Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<<I think the Democrats should be capable of fighting back strongly AND keeping the discourse on a higher level, though.>> <But we've been doing that and it isn't working.> I disagree that that is what (most) Democrats have been doing. Really, what most have been doing is bending over backwards to appease Republicans in an effort to be "bi-partisan" and being rewarded by the Republicans not even voting for the bills that have been watered down. <I'm with Hans on this one. It's time to fight fire with fire.> But then what do you get? You get a house on fire. And you get distractions like this calling for an apology. And because the media love controversy, THAT's what gets covered. The food fight. What Democrats should be doing is standing up and fighting back, ABSOLUTELY, but with substance and not hyperbole. I haven't seen much of that. They need to call the GOP nonsense "nonsense" in no uncertain terms, but don't need to go that step further and say "Republicans want you to die" because that makes them look like hype-masters themselves and just creates moral equivalency in a lot of people's minds. <What's needs is a simplified message: HEALTHCARE REFORM GOOD, CAN AFFORD, LIFE WILL BE BETTER FOR IT with factual backup.> Agreed.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>They need to call the GOP nonsense "nonsense" in no uncertain terms, but don't need to go that step further and say "Republicans want you to die" because that makes them look like hype-masters themselves and just creates moral equivalency in a lot of people's minds.<< Exactly. Let the GOP be Jerry Springer. The Democrats be Oprah.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox But even Oprah's ratings are slipping. Grayson got it right. Dems cannot get their message across unless it gets media attention. So far, most of the attention has been on the Republicans and their scare tactics. Grayson changed the tone and got attention for it. GOOD! The Dems cannot win unless people get our message. And if bringing the tone of the message down to the level of the Republicans' rhetoric gets the message noticed, that's half the battle. Taking the high road and playing it safe has not been working. It's time to try a different approach.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox Truthfully, I think you give too many Americans too much credit regarding political discourse. Fear works, and works well. That's why the Republicans are still using it to their advantage. Obama won the election because the swing voters hated Bush and/or believed McCain was past his prime and/or a nutjob for choosing Palin as a running mate. But when Obama stands alone, those swing voters aren't necessarily with him. Public option is a band-aid solution that may or may not bring about real reform, if it passes. If it doesn't, then I think we're all screwed and the health insurance monopoly will continue to grow and strengthen without real competition. The number of Americans who actually understand what's at stake, IMHO, is less than 50%. Over two-thirds of them want public option because they know it's the only way in our present system to offer low cost alternatives to folks who cannot get and/or afford health insurance. But that desire for the public option doesn't automatically translate into a deeper understanding of the true cost of health care to our economy. If they did, then at least two-thirds of our nation would be screaming for a single payer system. Without universal healthcare, our nation will continue to fall behind in the global economy, unable to compete with those companies abroad who do not have to factor health care costs into their operations.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Truthfully, I think you give too many Americans too much credit regarding political discourse.<< Probably. I know fear tactics work sometimes. But really, they didn't work a year ago. Throughout the summer of 2008 it was a steady drumbeat of fear. They lost, big time. People voted for "hope" and "change" and Again, the Democrats have control, for the time being, of the whole enchilada. And they still can't seem to get it done. If Americans' don't understand the whole thing, whose fault is that? Sure, the GOP noise machine can distract, fine. But the Democrats have the bully pulpit, the house and senate. Really, they only need to convince their OWN folks to get on board and it would be a done deal. Maybe I'm all wet, and it's the nasty stuff that makes friends and influences people. That's disappointing, but if that's what it takes to get us to catch up with the rest of the world in covering people's healthcare, then fine.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "How about coming up with a bill that all the Democrats are in favor of. That's really all that need be done." Many of those Dems who disagree are in districts where their constituents are Repubs or fence sitters. They aren't sincerely interested in seeing that you and your family has unfettered access to good health care. They just want to make sure that their seat stays intact. They are cowards who are simply towing the line rather than bringing about the kind of change that Obama promised when he took office.
Originally Posted By gadzuux There's two hurdles for the democrats - the sixty senate votes for 'cloture' - ie, suppressing the ability for republicans to filibuster (which they probably wouldn't actually do anyway). THEN comes the up/down vote for whatever bill is being presented. I don't think any democratic senator is going to side with the GOP for the cloture vote, meaning we've got sixty "in the pocket". If these conservative dems choose to vote 'no' on the actual bill, let them. They can answer to their own constituents. And only fifty one votes are required at that point, with a slim chance that a republican or two will vote in favor. But the first hurdle "should" be easy - the sixty 'cloture' votes to allow the bill to proceed to an actual up/down vote. Whatever the senate passes will be merged with whatever the HOR passes. The HOR will have some form of public option. The real trick here is with the senate side. And this is where my disappointment is greatest - with the senate.
Originally Posted By hopemax > They can answer to their own constituents. < And this is why I am not as confident as you as the 60 senators will vote for cloture. It's not like most Americans understand what cloture is. And there is still the wiggle room of I didn't vote against giving my constituents a better health care system, I voted against some procedural thingy. It's a less than certain death, than a "no" on the bill would be. So let's make it so I don't ever have to vote "no" on the bill.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Is it possible the the loss of support for Obama's plan has little to do with Republican negativity and lots to do with a lack of a coherent, workable plan?
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan It's possible. Especially the "coherent" part. I think the GOP obstructionism has done what they hoped -- plant seeds of fear and doubt. But the Democrats haven't done a great job of answering that stuff, either. Maybe this new pushback is the way to go. Maybe that's what works, answering baseless charges of "death panels" with base charges of "Republicans want you to die." I'd hate to think we're really that close to an Idiocracy, but maybe we are. The Republicans have offered no sort of plan whatsoever, other than obstructionism. So they're really out of the health care debate. Which leaves it to The Gang That Can't Shoot Straight to figure it out.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Head is with 2oony and Dabob2. Heart is with Hans and Skinner.<< Your heart is in good Hans. aaahahahahahahaaaaaa! ha. ahem.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Well, count me as a Republican who would like to see health care reform. I'm educated, I read the papers, I follow the news and I don't have a clue as to what the plan will be and who will pay for it. Granted, there are lots of umbrellas floating around out there...but it is nothing but air underneath. For as great a communicator as Obama is I am just floored that he hasn't completely controlled this debate. I think his team is failing him here and I don't know if that is because of a lack of leadership on Obama's part, an inability to circle the wagons with his party or what.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>For as great a communicator as Obama is I am just floored that he hasn't completely controlled this debate. I think his team is failing him here and I don't know if that is because of a lack of leadership on Obama's part, an inability to circle the wagons with his party or what.<< You and me both.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt I think Michael Moore nailed it. Obama is a really nice man who is a tad bit too idealistic. He should have started out with a single payer plan and let congress beat it down into a public option. He started out compromising and look where we are now.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Most of his supporters won't agree but I think much of his trouble is from trying to bite off too much at once. He is spending the day today flying back and forth to Denmark to try and fight for Chicago's bid for the Olympics. Chicago, a city which is in the midst of some of the most serious youth crime in our nation and an educational system in peril. Seems Chicago needs to set it's priorities....much the same way the President should.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt Nah, that's not the problem. The problem is that he really is a nice guy and the GOP is taking full advantage of it.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt Yes, but the voice you hear in the 24-hour news cycle is strictly partisan. That's what shapes the debate.
