lot about the future viability of the law. If the changes people are demanding are undoable, then they will continue to hate the law. If they are doable, then the law can be improved. Maybe for some of them it’s as simple as a public option.
They are only outdated in the sense that people hadn’t started losing their health insurance, and two of those four pollsters aren’t pollsters you don’t like. Yet they all say the same thing: the public favors repeal.
It’s not my fault that since the rollout of ACA, Quinnipiac is afraid to ask the repeal question.
And again, the “small modifications” aren’t spelled out, making the question useless. There aren’t going to be any small modifications or large modifications. Democrats oppose them all, except for the very one that undermines the law: letting people keep their insurance(and that only enjoys threatened Democrats’ support).
Um, people say they disapprove. I don’t have to creatively reinterpret those results to make it seem like people support the law when they say they don’t.
But hey, let the Democrats know that their political advisors are all stupid.
) . Not to mention long outdated. IOW, you *ought *to know better.