Will The Republicans ever figure out why they lost?

[Kolak_of_Twilo]

@elucidator

Are Seniors Souring on the Republican Party? - The Atlantic

Offered without comment, gloating is unseemly.

You do realize that article will be ignored or handwaved away just like everything that has shown our friend to be wrong, don’t you? Just like the polls prior to 11/6/12 were absolutely skewed I feel certain this will be situation where reality is considered to be skewed.

[Robot_Arm]

@Kolak_of_Twilo

You do realize that article will be ignored or handwaved away just like everything that has shown our friend to be wrong, don’t you? Just like the polls prior to 11/6/12 were absolutely skewed I feel certain this will be situation where reality is considered to be skewed.

No, no, he’s definitely changed his tune. He cited the poll about Obama’s popularity and has such faith in it that it should guide Republican opposition efforts.

[elucidator]

You do realize that article will be ignored or handwaved away…

Oh, that’s OK. Not really expecting much. Been on the conservative wing of the extreme left all my adult life, lost a lot of fights. But we win some too. And it matters.

[adaher]

@Robot_Arm

Yes, we remember how much the Republicans worked with him when his popularity was higher.

If he’d used his political capital to push bills that were actually popular…

The stimulus, cap and trade, and the health care bill were a trifecta of pain for Democratic candidates in all but the bluest districts.

And I won’t handwave away the article. Seniors have never been a Republican constituency. They only became one thanks to Obamacare and the Medicare cuts. Issues cause coalitions to change. Candidates cause coalitions to change. That’s what I’ve been saying for 30 pages now. Demographics is NOT destiny. There’s only one monolithic ethnic voting bloc in this country, and even that group made a party switch once and can do so again given the right set of circumstances(like Democrats becoming a predominantly Latino party that is hostile to African-American economic interests and/or African-Americans in general.)

[Fear_Itself]

@adaher

They only became one thanks to Obamacare and the Medicare cuts.

What Medicare cut?

[adaher]

The $500 billion cut in the rate of growth of Medicare spending in the health care law.

I mean, we can agree that’s not a real cut if you want, but then you’d have to concede that all the sequester doesn’t cut spending.

We’d also have to agree that using chained CPI to reduce the growth of SS benefits is also not a cut.

[Robot_Arm]

@adaher

If he’d used his political capital to push bills that were actually popular…

You don’t need to spend political capital on things that are popular. People will vote for them anyway because they’re, well, popular.

The stimulus, cap and trade, and the health care bill were a trifecta of pain for Democratic candidates in all but the bluest districts.

We have cap-and-trade? Where?

[running_coach]

@adaher

The $500 billion cut in the rate of growth of Medicare spending in the health care law.

I mean, we can agree that’s not a real cut if you want, but then you’d have to concede that all the sequester doesn’t cut spending.

We’d also have to agree that using chained CPI to reduce the growth of SS benefits is also not a cut.

How can reducing growth be a cut?
Why are you complaining anyway? Republicans would completely shut down Medicare and SS if they could.

[Robot_Arm]

@runner pat

Why are you complaining anyway? Republicans would completely shut down Medicare and SS if they could.

Yeah, but even better would be if they could shut them down and blame the Democrats for it. Because they should be using their political capital to push through things that are popular, or something.

[elucidator]

I kinda thought reducing the amount of money spent on medical care was more or less the whole point. Like the tylenol provided in the hospital that gets billed for $20, etc.

[BrainGlutton]

@elucidator

I kinda thought reducing the amount of money spent on medical care was more or less the whole point. Like the tylenol provided in the hospital that gets billed for $20, etc.

Now, let us think carefully about exactly whose oxen reducing that would gore.

[Fear_Itself]

@adaher

The $500 billion cut in the rate of growth of Medicare spending in the health care law.

Oh, you mean the same cut the Ryan budget depends on? That Medicare cut?

Why is it only bad if Democrats do it? Hmmm?

[Zakalwe]

Oh, it’s not. In fact, it’s best if Democrats do it because then the Republicans can blame the Democrats for something they wanted to do anyway. It’s a win-win for them. The Democrats are just dumb enough to fall for it.

[adaher]

@Fear_Itself

Oh, you mean the same cut the Ryan budget depends on? That Medicare cut?

Why is it only bad if Democrats do it? Hmmm?

It’s not a bad cut. But it is a cut Democrats should take responsibility for, and they have tried to avoid it by being disingenous. They’ve gored Republicans on that issue for decades and are now trying to be slippery about it.

What pisses off conservatives like me is that Democrats let waste occur for decades, but only deal with it when they want to use the money for something else, or use it was a bargaining chip to get higher taxes. Waste should be cut unconditionally, and Democrats show a distinct lack of respect for taxpayers by letting it stay there until it’s useful to deal with it.

[Zakalwe]

@adaher

It’s not a bad cut. But it is a cut Democrats should take responsibility for, and they have tried to avoid it by being disingenous. They’ve gored Republicans on that issue for decades and are now trying to be slippery about it.

What pisses off conservatives like me is that Democrats let waste occur for decades, but only deal with it when they want to use the money for something else, or use it was a bargaining chip to get higher taxes. Waste should be cut unconditionally, and Democrats show a distinct lack of respect for taxpayers by letting it stay there until it’s useful to deal with it.

Wow. Are you suggesting that Obama reducing the Medicare budget via cost savings WITHOUT reducing services and Ryan cutting SERVICES are not only equivalent, but somehow Ryan’s plan is better?

THE FUCKING ANSWER TO THE OP IS NO. Can we end the farce, close the thread, and let adaher just go back to being utterly partisan and totally wrong in all of the other threads about politics?

[adaher]

I’m suggesting that getting savings out of Medicare and using it to reduce the deficit, oh, 30 years ago, would have been a good idea. Letting all that waste go on for decades before finally deciding to fix it so that the money can be used to pay for a new entitlement is an insult to taxpayers.

BTW, win oh, TWO elections in a row and then you can talk about how Republicans don’t learn from defeat.

[Robot_Arm]

@adaher

I’m suggesting that getting savings out of Medicare and using it to reduce the deficit, oh, 30 years ago, would have been a good idea.

You mean 1983, when Republicans held the presidency and the Senate? Shame on the Democrats for not doing something!

[adaher]

Republicans have tried to cut Medicare for decades. Democrats hit them on it every time, even though all cuts were simply cuts in the rate of growth.

Democrats should not be surprised, then, that seniors took them at their word the first hundred times and aren’t letting them change their tune just this once.

Cuts in the rate of growth are either cuts or they are not. Which is it?

[GIGObuster]

@adaher

Republicans have tried to cut Medicare for decades. Democrats hit them on it every time, even though all cuts were simply cuts in the rate of growth.

Democrats should not be surprised, then, that seniors took them at their word the first hundred times and aren’t letting them change their tune just this once.

Cuts in the rate of growth are either cuts or they are not. Which is it?

Useless comeback as a reply to the other post, deal with it.

You are confusing the cuts of the unreal medical costs of today with the more manageable ones of the past. The cuts in Medicare from the republicans are usually not related to costs but to remove benefits to the people in the system.

Romney: Obama 'only president' to cut Medicare

The tally, then:

Reagan cut Medicare by reducing payments to hospitals, and he cut benefits by raising deductibles.
George H.W. Bush cut benefits by repealing a law that would have expanded coverage for drugs and catastrophic illness.
Clinton cut Medicare by changing payments to doctors and other providers, which could be considered to have an indirect effect on beneficiaries.
Obama cut future Medicare spending but expanded benefits.

Our ruling

Romney said Obama “is the only president to ever cut $500 billion from Medicare.” It wasn’t a cut, rather a reduction in future growth (the size of the Medicare program will increase dollar-wise). And other presidents have cut Medicare in the past, though you can debate whether specific changes to the program constitute a “cut” in some of those cases as well.

That’s a historical footnote, however, that doesn’t affect our ruling. We rate Romney’s statement False.

[Robot_Arm]

@adaher

Republicans have tried to cut Medicare for decades. Democrats hit them on it every time, even though all cuts were simply cuts in the rate of growth.

Absolutely. The Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 (which included the Part D prescription drug benefit) only costs $549 billion over ten years. A few more cuts like that should fix everything.