Who is voting this November and why should you bother?

Pick any number between 0 and 100. There is sure to be several margins of victory that match it.

You just want to be contrary.

NYT is running an analysis of the return claiming that they show that where ObamaCare has most added insurance covered care that used to be either charity care or care that was not gotten the voters gave the D's no credit, they voted R. The Professor assured D's that supporting ObamaCare would help them in 14, that when people got a taste of the candy the D's had provided the D's would be rewarded with votes. Could have been a lie, but more likely it was a typical complete miscalculation, another one to go with all of the others.

OOPS!

FOLLOW THE PROFESSOR AT YOUR OWN RISK!

Characterizing life saving insurance as candy is a despicable stance, but Obamacare has been attacked so hard and so often that even the ones who benefit by it seem uncertain. The unrelenting negative onslaught by the teabagger minded, in every part of society these days, has done its job. But, now that they have forced this change, they become the ones expected to produce what they have obstructed against, or fail, in the public mind.

You appear to be ignoring the obviouds flaws in the Obamacare system that many people simoly don't like - independently of all the political rhetoric and propaganda, bioth for and against the new system.

The fact is the ACA is less an insurance scheme than a government controlled market designed to pay for even routine, relatively low cost elements of health care - as opposed to a real insurance scheme designed to spread the risk and cost associated with high cost and extraordinary needs. Indeed ACA explicitly prohibits traditional catastrophic care policies. In addition it required everyone to pay for certain services favored by the government framers of the system, whether they will or even can use them or not.

Perhaps more importantly it attempts to lower the cost of health care services by government fiat without doing anything to lower the real cost of delivering them. This highly unrealistic element of the program is already having adverse and possibly unanticipated side effects that injure many elements of the public, To get costs down to the mandated rates insurers have created narrow networks of providers, promising them higher volume in return for lower unit costs. This restricts public choice and will end up reducing the number of available providers, including both doctors and hospitals. Competition, already hampered by insurance schemes is further reduced, and the quality of care will surely decline. All of this is both stupid and unnecessary. The main effect of the program has been to vastly expand current Medicaid programs at government expense. That's not much to brag about.

It would have been even better, but for the politicians that fought tooth and nail to sandbag it.

And the truth is it is not doing that badly at all.

Social Security had its difficulties...and has become one of the most successful safety nets ever. Obamacare (gotta thank the Republicans for that title) will eventually lead the United States into the 21 Century where healthcare is concerned.

Robert Reich
3 mins ·
Minimum wage hikes were approved Tuesday by margins of 60 to 70 percent in South Dakota, Nebraska, Alaska, and Arkansas – the same “red” states that sent Republicans to the House and Senate. What this tells me is voters are more concerned about jobs and wages than ideology. They don’t vote against their interests, but they don’t see Democratic politicians responding to their interests. They want action on lousy pay, unpredictable hours, lack of childcare and paid sick leave, arbitrary firings, and runaway CEO pay. Speak to these, and even in “red” state voters will support you.

The GOP tried 54 times to repeal ObamaCare knowing full well that the Senate and Obama would not approve it.

Talk about waste of time and money, the GOP is the epititome of waste, and all they talk about are tax cuts. Whose going to pay for their salaries and benefits? Maybe, they'll start printing more money to increase our national debt. I know they want to destroy social security next. It's going to be a fun two more years.

That is the Federal Reserve that does that does that, dummy. They are not a government office.

That has been main theme on most of the commentators yesterday and today. I am wondering how the parties are (or if) going to respond.

Its what I have advocating for years. Maybe now, the likes of Bernie Sanders will be heeded.

Nonsense. It was passed by Democrat majorities in both Houses of Congress with zero Republican support. They did what they wanted and faced no effective opposition. Whatever restraints were put on the authors of the program came from within the Democrat party, and even they likely didn't know what was in the 1,000 page bill, as their idiot leader Nancy Pelosi confirmed.
Since then the law has been repeatedly modified by administrative fiats in response to the exposure of contradictions in it and unanticipated side effects. My strong impression is that there is currently more public opposition to the law than support for it, and that opposition appears to be growing. Worse for the Democrats, the public hasn't yet seen the after effects of the employer mandate which has been repeatedly (and illegally) delayed by Presidential order. (Now the Democrats will have to go into the next Presidential election amidst all the after effects of a provisiuon they were afraid to face before the recent one. They're in a serious fix, ands I suspect more and more Democrat legislators will try to distance themselves from both this lay and their inept, narcissistic President.)

I agree that most Americans are against ObamaCare, but they don't what to repeal it - but to make the necessary changes. There's a huge difference between repeal and fixing anything.

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2014/03/19/Four-Ways-Help-Fix-Obamacare

If you look back, I said "politicians." There was so much sandbagging from Republicans and many fearful Democrats that it kept changing and becoming less desirable to keep supporters on board. Republicans were a huge factor.

Most of the polls I have seen unfavorable is only slightly higher than favorable, with don't know slightly under favorable. Pretty well divided along party lines. I just keep hoping we have universal health care, usually when the question is asked if the ACA does not go far enough, most people say yes.

Nonsense. The Republicans had no power over the then large Democrat majorities in both houses and other events amply confirm the truth of that.

Whatever inhibitions the Democrats felt came from within their own political calculations involving the public perceptions of what they were creating. Subsequent events have confirmed those fears. Indeed many of them now probably wish they had been more thoughtful and fearful a few years ago.

The idea that had had the Democrats been even less inhibited, the bill would have been "even better" is truly laughable. Painting turds doesn't usually make them smell better.

The Republicans had enough votes to override the changes that weakened it, but they refused to participate, except to be against it.

That's simply wrong. What whiney bullshit ! You and many Democrats simply don't have the courage, brains or balls to stand up and take responsibility for your own creation

It doesn't matter what you think; SCOTUS approved it. It's now the law of the land.