@georgeob1,
Quote:Quote:Cycloptichorn wrote:
The elements that you chalk up to 'progressive zealots' are all supported by majorities of Americans when polled on them, George. Remember that fact? I know it's inconvenient for your argument, but hey.
They were all clearly supported by the majorities in their districts when they were elected. However, I am less willing than you to speak for the majority of Americans - even with a carefully selected poll in my hands there's always another one telling a different story).
You misunderstand me; I was referring to specific elements of the House reform bill itself, not the members who created it. And those elements ARE supported by majorities of Americans. Want to see the polls? I bet you don't.
Quote: I believe these are conclusions based on highly unrealistic assumptions - in short a fantasy. However, there is little point in arguing about it, since the House Bill is dead.
Not quite dead. But still; the conclusions were not based on unrealistic assumptions at all and were not a fantasy. You don't get to casually wave away multiple CBO scorings which showed the same thing. Outside groups who studied the bill found much the same result as well.
Quote: More fantasy. The Democrats had solid majorities in every Committeee that reviewed the Senate Bill - they didn't need any Republican votes in any stage of the development of the legislation. Instead they needed only one Republican vote to achieve cloture in the final vote - and they got it. I'm not suggesting the Republicans were eager to negotiate, however, there were, in fact, no negotiations at all.
I don't think you paid much attention to the process at all, George. Either that, or you are engaging in Twain's Damned lies.
Where do you think the bill was held up in the Senate? It was held up in Baucus' Senate Finance committee, who debated it - including the Republican members - for several months. They
neogitated for months to attempt to craft a bill that would please at least some Republicans (and the Dems' contributors on the commitee, the Health-care industry). In short they watered the bill down tremendously in an effort to garner Republican votes.
This effort failed, because the Republicans in question had been specifically instructed to stall and then backpedal and ask for ever-increasing concessions while never intending to actually support ANYTHING that came out, period. Arlen Specter confirmed that he had been told specifically this by Mitch McConnell. Snowe said much the same thing afterward as well.
You are also incorrect re: the final cloture vote, which was 60-40; no Republicans voted for cloture. How you can casually engage in conversations so riddled with factual errors and historical inaccuracies, I don't know. I do know that you are unwilling to provide even a shred of evidence from the historical record to back up your opinions, so I'll leave it at this: You are completely incorrect in the above paragraph on several points.
Quote:I suppose that in your eyes and those of many progressives she has been a great success. However, considering the recent reversals the Democrats have seen and what I estimate will occur in the Novermber elections, I suspect she will be judged by a different standard then. She and Reid have certainly become polarizing figures in the public mind.
This is your way of admitting that you can't find any real fault in what she did as leader.
I wonder if you know which leaders poll lower then Pelosi? That would be Boehner and Mitch McConnell. You see Pelosi as 'polarizing' because you really dislike her, but there's no evidence that the country as a whole dislikes her.
Cycloptichorn
