General Discussion

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)

100. Democrats opposed Mandated Insurance. Including this President. It was Republicans

Mon Sep 30, 2013, 05:04 PM

Sep 2013

who were pushing to force those 'no-good Lieberals' to have to pay for HC. As Obama himself said and one of the reasons why many of us Liberal Democrats supported him over Hillary (who supported Mandates) 'if forcing people to buy homes would solve homelessness, we could do that' when he explained why he OPPOSED Mandated Insurance.

What's fun to see is how the Republicans have changed their positions on this and equally fun to see how some Democrats have switched theirs.

We should not force people to buy HC. We should have a National HC system which is the cheapest way to cover the country's HC needs. Not great for the middlemen (Health Insurance Corps who take at least 20% maybe more, in profits which should be going directly into actual HC).

I am amazed to watch the switching of positions though and the amnesia as to what a controversial subject this was with Republicans always supporting it, now suddenly opposed to it.

People are so sick of these political games while people are struggling to survive in this country.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

131 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

ACA: Employer mandate DELAYED, Caps on Costs DELAYED. Should Individual Mandate be delayed? [View all] leftstreet Sep 2013 OP

The poll didn't include the option "ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?" The Velveteen Ocelot Sep 2013 #1

Is the GOP asking to delay the individual mandate? leftstreet Sep 2013 #2

That's their latest hostage. The Velveteen Ocelot Sep 2013 #4

If you look at it logically delaying the mandate will save us grief. dkf Sep 2013 #9

You're aligning with the House GOP against the entire Democratic party geek tragedy Sep 2013 #20

That's because people are moving into "team" and "tribe" mode vs logic. dkf Sep 2013 #26

So, the GOP are the ones being reasonable now, in your opinion. nt geek tragedy Sep 2013 #27

I am Bob's complete lack of surprise jberryhill Sep 2013 #67

And I am Jack's complete lack of surprise geek tragedy Sep 2013 #76

Are you fucking kidding me? The Velveteen Ocelot Sep 2013 #30

$93 bucks isn't going to do much vs $100/month. dkf Sep 2013 #60

That's not the point! The point is that the GOP is demanding a change in a law The Velveteen Ocelot Sep 2013 #66

So Obama changed the law unilaterally by delaying the employer mandate one year? dkf Sep 2013 #69

He shouldn't have done it and I sure hope he doesn't cave again. The Velveteen Ocelot Sep 2013 #72

That wasn't a cave, that was his idea!!! dkf Sep 2013 #77

It was a cave. He was trying to make the ACA more palatable The Velveteen Ocelot Sep 2013 #78

more palatable to the ones who haven't gotten littlewolf Sep 2013 #79

The employer exchanges are behind the individual ones dkf Sep 2013 #80

why the "unsuspecting" part questionseverything Sep 2013 #71

Yes, geek tragedy Sep 2013 #8

Yes. Which seems to be why most people supporting the delay here are conservative leaning CreekDog Sep 2013 #81

is this like when you demanded Obama respond to the birther nonsense CreekDog Sep 2013 #102

Real ordinary people need real meaningful relief now, not in 1 or 2 or X years. Denninmi Sep 2013 #3

Not if you can't afford the coverage to begin with. It won't make one bit of difference duffyduff Sep 2013 #10

Exactly. If you have to buy it, but companies don't have to control costs, or implement it ... Myrina Sep 2013 #44

No, that's a GOP talking point, nothing more, nt geek tragedy Sep 2013 #5

I didn't know the out of pocket costs limit has been delayed. That's not good. northoftheborder Sep 2013 #6

This thing needs to be totally revamped. duffyduff Sep 2013 #7

They will remember it in 2016 too. Puzzledtraveller Sep 2013 #11

Spare us the pro-GOP concern trolling. geek tragedy Sep 2013 #13

You must be an insurance agent. Puzzledtraveller Sep 2013 #15

No, a Democrat. Only Republicans and their allies want to delay/repeal the ACA at this point. geek tragedy Sep 2013 #16

Obama delayed ACA provisions. Is he a Republican? leftstreet Sep 2013 #37

He's implementing it, you and they are trying to sabotage it. nt geek tragedy Sep 2013 #40

He derailed 2 provisions. You're saying GOP allies derail leftstreet Sep 2013 #42

You repeating the Republicans' talking points only proves my point. geek tragedy Sep 2013 #46

Maybe the GOPers are repeating our talking points leftstreet Sep 2013 #63

Three, actually. enlightenment Sep 2013 #74

Oh that's right leftstreet Sep 2013 #83

Understandable. enlightenment Sep 2013 #111

Democrats opposed Mandated Insurance. Including this President. It was Republicans sabrina 1 Sep 2013 #100

How would you vote, with the Republicans or with the Democrats? geek tragedy Sep 2013 #103

Voting for the Mandate WAS voting for Republicans. McCain was for it, Obama against it. sabrina 1 Sep 2013 #105

Quit dodging the question: do you support the Republicans or Democrats in this geek tragedy Sep 2013 #107

So you voted against it then? sabrina 1 Sep 2013 #108

That's twice you've dodged the question. geek tragedy Sep 2013 #110

So you voted against Obama then? Why are you continuing to dodge what is a very sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #129

Obama didn't win the nomination because of the mandate issue. He had to play geek tragedy Oct 2013 #130

Being that I have stood by the Democrats' fight against Republicans sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #131

Thanks for Rush Limbaugh's talking points. Try to be more subtle next time. nt geek tragedy Sep 2013 #12

+1 leftstreet Sep 2013 #34

Those voting yes are aligned with the House GOP. geek tragedy Sep 2013 #14

I'm scared. Puzzledtraveller Sep 2013 #18

I don't know why you're supporting Michelle Bachmann and Louie Gohmert on this issue. geek tragedy Sep 2013 #22

The ACA is a GOP plan. Are you calling Obama a teabagger? leftstreet Sep 2013 #21

Those wanting to delay or derail the ACA are allies of the GOP. Zero exceptions, regardless geek tragedy Sep 2013 #23

Obama 'derailed' the ACA twice leftstreet Sep 2013 #32

No, I'm saying that those who want the same thing as the GOP are aligned with the GOP. geek tragedy Sep 2013 #35

So what? leftstreet Sep 2013 #38

You and your fellow travelers here are arguing for a delay. geek tragedy Sep 2013 #41

Yes. Delay the mandate leftstreet Sep 2013 #43

Yes it is. Because the mandate means more people joining the pools, which will make them geek tragedy Sep 2013 #47

If employers don't join, will it be successful? leftstreet Sep 2013 #62

Only someone completely ignorant of the exchanges would ask that kind of question. geek tragedy Sep 2013 #65

LOL so this is like Phase 1 or something? leftstreet Sep 2013 #68

Let's see, you repeat Republican talking points and then you reveal geek tragedy Sep 2013 #70

Stop insinuating members are trolls leftstreet Sep 2013 #85

Only a rightwing troll would suggest Obama needs to negotiate with the Republicans over the ACA geek tragedy Sep 2013 #86

Really? Obama negotiates all the time leftstreet Sep 2013 #89

Obama has said he's not negotiating on this. So has Harry Reid. So has every Democratic Senator geek tragedy Sep 2013 #92

Oh, okay n/t leftstreet Sep 2013 #93

ACA is patterned after what the Massachusetts legislature (85% Democratic) passed and romney vetoed. pampango Sep 2013 #28

Nice smear zipplewrath Sep 2013 #24

It is not a coincidence that this poll was posted contemporaneously with the House geek tragedy Sep 2013 #25

This Congress can still make several hundred more attempts to repeal it. Turbineguy Sep 2013 #17

lol at the Boehner Brigade RandiFan1290 Sep 2013 #19

Hell no! Andy823 Sep 2013 #29

So they're going to force people into the market but delaying many of the consumer protections? hughee99 Sep 2013 #31

Correct n/t leftstreet Sep 2013 #33

Ego, plain and simple Puzzledtraveller Sep 2013 #36

"They want to spike the ball so hard they don't care. We must ask, what's the hurry?" geek tragedy Sep 2013 #39

Why? bunnies Sep 2013 #49

You do not know me do you? Puzzledtraveller Sep 2013 #51

You didnt answer the question, did you? bunnies Sep 2013 #53

Don't expect an honest answer from the person who claims to be a Medicaid case worker geek tragedy Sep 2013 #57

Heh. bunnies Sep 2013 #59

i dont have insurance any more questionseverything Sep 2013 #82

I dont have insurance either. bunnies Sep 2013 #84

so delaying the mandate would keep you from owing the penalty questionseverything Sep 2013 #97

I wont owe the penalty anyway. bunnies Sep 2013 #101

she had cancer questionseverything Sep 2013 #112

oh man. Im really sorry to hear that. bunnies Sep 2013 #114

you are talking premiums questionseverything Sep 2013 #116

Ooooh. Now I understand. bunnies Sep 2013 #118

yea they should send you and me questionseverything Sep 2013 #119

26% is unacceptably high. bunnies Sep 2013 #120

Let's see Puzzledtraveller Sep 2013 #61

So yes. You have insurance. I thought so. bunnies Sep 2013 #64

^^ THIS THIS THIS THIS ^^ Myrina Sep 2013 #45

I don't think you've thought this through. oh well. Pretzel_Warrior Sep 2013 #117

Do you think forcing consumers into a market, but delaying measures to protect them hughee99 Sep 2013 #122

This is a fair question 1000words Sep 2013 #48

I've devoted all my working years to helping others Puzzledtraveller Sep 2013 #50

Consider the source 1000words Sep 2013 #54

No, it's because you smeared everyone who opposes the Republican delay efforts as being geek tragedy Sep 2013 #55

Youve been here less than TWO WEEKS and your blaming "the usual suspects"? bunnies Sep 2013 #52

Lurked for many, many years 1000words Sep 2013 #56

Exploit us! Hey! We are vulnerable to WH decision making HereSince1628 Sep 2013 #58

Delay it and fix it quinnox Sep 2013 #73

Another non-surprising call for caving to the GOP. nt geek tragedy Sep 2013 #75

Yes, not surprising. AtomicKitten Sep 2013 #91

I would support that if either party was interested in doing that. Unfortunately I don't see the liberal_at_heart Sep 2013 #98

The mandate guarantees insurance profits...it CANNOT BE DELAYED!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HereSince1628 Sep 2013 #87

Wait! Is it the tea party lobbying for the delay that will cost insurance companies such profits? pampango Sep 2013 #94

IMO, they want delay in employer mandates, not delay in payments from individuals. HereSince1628 Sep 2013 #95

Would not delay it over something that impacts only 1% of companies with more than 50 employees, and Hoyt Sep 2013 #88

This whole thing is so confusing. I heard on the local news that you can only shop the exchanges if liberal_at_heart Sep 2013 #90

Im pretty sure that if your premiums are over 9.5% of your income... bunnies Sep 2013 #96

if you have questionseverything Sep 2013 #113

thought du was against mandate joshcryer Sep 2013 #99

Well yes, but that was before the GOP opposed Obamacare, so now we love it. It's complicated. nt Demo_Chris Sep 2013 #106

they were never for it joshcryer Sep 2013 #109

The mandate should be delayed permanently. nt Demo_Chris Sep 2013 #104

Healthcare should have been mandated, not insurance. Skeeter Barnes Oct 2013 #128

enlightening list of people who voted "Delay it" in this goofy poll. Pretzel_Warrior Sep 2013 #115

But not surprising. geek tragedy Sep 2013 #121

Please stop calling DU members 'trolls' leftstreet Sep 2013 #123

I am of course against the mandate. I am also against TeaPubliKlan appeasement TheKentuckian Oct 2013 #124

Not only NO, but FUCK NO!!!!!! Wounded Bear Oct 2013 #125

Passing a law mandating insurance and consumer protections and then delaying those protections Skeeter Barnes Oct 2013 #127

As long as the employer mandate and cap on out of pocket cost is delayed, the indivdual mandate Skeeter Barnes Oct 2013 #126