It's a prediction that he's going to nominate an extremely conservative SCOTUS justice? He'll be making the pick 10 days from now and he's talked about doing exactly that repeatedly, and whoever he nominates is obviously going to fit the mold I described.

Obamacare often polls between 45 and 50% approval. Trump changing it is beneficial to Trump and the Republicans, as they can now claim they've fixed it.

Polls that take sample sizes of thousands of individuals can and should be considered part objective analysis.

Does Trump lie? Of course he does thats why his trustiness was also very low. But for a historically untrustworthy candidate, one has to ask why Clinton's was even lower.

GHWB thought David Souter was a conservative Justice, man did he get the surprise of his life. Reagan appointed Sandra Day O'Conner. You never know for sure. What is your criteria the dividing line between a conservative jurist and a moderate jurist?


You haven't described any mode you just used the word conservative. That means a lot of things to a lot of people.

The Democrats have been getting creamed on Obamacare and you know it. Most people want it changed and you know that too. Look, you can be for the principles of improving healthcare outcomes for many more people and at the same time have an open mind in how to achieve that.

Obamacare is popular in the newest polls:

Its an objective analysis of subjective opinions. Your reading comprehension sucks.

TRUMP2020: Your Reading Comprehension Sucks

It would be closer to 100% if it was any good don't you think?

Do you think the people polled know anything about the details, costs etc?

It doesn't matter, it's going by by!

People thought Obamacare contained Death Panels, so, no, people aren't particularly informed about the law.

Exactly!

Exactly....what?

This statement:

Is no longer true based on the newest polls.

If you want to argue that Obamacare would be less popular if people knew what was in it, we can. You are going to look pretty bad on that score, so you may want to change the subject.

Nothing I said was wrong. We don't actually have a fact check database of 1000 statements made of each candidate from a non partisan source.

Who cares about it's popularity!

Obama Care is a disaster and it's going away!!

The problem with the ACA was it was too half-ass. Obama middled it, he should have went full force or don't do it. He may have chosen the worst option.

Have to take a rare opportunity to agree with wil here. Furthermore, this draws on some of the legitimate criticism of Obama which came from the both sides regarding his lack of character. He's always seemed to want to please everyone, and didn't know when to compromise and when to push through at times where half measures were actually worse. This represents a major weakness of leadership which maybe came from Obama himself or possibly from his strict allegiance to his elite sponsors who have no interest in a government functioning well for the majority.

Perhaps the ultimate expression of Obama's middling and muddling was his having to, along with with other centrist elites, endorse a hugely flawed, unpopular, and deeply corrupt candidate in Hillary Clinton. Biden was the obvious choice choice for centrists who wanted to maintain the status quo. But no, they wanted to be extra greedy and foist a true reptile upon us, a ratched criminal who would mash their clawed hind leg down on the gas of the exploitation vehicle known as globalization. So the end of Obama's presidency saw him as an ultimately compromised bitch, campaigning for someone who used racism against him in her previous run against him. Obama had no spine or character, and it showed it everything he did.

One of my friend is a huge lefty and probably the smartest political mind I know IRL.

He was extremely worried when ACA passed with the mandate, and pretty much predicted exactly what has happened.

Even if ACA gets butchered by Trump, Trump will own it.

If Trump's plan doesn't work he will get slaughtered in 2020 and it will be the Dems again that will have to wrestle with it.

Its basically the elephant in the room where both parties have to wrestle with and where it eventually ends up single payer over time.

I guess the person who brought up its popularity cares about it.

Many have said similar things and not just to be pejorative, but from a genuine concern for the nation. Details are too numerous to mention or link. But Deuces criticism (IMO justified) has been mirrored by many others and for quite some time, some of the best from Commentary Magazine.

I will refrain from doing an analysis of Obama's, IMO, very flawed nature and character. Other's will think themselves more qualified no doubt. He should never have been president - but that can be said of many of our US Presidents. The limitations inherent in our Representative Democracy, perhaps.

No way anything like single payer passes in 2010, so the argument is: was it better than doing nothing?

It certainly reduced the uninsured rate and eliminated predatory insurance policies, among other tangible improvements.

The argument that the ACA made it harder to implement single payer is pretty weak. The opposition laughably called the ACA "government takeover of healthcare". You think that argument works less effectively when it becomes more true?

Think of it like this.

If in 10 years the US moves to single payer, it will be because both sides fought and changed it until it became single payer. If TrumpCare doesn't work, by 2020 he will be routed and Dems will have the opportunity to try again. But they won't go "back" to Obamacare and repeat 2010-2016 over again. They will ram through single payer eventually. Single payer will end up like other popular social programs, once the people have it they will never allow the government to undo it. The resistance will be overwhelming.

Here in Quebec we have practically free education. The government increased tuition costs by a tiny amount and was met with massive protests. Once the people have it, they won't let it go.

History will look back and say "Obama put it on the table for everyone to be forced to deal with". Like a founding father type of roll, even if it gets butchered by Trump today. So yes, I firmly believe him forging ahead was the right move, regardless of how "bad" it looks today.

Poll:: Americans Want Obamacare to Change

I think this is pretty indicative of where people are it with it. Also 48% support doesn't mean it's popular. Come on now, you can admit Repubs have been running against Obamacare and have been successful doing it.

Regarding a single payer system, if Medicare is the model then I'm not at all sure that the reimbursement rates for Medicare can be sustained for Medicare for everyone. I can't prove it and I have only anecdotal evidence to back it up, but I'm fairly certain that Medicare is often effectively subsidized by other insurance IE health care providers make up for too low Medicare reimbursements by overcharging for non medicare insurance covered patients. I could be wrong but I've seen how much Medicare reimburses for some things and it was a pretty big surprise. Medicare isn't free either, you have to pay a premium for Part B and your on the hook for 20% of the costs. You can get Medigap insurance coverage though and that isn't too expensive. Medicare Advantage is also an alternative. I just don't think Medicare for everyone will be as inexpensive as people think. Could definitely be wrong though.

It seemed like everyone I talked to about it said it would fail.

Exactly why the subsidies won't end. When the challenge to Obamacare's paying subsidies to residents of states who didn't have a state run exchange went before the SCOTUS, Republicans were in a complete panic as many indicated that they would vote to keep the subsidies going. They knew it would be political suicide not to.

Dershowitz claims that the conservatives started picking judges on the basis on partisan loyalty in the 80s and that none of the members appointed by conservative presidents in recent decades have nearly the merit to be SCOTUS justices. Maybe Souter is the exception that proves the rule.

I expect Trump to go over board in choosing a die hard conservative who, in the tradition of republican presidents, who has more loyalty than legal excellence. Trump has no shame. Then again, I still don't understand how the republicans seemingly didn't pay a political price for blocking Obama's nominee under such a ridiculous pretense- so what do I know?

I'm pretty sure that that would require a shift so major that, in that scenario, healthcare reform would be just one of many fundamental reorganizations. When you see people like Hillary and Donald as the choices, it means there is very little positive relationship between what the majority wants and what it gets.

I mean, Corey Booker, who it seems is being presented as a 2020 presidential candidate, wouldn't even vote for a measure to allow importation of drugs from Canada. These people just lost to Donald Trump (who, in a deviation from his typical anti-trade stances, actually said he was for allowing prescription drug importation) and there they are, doing what their biggest sponsors tel them to do on an issue in direct opposition to public opinion.

No wiggle room on prescription drug price gouging but eventual single payer? No. As long as corporate lobbyists don't want single payer, and the establishment politicians are occupying the government, there will be no single payer. And these people are entrenched, in large part because they have "educated" morons like Fly, Wookie, Trolly, etc. believing that they are in some epic war against homophobes/racists.