All Forums > General Discussion > Non-Sports > Who would do a better job of running the USA?
10/1/2013 12:46 PM
Who would do a better job of running the United States government?


Votes: 23
(Last vote received: 12/19/2013 9:24 PM)
10/1/2013 12:55 PM
The Republicans of 1995 would be liberals compared to the extremists of today.
10/1/2013 12:56 PM

JOHN BONER IS A SPINELESS, LUSH

STAND UP TO THE TEABAGGING TERRORISTS!

10/1/2013 1:18 PM
Sorry Cresty, but it's a bad time for Dems to be finger-pointing.  Senate Democrats are the biggest troublemakers at the moment...

A new Congress would do a "better" job of passing legislation for about 6 months, but after they realized the mistakes they'd made as a result of a total lack of experience, coupled to the fact that very few members of Congress have an actual policy background before they get to Washington, and after the new member excitement wore off, they'd get right back to where we are now.
10/1/2013 1:23 PM
I don't really 100% understand why the President and Senate Democrats are choosing to take a strong stand on this at the moment, frankly.  People don't like Obamacare.  Opinion polls have nearly universally demonstrated the truth of that statement.  That doesn't mean, as a Democrat, you have to give up on it.  But if you vote to delay it, you haven't even voted on any meaningful change to the law.  Just give yourself more time to do a better job of explaining it and trying to convince the more gullible members of society that it's actually a good idea.  Of course if you're heavily invested in the law you don't want to see full implementation pushed back.  But right now you certainly aren't doing anything to increase its popularity with Republicans or the general public.  I don't think fighting for implementation on the original timetable is good for the long-term viability of the bill.  I think the wiser move would be to allow the delay, start running a lot of public service ads on TV and in print to explain the law to the people, and gear up for a big battle over whether Obamacare stays or goes further on down the line.
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
10/1/2013 1:31 PM
Posted by dahsdebater on 10/1/2013 1:23:00 PM (view original):
I don't really 100% understand why the President and Senate Democrats are choosing to take a strong stand on this at the moment, frankly.  People don't like Obamacare.  Opinion polls have nearly universally demonstrated the truth of that statement.  That doesn't mean, as a Democrat, you have to give up on it.  But if you vote to delay it, you haven't even voted on any meaningful change to the law.  Just give yourself more time to do a better job of explaining it and trying to convince the more gullible members of society that it's actually a good idea.  Of course if you're heavily invested in the law you don't want to see full implementation pushed back.  But right now you certainly aren't doing anything to increase its popularity with Republicans or the general public.  I don't think fighting for implementation on the original timetable is good for the long-term viability of the bill.  I think the wiser move would be to allow the delay, start running a lot of public service ads on TV and in print to explain the law to the people, and gear up for a big battle over whether Obamacare stays or goes further on down the line.
"People don't like Obamacare.  Opinion polls have nearly universally demonstrated the truth of that statement."

I think the poll, at least the one I've seen, shows that 1/3 don't like it, 1/3 like it, and 1/3 wish it went further (more liberal). 2/3 are in favor of Obamacare or more liberal health care reform.
10/1/2013 1:31 PM
The Senate Dems have tried 18 times since March to get a conference committee on the budget but it's been blocked by the dipshit tea party Senate Repubs. Now they Repubs use it as an excuse to delay voting on a clean CR.

It's also entertaining when Repubs bring up polling numbers when 1) The great majority of people don't want to shutdown the government over healthcare and 2) They didn't even bring the gun control measure to a vote that has 85+ approval.
10/1/2013 1:32 PM
The Democrats are doubling down on their own stupidity for passing this ill-conceived law in the first place by refusing to budge.
10/1/2013 1:34 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 10/1/2013 1:32:00 PM (view original):
The Democrats are doubling down on their own stupidity for passing this ill-conceived law in the first place by refusing to budge.
Why should they budge on the ACA? The bill was passed legally and upheld as constitutional by SCOTUS.
10/1/2013 1:36 PM
10/1/2013 1:37 PM
Posted by The Taint on 10/1/2013 1:29:00 PM (view original):
Obamacare is law. The fight already happened. His reelection was a public vote on the ACA. Listening to the GOP talk about the unconstitutionality of it is ludicrous.

A small group of GOP tea partiers are the problem ,members of their own party are saying as much. They have hijacked the party and are leading it to its ruin.

I think Obama's reelection was just as much, if not more, about how much the electorate disliked Mitt Romney than it was an affirmation of Obamacare.

But nice try at putting a spin on it!
10/1/2013 1:39 PM
47% of the popular vote went for Romney. If Romney was less popular than the ACA, at least half of the electorate is in favor of the ACA.
10/1/2013 1:40 PM
Obama winning an election is "spin". LOL.
10/1/2013 1:43 PM (edited)
Posted by bad_luck on 10/1/2013 1:34:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 10/1/2013 1:32:00 PM (view original):
The Democrats are doubling down on their own stupidity for passing this ill-conceived law in the first place by refusing to budge.
Why should they budge on the ACA? The bill was passed legally and upheld as constitutional by SCOTUS.
Yes, it was passed legally.  And yes, it was upheld as constitutional by SCOTUS.

Do both of those things together make it a good law?

Because it's not.  It fails to address the basic and most fundamental problem with healthcare in the United States, which is a broken and obscenely bloated cost structure.  Instead, it just legislates who's going to pay for it.

You don't solve problems by merely throwing money at it.

of 57
All Forums > General Discussion > Non-Sports > Who would do a better job of running the USA?

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.