Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
He bought the bill up last year and it passed. Not to mention the fact the Senate Majority leader controls what bills are brought up and regardless if the majority leader is Democrat or Republican, they virtually never bring bills up to the floor that don't have majority support. Take a look at how many bills pass the House each year, and compare that to how many bills actually reach the Senate floor, look at when Frist was Majority leader as well.
Yikes he brought up a repeal law? And it passed? Mmmm I don't think so.
The Dems took a pounding in November and they clearly have no idea why. The job will be finished in 2012. The Dems own this mess, that much is clear.
Do you know how they screened the respondents?
Did they ask party affiliation at the beginning or the end of the survey?
Did they reject people if they were Republican?
As I noted in another thread, unless they had quotas set to only interview people to match the constantly moving target of party affiliation, they are simply reporting the data as they 'fell.'
Again, if a larger number of Democrats chose to participate, c'est la vie.
Not how polls are taken. They need a representative sample of the country or electorate. Having the dems with a 10 point advantage is not representative, since all generic ballot and party affiliation is tied or the GOP ahead slightly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit
Really?
The President's Health Care Summit, Feb. 25, 2010:
I believe that's Brother McConnell sitting right there, isn't it?
That was for show and the republicans pounded him and the lies, gimmicks and fraud within the bill. I believe the very next day, the dems went ahead with their plans, taking not one single idea from the republicans, ignoring all the warnings that have subsequently come true .
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255
The AP poll was actually +6 with leaners, +3 overall
He's afraid it will passsssssss, that's why he won't bring it up. Depending on how the bill is handled, the GOP could use a rule to bring it to the floor.
Good points and good thread, sanrene. I thought there were going to be groups from different states taking this bill (Obamacare, not the repeal) to the Supreme Court for review. I bring it up only because I haven't heard anything new on it lately. Anyhow, it will be interesting to see how the Senate ends up going about this. Reid should just go forward, regardless, and proceed with a vote on the repeal. What could it hurt at this point?
Not how polls are taken. They need a representative sample of the country or electorate. Having the dems with a 10 point advantage is not representative, since all generic ballot and party affiliation is tied or the GOP ahead slightly.
That was for show and the republicans pounded him and the lies, gimmicks and fraud within the bill. I believe the very next day, the dems went ahead with their plans, taking not one single idea from the republicans, ignoring all the warnings that have subsequently come true .
They dropped republicans by 12 points and looky, looky...so did the opposition to obamacare.
There's were the discrepancy comes from.
In 2010 the GOP had a large turnout advantage, its not exactly a surprise that the 2010 turnout poll is going to have a different Party ID than other polls.
That likely voter poll of GOP +6 was also no where even remotely near the party breakout of any other poll. That one was the odd man out. On top of that the real difference was between the leaners. Taking out the leaners the difference is Dem +3 to GOP +1.
In 2010 the GOP had a large turnout advantage, its not exactly a surprise that the 2010 turnout poll is going to have a different Party ID than other polls.
That likely voter poll of GOP +6 was also no where even remotely near the party breakout of any other poll. That one was the odd man out. On top of that the real difference was between the leaners. Taking out the leaners the difference is Dem +3 to GOP +1.
The leaners are included in the 42-36 split. Again, one more time, the previous poll had the dems @ 42% and the GOP @ 48%. This poll, the dems stay @ 42% and the GOP loses 12 points, down to 36%, and there is your difference. There is NO justification for doing that, other than trying to manufacture the result you want and make it appear something is happening when it actually isn't.
The leaners are included in the 42-36 split. Again, one more time, the previous poll had the dems @ 42% and the GOP @ 48%. This poll, the dems stay @ 42% and the GOP loses 12 points, down to 36%, and there is your difference. There is NO justification for doing that, other than trying to manufacture the result you want and make it appear something is happening when it actually isn't.
The only reason why that one poll was 48-42 GOP to begin with because it was a likely voter poll just prior to an election in which the GOP was going to have a large turnout advantage. Notice how no other poll is even remotely close to the GOP + 6 advantage.
Wouldn't this be alot easier if a republican was majority leader? Why isn't a republican the majority leader? I don't like Harry Reid but if the republicans did their job we wouldn't be having this discussion.
In light of the trillions of dollars this Congress has spent so far, the amount of money that would be spent in order to bring this to a vote on the floor of Congress can best be described as miniscule.
20+ Democratic Senators will be up for re-election in 2012, and Reid in trying to cover for them as fiercely as the liberal press has been trying to cover for our inept President.
Since Ms. Palin was correct about the existence of 'death panels' as the Democrats finally admitted recently, don't expect the liberal press to bring that 'inconvenient truth' up anytime soon. Obama's choice to head Medicare (Berwick) is an admirer of the British health care system, where death panels are a huge part of their system.
1. If it is brought for a vote, all votes will go on record. All Dems (especially those who are up for re-election in 2012) who vote against repeal will have to go home and face their constituents.
2. If the repeal doesn't pass, but turns out to be close, those numbers will reflect its true unpopularity with Americans - an embarrassment to the agenda. They will not be able to hide behind their smoke and mirrors and say "most Americans want it".
3. If the repeal DOES pass, and Obama vetoes it, it will reflect his arrogance and opposition to what the citizens want, and he'll be toast in 2012.
Harry Reid is just trying to protect the Democratic-held Senate and the administration from a HUGE humiliation.
This is what some of you don't seem to get. The Dem's aren't afraid of taking their vote on health care home to their constituents--there are very few freshmen Dem's, they've already voted on it once, and they're PROUD of that vote. If I can be vulgar, failing to take up the bill in the Senate is more like flipping their middle finger in the air to the Republican House leadership, and telling them to get lost. Whether you want to admit it or not, the Dem's still control the Senate and the Presidency--the R's don't get to run the show. Whether you want to admit it or not, many voters in democratic states LIKE healthcare reform.
That said, there's absolutely going to be a fight, because the R's ARE going to try to leave HCR out of appropriations, but this whole fight over trying to repeal the bill is just a time waster and grand standing for their base. So much BS...nothing more.
The appropriations fight will come down to a PR fight with the public--the R's are going to have to explain to the entire country--not just their hardcore base--why they're taking away existing healthcare programs from the American people. It may go their way, and then again, it may not. The provisions are becoming VERY popular as people are starting to understand that most of the negative hype about this program was completely made up. When Gingrich tried to pull the same trick during the Clinton years--tried to cut programs like Medicare and Medicaid--it forced a government shutdown and he wound up taking the blame with the public. The R's lost the presidential election in 96 over that, and continued to lose House and Senate seats throughout the 90's. This is a very risky move for the R's, especially since the Dems are openly saying they'll work with the R's on making bipartisan changes, but the R's don't seem interested. We'll see how it goes.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They need a representative sample of the country or electorate. Having the dems with a 10 point advantage is not representative, since all generic ballot and party affiliation is tied or the GOP ahead slightly.
