Twice now, while there were other factors in both cases, the Democrats have been severely punished in elections over their attempt to socialize medicine.
First, in 1994, they lost both houses of Congress because of HillaryCare, which fortunately didn’t pass.
They learned the wrong lesson from 1994, deluding themselves that they lost not because they attempted to take over a sixth of the nation’s economy, and one on which people depend for their very health and lives, but because they had failed to do so. So in 2010, they applied this false lesson to double down, deluding themselves this time that if they passed the latest unconstitutional monstrosity, it would be the key to electoral victory. Even Bill Clinton fantasized (or at least pretended to, perhaps as a way of sabotaging the Obama administration?) that it would magically become more popular once it was passed, and Queen Nancy assured us, holding her giant gavel, that we would find out what was in it then, and like it.
This time, they lost the House even more dramatically, and kept the Senate only because of a combination of safe Dem seats up that year and some flawed Republican candidates. The fact that the law remains on the books, with a president in the White House prepared to veto any repeal of it, his signature “victory” (ignoring the fact that it was rammed through the Congress in a partisan manner via undemocratic procedural gimmicks with very little White House guidance or input), will just make things that much worse in two years in the Senate, with many more vulnerable Democrats up for election, perhaps even providing the Republicans with a filibuster-proof majority.
So what false lesson will they take from this latest setback on their “progressive” road to serfdom? My prediction: the polls are all wrong — the bill was unpopular not because it passed, but because it wasn’t socialistic enough, lacking a “public option” (read “government option” or inevitable slide down the steep greased slope to single-payer). Because in their ideology, the “reality-based community” ise impervious to empirical data, or reason, or reality. It’s the thing that saves us from them, ultimately, in a country where the voice of the people is ultimately heard.
[Update a while later]
And here is Chris Gerrib in comments, right on cue, to validate my prediction.
Well, if you actually look at the polls, you find that the American public likes all the goodies that came with the bill.
You will also find that, from 2001 to 2008, the public overwhelmingly believed that it was the federal government’s “responsibility” to guarantee all Americans health-care insurance.
Back in 2009, the public option polled as high as 72%. Putting the public option back in would render your constitutional complaints moot.
I’m in comments providing empirical data. You’re the one spouting opinion.
I’m a bit surprised that a “CBS News/New York Times” poll couldn’t come up with at least 90% support for the public option.
“guarantee health insurance” comes with an implicit “if you want it”. If they worded any of those questions “force you to buy health insurance” instead the answer would be completely different – and it turns out it was, in the midterms.
Why would anyone want guaranteed health insurance? If anything, wouldn’t they want guaranteed health care?
But jrman is right. It isn’t guarantted access to health insurance. It can never be that. If it was that, people would do what they do now; not buy insurance until they needed it. To get to “everyone has healthcare”, you have to make everyone buy healthcare. And fortunately, it is not possible without a US Constitutional amendment to make people buy something they don’t want or need.
I’m in comments providing empirical data.
Gerrib’s in comments here, because no one would bother reading him at his blog. He is a free-rider. Under universal blog access; Gerrib would be forced to pay for insurance for the right to comment here. As it is, no one is forcing him to come here and defend foolish arguments. He does so with his own free will, because the blog owner believes in true freedom and liberty.
Polls are like assholes – everybody has one.
I’m in comments providing empirical data. You’re the one spouting opinion.
You skpped the empirical data that as of today 68% of all adults want to repeal the individual mandate. Which is the topic under discussion.
Brock – no, actually I did not skip that. It’s in my first link.
I wonder if Chris will ever admit that when Barack Obama repeatedly said “…if you like your insurance, you can keep it,” he was either clueless, or lying? Because I sure don’t see any other possibilities, for millions of people.
Sorry, Mr. Gerrib, but your side loses. Obamacare is doomed. And that’s good news.
For the record: I support universal health care. After all, we have it now; it’s called the county ER. What I do not support is another federal intrusion into my private life and pocketbook. I would back a state-administrated national health care system modeled upon that currently in place in Singapore or France if such were to be offered.
The federal government is already far, far too involved in my private life. I do not want them intruding there any further than they do now — not one more millimeter.
Scary as it has been to have the Dims in complete control, it’s also fitting given the state of the economy.
After decades of incremental sabotage in the name of “fairness”, the Dims are presiding over the anemic economy that is the inevitable result of their damnable tinkering. Serves ’em right, it’s just a crying shame the rest of us have to suffer through this to finally see what these people are really all about.
I suppose it was necessary to purge the disease, kinda like chemotherapy.
Rand,
I seem to recall they also got knocked after Medicare was passed as well, so make it three.