Allow me to translate “send Medicaid to the states” for you

Mitt Romney mentioned Medicaid last night in the course of avoiding questions on foreign policy. Medicaid is more than a debate tactic to millions of people, so I thought we could take a look at what Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan plan for Medicaid.

When Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan and opinion leaders say they want to “give Medicaid to the states” they’re not telling anyone anything they need to know about the plans for Medicaid. That’s deliberate. The plans are to cut Medicaid drastically by reducing the number of people who are covered by Medicaid. They all know this. That’s why they use phrases like “block grants” and “giving Medicaid to the states.”

So let’s look at some real numbers and the next time you hear Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan or their legions of fans in the punditry cavalierly toss off “block grant” or “send Medicaid to the states” you’ll have some idea what they’re not telling you.

There’s two ways to look at Medicaid. There’s Medicaid as it exists now and Medicaid with the planned expansion under the PPACA. Here’s how Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan would cut Medicaid under both scenarios:

The House Budget Plan would repeal the ACA and convert Medicaid to a block grant with significant reductions in federal spending. This proposal would make fundamental changes to the financing structure of the program that could shift costs to states and could result in large reductions in enrollment and payments to providers such as hospitals.

In aggregate, the proposal would reduce federal Medicaid spending by $1.4 trillion over the 2012 to 2021 period relative to spending under current law with ACA, a 34 percent reduction.

The repeal of ACA along with reductions in federal spending for Medicaid through the block grant would almost inevitably result in dramatic reductions in coverage and similarly dramatic increases in the number of uninsured in the country.

Cuts in federal spending would result in large scale reductions in enrollment in Medicaid. This outcome would hold even if states were able to achieve substantial efficiencies by adopting policies to reduce the rate of growth in spending. We examined different scenarios for state responses to reduced federal Medicaid spending and estimate, depending on the specific underlying assumption, that enrollment reductions could range from 31 to 36 million if enrollment cuts were spread across all groups. Under the assumption that there were no cuts in eligibility and enrollment of the aged and disabled, 44 million adults and children, 58 percent of the total (or 71 percent of adults and children) could be cut even assuming efficiency gains. Most of the people who would lose Medicaid coverage would become uninsured.

Pay particular attention to this next part if you live in the real world and are aware of how brutally inequitable our current health care system is, if you actually encounter people in your daily life who have no access to even basic health care, read this, because it’s going to get much, much worse under Romney-Ryan:

Of the $1.4 trillion reduction in federal Medicaid spending under the House Budget Plan, $610 billion is due to the repeal of the ACA, and $750 billion is due to the conversion of Medicaid financing to a block grant. The $750 billion reduction represents a 22 percent cut from what Medicaid spending would have been even without ACA.

Look around at our current health care system and then cut 750 billion dollars that would go to health care for working class and poor people over a course of years. That’s the plan. It makes my skin crawl when I hear Romney or Ryan mewling about “the poor”. That’s because I know what Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are planning to do to them.

pdf

169 replies
  1. 1
    Maude says:

    Romney also wants to cut food stamps. Starve the military.

  2. 2
    some guy says:

    time to make space for Granny and Grampa in the spare bedroom.

  3. 3
    Political Observer says:

    Well, it’s going to happen whether you like it or not, because Romney is on the verge of victory, motherfuckers.

    The momentum is on his side and Obambi has done nothing to stop it. Even Ohio is tightening (TIED in a Gravis Marketing Poll) .

  4. 4
    Richard says:

    Conservative Christians practicing social Darwinism.

  5. 5
    PurpleGirl says:

    @some guy: And further, women, stop working full time because you’ll have to stay home to take care of your parents/grandparents since they won’t be able to have that home aide any more.

  6. 6
    Redshift says:

    Republican governors are constantly whining about the cost of Medicaid because they have to spend their state’s money to get the federal money (but despite their complaints, it’s extremely rare for them to refuse it.)

    You would think they would be screaming even louder about Ryan’s plan to slash the money they get. Or does “block grant” mean they’re no longer required to spend their own money to get it?

  7. 7
    danimal says:

    If enough middle-class voters study this issue enough to understand it means “mom’s moving into the living room,” there is a chance we would see Moderate Mitt back away from the plan.

    Otherwise, mom’s moving into the living room, because you won’t be able to afford nursing care, and your state will shift the block granted Medicaid money away from patient services and into the pockets of the local medical community.

  8. 8
    Kay says:

    @Maude:

    We all know how this is going to go. The sacrifice is going to come from people without lobbyists or clout, and any other cuts are going to magically disappear or “prove impossible, politically”.

    I think it would be more honest if Romney and pundits who love him would just say “we’re cutting all the poor people programs” because that’s the only thing that’s going.

  9. 9
    PurpleGirl says:

    @Political Observer: Are you paid by the word or by the message?

  10. 10
    Political Observer says:

    BTW, remember who is going to count the votes in Ohio–a REPUBLICAN Secretary of State. Let that sink in for a few minutes losers…

  11. 11
    Redshift says:

    @some guy: You said it. My in-laws just moved into assisted living, and if they live long enough to outlast their assets (which is a serious possibility, because my mother-in-law has early-onset dementia but is physically fairly healthy), then Medicaid will be the only thing letting them continue to live there instead of moving in with us.

    If anyone tries to tell me this is about “the poor,” they’re asking for an earful.

  12. 12
    danimal says:

    @Political Observer: The GOP confidence game sure gets old. I wonder if it even works any more? Are there still morons who get discouraged from this kind of false bravado? I just laugh it off, it’s not even good trolling.

  13. 13
    Maude says:

    @Kay:
    Impoverishing people just isn’t good public policy. First Medicaid and then Medicare. The Financial sector is always saying that the problem is “entitlements”. No, it’s not. It’s the jobs having been shipped out and the low wages that are causing a lot of problems.

  14. 14
    Political Observer says:

    @PurpleGirl:

    Are you going to threaten to move to Canada after November 6th? Or just whine about “stupid voters” or “TEH ELECTIONZ WAZ STOOOOOOOLEEEEEEEEN !”

    Which will it be?

  15. 15

    Well, it’s going to happen whether you like it or not, because Romney is on the verge of victory, motherfuckers.

    Ah, let the masochism shine through.

    Dems will have 51-54 in the Senate. And if Romney wins, Reid will definitely keep the filibuster in place.

    So, no. “It” won’t be happening. At least not next year.

  16. 16
    Political Observer says:

    @danimal:

    Romney is so confident about NC and FL he’s thinking about pulling out of both. They’re rock-solid, rock-ribbed Republican red states now. Today Florida is as much of a red state as Mississippi.

  17. 17
    quannlace says:

    Well, it’s going to happen whether you like it or not, because Romney is on the verge of victory, motherfuckers.

    Hey, glad you’re admitting that Romney and Ryan want to fuck the country over.

    the votes in Ohio—a REPUBLICAN Secretary of State.

    And that you’re admitting Republicans are doing everything they can do to ommit voter fraud. Good job, ass.

  18. 18
    Political Observer says:

    @quannlace:

    They’re doing everything possible to put Ohio in the Romney column. I’ll just leave it at that. ;)

  19. 19
    japa21 says:

    @Political Observer: PO, so you admit the Republicans can only win by cheating. Thank you.

  20. 20
    Jeff Spender says:

    @Political Observer:

    Hey, man. What’s with the language? You’re starting to sound unhinged, not funny.

  21. 21
    Political Observer says:

    @Judas Escargot, Acerbic Prophet of the Mighty Potato God:

    There will be enough Blue Dogs who will go along with the Romney Agenda in the name of “civility” and “bipartisanship” that I’m not worried.

  22. 22
    flukebucket says:

    @PurpleGirl:

    I am pretty sure he gets paid for each response he gets so the trick is to not respond. Starve the beast!

  23. 23
    japa21 says:

    I have heard, but cannot verify, that if Medicaid block grants are given to the states, there is no way to hold the states to actually using that money for Medicaid and they can use the money for whatever purpose they want. Can somebody speak to this?

  24. 24
    dmsilev says:

    PO is a living example of what Jon Chait was talking about this morning, that the Romney camp is desperately trying to run a “we’re on a roll” bluff aimed at the gullible.

  25. 25
    Svensker says:

    Can we ban P.O.? I know the Management doesn’t like to ban folks, but he contributes absolutely nothing, ever, unlike some other trolls who do actually occasionally say something of interest. In the meantime, he fairly succesfully derails threads. Kick his skinny little ass out, I say.

  26. 26
    scav says:

    Better than polls is the insant use of agression and abuse by PO: he was so cheerful an idiot once. Now scarey things are penetrating even into that cranium.

  27. 27
    Jeff Spender says:

    I think I may have convinced someone to vote for Obama who I was sure was going to vote for Romney.

    I only had to use a little logic and underscore how a Romney Administration would adversely effect his family.

    It’s funny how a convincing argument and some facts can actually get people to admit they may be wrong sometimes.

  28. 28
    SatanicPanic says:

    @Political Observer: Another dead giveaway that you’re a parody troll- Bishop Romney is not paying people to use that kind of language.

  29. 29
    Richard says:

    A while back here in Arizona, there was a debate about cutting Medicaid in the state legislature. One of the GOPers basically let the cat out of the bag as far as the national plan is. In response to objections about large numbers of people getting dumped from the state Medicaid program by the state GOP, his response was essentially “you ain’t seen nothing yet” compared to when the GOPers in Washington get their way. The implication was that over 90% of people would no longer be covered.

  30. 30

    @Political Observer:
    Also, no. The Blue Dogs are gone. Swept out by the Tea Party in 2010.

    Besides, Sen. Warren will never let your guys win :P

  31. 31
    japa21 says:

    According to Ipsos, Romney could win Ohio through chicanery but still lose.

    Ipsos projects that Obama holds an edge in the most hotly contested states, including Florida, Virginia and Ohio, and is likely to win by a relatively comfortable margin of 322 electoral votes to 206 electoral votes.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....lp00000003

  32. 32
    Culture of Truth says:

    smell that freedom!!… oh look a new ipad

  33. 33
    Chris says:

    Am I the only one that thinks there’s something ludicrous about the people who hold up the DMV* as the be-all-and-end-all of How Government Totally Sucks now claiming that we should totally give Medicaid to the states because they can run it more efficiently?

    *As opposed to the U.S. military, the FBI, and “Medicare,” as in “Keep your government off of,” which are run by the feds.

  34. 34
    Nicole says:

    Not to mention, if Medicare turns into a coupon program ($8000 off your private health insurance!) it will mean hospitals will no longer be required to treat the uninsured, since there will be no Medicaid reimbursements to lose. So, Grandma living at home and the poor dying in the street. Welcome back, 19th Century!

  35. 35
    Culture of Truth says:

    Obama could lose NC, Florida, Virginia, Colorado, Arizona and either New Hamsphire or Wisconsin and still win as long as he wins Ohio.

  36. 36
    Culture of Truth says:

    Send Medicaid to the counties! Much more efficient!

  37. 37
    chopper says:

    @Political Observer:

    americans are committing suicide by the thousands at the gates of baghdad!

  38. 38
    handy says:

    I would say obvious troll is obvious but it gets results. Every. Single. Time.

    As for Romney-Ryan’s on-record plan to cut $750 billion from Medicaid, boy it would sure be nice if a prominent Dem politician running a high-stakes national campaign would have pointed that out during a widely watched televised event, say like a debate or something. Oh well.

  39. 39
    danimal says:

    @japa21: TANF (welfare) was block granted as part of welfare reform. While there is some requirement to spend TANF funds on welfare recipients (Maintenance of Effort-MOE), states have a wide latitude in spending the money. Have you wondered why, during the most severe recession in 70 years, the size of the welfare rolls stayed fairly flat? It’s because states chose to spend the block grant money backfilling other programs for the poor and made eligibility for aid much more difficult.

    If Medicaid is block granted, expect something similar. A certain amount will be required for patient services, and the rest can be spent on anything related to health care or medicine. I expect a lot of shiny, new medical facilities in the state capitals and a huge elimination of basic care for the poor, the sick and the non-voting population.

    It all depends on the details, and good luck getting a detailed plan before the bill is passed at midnight of some artificial budget deadline.

  40. 40
    Triassic Sands says:

    There is no plausible real world scenario in which there would not be huge cuts in Medicaid services under Romney’s plan.

    States are not suddenly going to start raising taxes to make up for the disappearance of federal funding. I live in Washington State, with a Democratic governor and legislature, and for the past several years they have been chipping away at Medicaid services. And Washington is one of the more generous states in this regard.

    Last night, once again, Barack Obama failed to make the case for Medicaid. If there has been one issue that has been completely absent from Obama’s reelection campaign, I’d say it is Medicaid (and similarly SNAP). Following Obama, one would never know that Medicaid even exists or that it faces any kind of threat at all from Romney.

    Nothing is more instructive about what kind of person Mitt Romney is or what kind of a president he would be than his plans for Medicaid and SNAP. Yet, the president has passed on every opportunity to make Medicaid/SNAP an issue. Gone are the days when the Democratic candidate for president champions the needs of the most vulnerable Americans.

    Romney can tout his wonderful “cost saving plan” for Medicaid and Obama doesn’t even respond with a brief description of the disaster that would be for the poor and elderly.

    On some issues, when Romney has criticized the president, Obama has come charging back with an aggressive response and retaliation. Not so on Medicaid or SNAP. One of the few areas where Romney has been at all specific — gutting programs for the poor — has elicited silence from Obama.

    After the Democratic convention, I mentioned the stellar job Clinton did in his speech of spelling out the importance of Medicaid and the danger it faces from a Romney presidency. Then, when I noted the absence of any follow-up by Obama, a commenter speculated that it was because they had decided on a division of labor and didn’t want duplication (yeah, because re-emphasizing something critical is so wasteful). That might have been plausible then, but subsequently Obama has been consistently silent on the threat Romney poses to the poor. If I could ask Obama one question, it would be “Why are you ignoring the poor and disabled?”

    Obviously, this has been a high-level strategic decision made by the Obama campaign — ignore Medicaid and SNAP. That doesn’t say very good things about who Obama is as a person, candidate, or president.

  41. 41
    Herbal Infusion Bagger says:

    Romney is so confident about NC and FL he’s thinking about pulling out of both. They’re rock-solid, rock-ribbed Republican red states now. Today Florida is as much of a red state as Mississippi.

    He’s abandoned PA, TPM Polltracker showing him ahead by only 0.4% in FL. Latest NH poll showing Obama 9 points ahead from U. New Hampshire, who presumably know their state. Nevada and Wisconsin widening for Obama, which makes a path without Ohio is harder for Romney. And poll averages have Obama 2% up in OH – larger than Romney’s margin in FL. So Romney pulling out of FL and NC may be more of a Hail Mary to put resources into OH than a sign of strength.

    The differences between Likely and Registered voters that you see in Gallup mean you’re putting a lot of faith in their likely voter models.

    We’ll see how much the robopolls like Gallup and Rasmussen that exclude cellphones compare against better quality polling methods in two weeks time.

    Basically, Romney’s whiplash-inducing attempt to move to the center last night is either a sign that his internal swing state polls are either looking (a) really good or (b) really bad. I’m not seeing any sign of an immanent collapse of Obama’s EV count in the public polls, so I’m guessing it’s (b).

  42. 42
    jayackroyd says:

    Something I really wish people would routinely include in pieces on Medicaid is that it is the insurance program of last resort for everybody. We all know somebody, in our extended network of family and friends who have ended up needing Medicaid–usually an elderly relative who (or someone with power of attorney) sells the house, and gives up all of his or her assets to qualify for Medicaid funded nursing home care.

    But it’s true for everyone, that if everything craps out for you, Medicaid is how you are going to receive medical care.

  43. 43
    Citizen Alan says:

    @Political Observer:

    And pie’d.

  44. 44
    handy says:

    @Herbal Infusion Bagger:

    If they ever write a book about why Romney lost, I imagine his deciding to switch the deck chairs around in some of these states will come up prominently.

  45. 45
    Cassidy says:

    @Triassic Sands: That was quite possibly the most asinine, full of shit thing I have read today and this thread is full of the barking jackass (PO).

    It says a lot about who he is? Really? Are you that fucking stupid? Were you dropped on your head? All the shit he has put up with, all the bigotry and not once losing his cool, all the good things he’s signed into law and supported and yet, little ol’ jackass you has the gall to say he’s not a good person because he hasn’t mentioned Medicaid or SNAP this campaign season.

    With friends like you…

  46. 46
    Enhanced Mooching Techniques says:

    @Political Observer:

    There will be enough Blue Dogs who will go along with the Romney Agenda in the name of “civility” and “bipartisanship” that I’m not worried.

    Then explain the smell of utter fear in your posts over Romney might win. It’s been painfully obvious in all of the posts you have here that you’re a conservative who wants Obama to win yet refuses to admit to it to himself.

    And BTW, I do love how you blame us progressed for your personal intellectual cowardice.

  47. 47
  48. 48
    japa21 says:

    @Triassic Sands: I don’t think you are right. I have heard him talk about it and then there is a little thing like running ads.

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/.....n-Medicaid

  49. 49
    pseudonymous in nc says:

    PO, totes adorbz!

  50. 50
    Sour Kraut says:

    @PurpleGirl:

    @some guy: And further, women, stop working full time because you’ll have to stay home to take care of your parents/grandparents since they won’t be able to have that home aide any more.

    Don’t worry, Romney will encourage your boss to let you go home at a decent hour so you get get dinner on the table for everybody.

  51. 51
    Scott S. says:

    @Svensker: Let’s not ban him. Let’s treat him like Michael Brutsch.

  52. 52
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Triassic Sands:

    Yet, the president has passed on every opportunity to make Medicaid/SNAP an issue. Gone are the days when the Democratic candidate for president champions the needs of the most vulnerable Americans.

    Yes, because the Democratic president doesn’t need to talk about it anymore. It’s all part of Obamacare, which includes the largest increase in Medicaid funding in years.

    Why the fuck should Obama spend his time talking about what he’s going to do for Medicaid when it’s already written into law what he’s going to do for Medicaid through the end of 2014 and beyond?

    Like it or not, Medicaid is dead as a divisive issue on the Democratic side — we love it, we fund it, we’re making sure everyone either has their own health insurance or is covered by Medicaid. There is no debate left to have as far as we’re concerned.

  53. 53
    pat says:

    PO: so you admit you have to steal the election in Ohio, right?

  54. 54
    Cacti says:

    @Svensker:

    Can we ban P.O.? I know the Management doesn’t like to ban folks, but he contributes absolutely nothing, ever, unlike some other trolls who do actually occasionally say something of interest. In the meantime, he fairly succesfully derails threads. Kick his skinny little ass out, I say.

    Hear, hear.

    He’s not even an opposing view. He just pops in, spams, and never comments on anything remotely topical.

  55. 55
    gogol's wife says:

    @Cassidy:

    Thank you.

  56. 56
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Cacti:

    Well, there was the one time when he was convinced that the fact that you could take a graduate-level humanities course in “The Phallus” meant that people could actually declare their major as “The Phallus” and would receive their degrees that way.

    I’m still laughing about that one, but maybe that’s why he doesn’t post anything else anymore.

  57. 57
    Lurking Canadian says:

    @Political Observer: I apologize to everybody for feeding the troll, but I must ask this:

    You have been at this for roughly nine months now. Are you aware that in all that time, you have never, not ONCE, given a reason why the majority of your countrymen should vote for this clown? You have given plenty of reasons why you think he’s going to win, mostly revolving around voter ID laws and other forms of disenfranchisement, if not (as today) outright fraud, and you certainly seem to think it’ll be good for Obama to lose, but as far as I can tell, not even you, the most rocked-ribbedy supporter Romney has, can come up with a single reason why he’s the man for the job.

    It’s kind of sad, really, to see such devotion to such an utterly vacuous cause.

  58. 58
    Surreal American says:

    Kick his skinny little ass out, I say.

    Objection: Assumes facts not in evidence.

  59. 59
    Cacti says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    Well, there was the one time when he was convinced that the fact that you could take a graduate-level humanities course in “The Phallus” meant that people could actually declare their major as “The Phallus” and would receive their degrees that way.

    He seems to be getting progressively (haha) unhinged.

    Maybe it’s because the aggregate sites are showing Willard with a ceiling of 256 electoral votes, even if he carries everything that leans his way, plus the last true tossup states (CO & VA).

  60. 60
    Schlemizel says:

    OK – this is OT but who can wait for an open thread when they just discovered another REpublican busted for multiple counts of child sexual abuse?

    http://www.delawareonline.com/.....dyssey=mod|breaking|text|Home

  61. 61
    Walker says:

    I am convinced that PO is a DougJ-style spoof. Some of the posts last night were just too spooftastic.

  62. 62
    rlrr says:

    @Schlemizel:

    Soon to be identified as a Democrat by Fox “News”…

  63. 63
    gene108 says:

    @Maude:

    It’s the jobs having been shipped out and the low wages that are causing a lot of problems.

    I think the bigger problem is the lack of adequate social safety nets in the U.S., so whatever job shocks we’ve experienced are that much more jarring, when compared to other industrialized countries.

    Globalization is here to stay. It’s helped raise the living standards of people around the world.

    Other countries aren’t rocked as hard as we are, because there’s less income inequality and better protection for people, who have been displaced from jobs.

    The fact that many people getting screwed by the current system keep voting for Republicans makes me think they (and us) get the government they deserve.

  64. 64
    SatanicPanic says:

    @Walker: This. My theory is that we haven’t have any good trolls in a while, so one of the FP’ers is just posting these to keep us busy. PO leaves too many obvious clues that it’s all a joke.

  65. 65
    El Cid says:

    @gene108: Actually, Latin American nations have been developing much more rapidly over the last decade not via increasing [ex]ports or simply aiding middle classes fallen behind, but focusing on internal development including the domestic market.

    The huge improvements throughout South America — largely unnoticed in this country — contrast wildly with the typical narrative of nations being able to lift themselves up via trade.

    If trade and exports increase but the benefits of those industry don’t actually arrive to the lives of those local workers in those industry, the increased trade itself is not appearing as a benefit at the kitchen table.

    In addition, many of those nations crafted trade agreements for regional trade which are more inclusive of principles of national development, labor protection, etc., and not the wilding of regulation erasure which so many people in the US have been convinced equals ‘trade’.

  66. 66
    Kay says:

    @Triassic Sands:

    Expanding Medicaid under the PPACA had absolutely no political benefit for Democrats. Chuck Schumer was the only one who was honest enough to say it during the health care debate, and he was right. That doesn’t mean they shouldn’t have done it, but the facts are that poor people don’t vote in the same numbers (as a percentage) as people in other economic groups, they don’t donate, they don’t have powerful lobbyists, and their opinions aren’t courted by political media or pundits.

    I think a lot of the objection to the PPACA is because it expands Medicaid, actually. The one and only reason Democrats were able to expand Medicaid prior to the PPACA is because they were expanding it to cover children (S-CHIP), and even there, Bush vetoed it twice.

  67. 67
    rikryah says:

    TELL IT, KAY.

    keep on telling it!!

  68. 68
    El Cid says:

    @Kay: Yes, but poor people steal all the elections for Democrats by working covertly for the mastermind ACORN organization which helps them vote thousands of times under all sorts of names and that’s of course the only way Democrats ever win.

  69. 69
    The Moar You Know says:

    Can we ban P.O.?

    @Svensker: He’s been banned four or five times now. Doesn’t stop him.

    Truth is, if you’re determined, you cannot be banned from a public forum on the internet in any meaningful or lasting way. I think John’s policy is sound – better to just carry on, do your thing, write your thoughts, and not spend 24/7 trollhunting, as they have the advantage.

    The alternatives are either pre-approved comments (like the system at Pat Lang’s, which only works because he’ll publish a LOT of stuff he does not personally agree with) or private forums, which sort of defeat the purpose of a political discussion site – that’s what Facebook is for, to lock out the idiotic thoughts and stupid opinions of those you disagree with.

  70. 70
    Redshift says:

    @SatanicPanic: I don’t buy the idea that the FP’ers think we need trolls, so they’ll provide them if there aren’t any. I don’t think there’s any reason to believe that they want to derail discussion of their own posts, or each others’.

    And if it was DougJ, it would be more entertaining.

    As for the evidence that it’s all a joke, I refer you to Poe’s Law.

  71. 71
    Chris says:

    @Svensker:

    Yea, verily do I add mine voice to those calling for the Banning of the Troll. (I generally support that with all trolls, except the funny ones, but PO isn’t funny).

  72. 72
    JPL says:

    @Cacti: His purpose is to derail the topic at hand. Since he understands Medicaid is an important issue, he doesn’t want to highlight Romney’s views on it.

  73. 73
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @JPL: his purpose is to say “you suck.” There’s nothing beyond that.

  74. 74
    Chris says:

    @The Moar You Know:

    Truth is, if you’re determined, you cannot be banned from a public forum on the internet in any meaningful or lasting way.

    Wait, I didn’t know that – if that’s true, what happened to Matoko? Did she just reincarnate as a conservative and become Political Observer?

  75. 75
    Cassidy says:

    @Chris: M_C still lurks and will email Cole on occassion (I believe). I think she just stopped commenting. She was always a little batshit, but I liked her.

  76. 76
    Redshift says:

    Virginia voters — GOS has a tool to send a message the VA Board of Elections demanding a full investigation of registration fraud. Here’s my edited version of the message:

    Virginia State Board of Elections,
    __
    Please ask the Virginia attorney general to investigate the actions of Colin Small, a voter registration supervisor who was arrested and charged with 13 counts of voter registration fraud. Small was associated with a company that has been implicated in mass registration fraud in Florida, so the presumption should be a reasonable suspicion that it is more widespread. Furthermore, the assertion that it cannot have been partisan because we have nonpartisan registration is disingenuous, to say the least. There is nothing preventing a voter-registration worker from asking voters who they are supporting, or engaging in phony “surveys” and other tactics to find out.
    __
    We need to maintain public confidence in our voter registration system, and an investigation to determine if Small’s actions were more widespread would help accomplish that.

  77. 77
    Lurking Canadian says:

    @Chris: I saw one post under her byline the other day, but I assumed it was somebody else pretending, because it didn’t have any of her hobby horse issues or…er…unique phraseology.

    I missed whatever event led to her final banishment, but it must have had a real effect on her, because it seems to have stuck.

  78. 78
    Kay says:

    @Triassic Sands:

    I go back and forth, but I’d have to say that I lean towards thinking the only reason we have any safety net programs at all is most of them run under conservative/media radar. I was relieved no one paid any attention to Medicaid in the health care fake-debate. Poor people were going to lose if anyone had remembered they existed.

    When Paul Ryan was looking for programs to cut, he zeroed right in Medicaid. It’s easy, politically.

  79. 79
    SatanicPanic says:

    @Redshift: I’m aware of all internet traditions, but PO is too obviously doing things like positively quoting Halperin or contributing to the snark thread a few weeks back and actually getting the point (which PO almost never does otherwise). I deal with lots of RW trolls and PO just doesn’t ring true. The FP’er thing is maybe a bit out there, but I’m convinced PO is just someone’s idea of a joke.

  80. 80
    muddy says:

    @Triassic Sands: In addition to bringing out the wingnuts by going on and on about food stamps, Obama ought also to make a big hairy deal about the stringent gun control law he plans to enact.

  81. 81
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @muddy: also, reviving the Fairness Doctrine and being clear that “Democrat party” is not the preferred idiom. All the stuff voters most want to hear as they decide which candidate they like better.

  82. 82
    red dog says:

    @Political Observer: Who-so-ever you are the rock you hide under is about to become a rolling stone and leave you in the daylight.

  83. 83
    Chris says:

    @Cassidy:

    I thought she got banned for racism. And since for once she didn’t come back, I assumed there was in fact a way of making it stick. Huh.

  84. 84
    Redshift says:

    @SatanicPanic: Hmm, could be. It’s been effective at derailing threads a fair amount of the time, though, so my money is on paid troll rather than true believer, but parody can never be ruled out.

  85. 85
    geg6 says:

    @Lurking Canadian:

    Yeah, I’ve wondered about how that came about myself. I must have missed the final blowup.

  86. 86
    SatanicPanic says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    being clear that “Democrat party” is not the preferred idiom

    Man, every time I hear Romney say that I am annoyed. “I can work with Democrat Congressmen…” aaarrrgh you just insulted them

  87. 87
    gelfling545 says:

    @Political Observer: Weren’t you the one just suggesting up above that the Ohio REPUBLICAN Secretary of State was planning to steal the election?

  88. 88
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @SatanicPanic: I put it in the same box as “nookyaler.” Designed to annoy, so I refuse to let it bother me.

  89. 89
    Davis X. Machina says:

    @Kay: Means-testing anything turns it into a target. The program becomes ‘welfare’ and starts to die.

    I cringe every time I hear about means-testing SS OASDI.

  90. 90
    The Moar You Know says:

    The huge improvements throughout South America—largely unnoticed in this country—contrast wildly with the typical narrative of nations being able to lift themselves up via trade.

    @El Cid: I’m one of the few Americans left who will go across the border to Tijuana these days. Let’s just say the dangerous are blown wildly out of proportion.

    You’re not kidding about improvements. The first time I went, in 1975, TJ looked worse than most of Africa does today (I just went there last year).

    The last time I was down I honestly started looking at what it might cost to rent a beachside apartment down there for weekends. It’s still isn’t totally safe by any stretch, but I’m willing to bet I stand more of a chance getting shot in most of the Deep South than Tijuana. The city is nice, opera, museums, nice hotels and restaurants (but you go for the street food, which is epic) and cultural and human interaction that I don’t see in the states anymore. Full internet and power. Cell phone service is ungodly pricey but fully available. You can drink the water now, even, but no one does.

    Oh, and Coke with real sugar.

    All this in a nation with staggering, real problems, but the one thing that Mexico does NOT do is but shit from overseas with no regard for what they get in return. Unlike us.

  91. 91
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @gelfling545: sometimes his shtick is that the people all love Republicans, which is why they always win, and sometimes it’s that Republicans will fight dirty and steal what they can’t win legitimately. Either way, the point is the same one a little brother intends when he sticks out his tongue. “Lookit, I’m being annoying! This is you! Wait, you’re not looking!”

  92. 92
    Ridnik Chrome says:

    @Enhanced Mooching Techniques: Reads troll like a magazine…

  93. 93
    Redshift says:

    @FlipYrWhig: Yeah, the basic intent most times seems to be to discourage Democratic voters (along with the standard troll thing of being a dick and killing reasonable conversation.) It is a bit usual how often it goes to the point about stealing the election, but since this one never talks about issues or any reason to vote Republican, I guess the alternatives are limited.

  94. 94
    catclub says:

    @The Moar You Know: I used to think that silent banning of the troll was the best way.
    (They can see their posts, but no one else can.)

    Now I think that putting all responses to the troll into a silent ban would work better. Troll does not see any responses
    to respond to. All righteous persons who have told troll that troll is wrong, see their righteous response.

  95. 95
    The Moar You Know says:

    Wait, I didn’t know that – if that’s true, what happened to Matoko? Did she just reincarnate as a conservative and become Political Observer?

    @Chris: She left. Still lurks, rarely comments, but she’s more or less done with us. She knew enough re: proxies and the like that you couldn’t keep her out no matter what you tried for more than about five minutes or so.

  96. 96
    Belafon (formerly anonevent) says:

    I guess some of the FPers are like Romney: Need a rest after a debate.

  97. 97
    Joel says:

    Troll – DNF.

  98. 98
    Joel says:

    Troll – DNF.

  99. 99
    The Moar You Know says:

    Man, every time I hear Romney say that I am annoyed. “I can work with Democrat Congressmen…” aaarrrgh you just insulted them

    @SatanicPanic: This I do not get. Who fucking cares what they call us? “Democrat” is certainly preferable to “traitor” circa 2003, so things are improving, no?

    Appropriate the word if it bothers you so much. The way the GOP rolls, you do that and by next year they’ll be whining that “well, they call each other that, why can’t I?”

  100. 100
    Herbal Infusion Bagger says:

    You have been at this for roughly nine months now. Are you aware that in all that time, you have never, not ONCE, given a reason why the majority of your countrymen should vote for this clown?

    Because his contract specifies the number of posts he has to make to liberal blogs but not the quality. Fact is, that he’s counterproductive: liberals concerned about potential Pres. Romney are more likely to vote, liberals complacent about the election being in the bag are less likely to vote.

    90% chance we won’t see Political Observer after November 7th.

  101. 101
    Political Observer says:

    Latest word is that Romney’s INSURMOUNTABLE LEAD with white voters is what’s going to win him this election.

    Media CW also moving from debate draw to narrow Romney victory. BO not controlling the narrative at all.

  102. 102
    Political Observer says:

    @Herbal Infusion Bagger:

    I’ll be here on November 7th, and all through election night…I’ll enjoy rubbing your faces in the shit of your defeat.

  103. 103
    Political Observer says:

    ROMNEY TAKES THE LEAD IN FAVORABILITY, more bad news for Democrats!

  104. 104
    kay says:

    @Davis X. Machina:

    I can’t think of any working class/ middle class program or entity that has benefitted from media-conservative scrutiny.

    Remember when they found out teachers still had pensions? How’d that go?

    We may as well paint a target on our backs.

    “Look over there! Sarah Palin said something! Chase her!”

    I remember the absolute look of despair on the poor Democratic member of Congress who was sent out to explain living wills during The Dumbest Health Care Debate Ever, in 2009-10. He was talking so fast I was afraid he was going to pass out.

  105. 105
    Political Observer says:

    Virginia, NC, and FL so securely in Romney’s column that he’s now going to pound the ground in the Midwest to clinch victory, pulling resources out of the Atlantic South and POURING them into Ohio to hammer home a fatal blow to BHO.

  106. 106
    danielx says:

    But it’s all good because it will help our Galtian overlords to create jobs – as in when people die from lack of medical care it will create job openings. So there you go.

  107. 107
    SatanicPanic says:

    @The Moar You Know: It’s not so much the term, it’s the nerve of putting it in statement about how he is all bipartisany. I can work with those Demoncrap traitors across the aisle. And the media doesn’t point it out either. I know, I know, I’m asking too much but still.

  108. 108
    Political Observer says:

    RASMUSSEN: Romney within striking distance in MN, bad news for BO in WI?

  109. 109
    Chyron HR says:

    Tune in November 7th when we’ll hear ReaIity Check whining that Obama’s popular vote lead is so small it’s a tie, and a tie must mean a ROMNEY VICTORY!

    Also he’ll ignore Obama’s 300+ electoral votes and continue jerk off to North Carolina as though it’s a GIANT VICTORY! for a Republican to win there.

    Bookmark it, libs. You will wonder how I was able to call this.

  110. 110
    Cacti says:

    I can’t blame the troll for running up his post count.

    That Adelson money will be drying up here in two weeks.

  111. 111
    Political Observer says:

    @Cacti:

    Adelson is about to provide a nice, big shot of cold hard cash into Ohio for the final two weeks.

  112. 112
    Jay in Oregon says:

    @Herbal Infusion Bagger:
    The only exception I can think of would be if PO gets new directives to push the “Obama totally stole this election! Second Amendment remedies!” angle.

  113. 113
    Political Observer says:

    @Chyron HR:

    LOL how the hell do you get BHO to over 300 electoral votes? The only talk in the media of anyone getting over 300 EVs at this point is Romney, who could quite possibly win 317 at this point.

  114. 114
    Cacti says:

    @Chyron HR:

    Also he’ll ignore Obama’s 300+ electoral votes and continue jerk off to North Carolina as though it’s a GIANT VICTORY! for a Republican to win there

    Rmoney’s ceiling for the election is 256.

    Troll knows it.

    Conventional wisdom that a Republican can’t win without Ohio will be true.

  115. 115
    Political Observer says:

    @Cacti:

    Once again, Romney is so confident about FL, NC, VA and even CO now that he’s going to pull up from those states and HAMMER HOME Ohio with enough resources to pull it out. Wisconsin, too. Those two states are about to be subject to a political blitzkrieg the likes of which has NEVER BEEN SEEN BEFORE in American politics. It will stun everybody.

  116. 116
    FormerSwingVoter says:

    @Political Observer: Seriously, dude, what are you doing here?

  117. 117
    Political Observer says:

    Mitt Romney is in the catbird’s seat as of now, and it’s reflected in the CW that he continues to surge.

    The Romney Bandwagon is picking up more and more passengers by the day. Next Stop: Columbus!

  118. 118
    Political Observer says:

    @FormerSwingVoter:

    Cluing the Obama-bots into a little thing called “reality”, and preparing them to hear the inevitable phrase “President-Elect Romney” in just about two weeks…the wailing and gnashing of teeth will be a site to behold.

  119. 119
    Comrade Scrutinizer says:

    @Political Observer: Give it a rest, okay DougJ?

  120. 120
    The Moar You Know says:

    @SatanicPanic: It is the term that’s the problem for you or you wouldn’t give a shit.

    Look, that’s all they have. Name calling. Name calling that goes over the heads of 98% of the entire public, I might add. Shit, I used it all the time until some jerkoff at DKos decided to get up in my face about it. Didn’t know it was an insult!

    Bottom line is that I really don’t see the problem, if they think it’s insulting let them do it, because November 7th the same guy who was president on the 6th will still be president and the guy who got under your skin last night so much by dropping two letters from a noun will just be another entry in the ever-growing Republican Hall Of Presidential Losers.

    Shit, I think I’m gonna use it as my new nym. Don’t get all pissy with me, guys, it’ll still be the same Moar you’ve all come to know and love.

  121. 121
    Democrat Partisan Asshole says:

    And here we go…new nym time! Howd’ya like me now, fuckers?

  122. 122
    SatanicPanic says:

    @The Moar You Know: Well, however you want to look at it, it’s annoying. Being annoyed, put off, disturbed, creeped-out, etc., with Romney is a pretty natural reaction IMHO.

  123. 123
    Belafon (formerly anonevent) says:

    @Political Observer: I love it when your snark shows.

  124. 124
    Cacti says:

    Ceiling of 256, but he’ll end up with less.

  125. 125
    rlrr says:

    Has anybody noticed our resident troll becomes more active when President Obama’s poll numbers improve?

  126. 126
    kay says:

    @Political Observer:

    You haven’t contributed a single comment on the topic of the thread. It’s rude. I’m sure you were raised poorly, but you should try to pick up some social skills from adults around you. I’m in my car, so can’t babysit you right now, but the next time you come in on one of my threads and dominate the topic with the same comment repeated 40 times, I’ll remove your comments.

    Learn how to act.

  127. 127
    Belafon (formerly anonevent) says:

    @The Moar You Know: You’re right, it’s just a name. Probably the only thing annoying about it is that it’s meat for the right, it annoys the left, and the other part of the population doesn’t get that it shows just how childish Romney is being by using it. It’s that last part that’s truly annoying.

  128. 128
    lacp says:

    What did you people do to it? It’s gone completely berserk.

  129. 129
    MikeJ says:

    @Belafon (formerly anonevent): It’s a shibboleth. It’s how you identify morons. You can simply ignore anything they say after that.

  130. 130
    Cacti says:

    @rlrr:

    Has anybody noticed our resident troll becomes more active when President Obama’s poll numbers improve?

    Indeedy.

    For all its yammering about momentum, Rmoney’s odds peaked at 37 percent about a week and a half ago at 538. His EV share never hit 270, and Obama’s never dropped below 280. Presently, Willard has receded to 29 percent odds.

    VICTORY!

  131. 131
    Ridnik Chrome says:

    @FormerSwingVoter: He still hasn’t answered LC’s question about why he thinks a Romney victory would be good for the country. Seriously, what was so awesome about the Bush years that anyone would want to bring them back?

  132. 132
    MikeJ says:

    @MikeJ: Perhaps we should refer to Republicans as Ephraimites.

  133. 133
    Cacti says:

    @lacp:

    What did you people do to it? It’s gone completely berserk.

    I think the “horses and bayonets” bitch slapping that Willard got finally sent it over the edge.

  134. 134
    SatanicPanic says:

    @rlrr: That Jon Chait article that everyone’s been linking to nailed it- this is the “We’re WINNING” bluff favored by Rove, Charlie Sheen and now Eric Fernstrom.

  135. 135
    Cacti says:

    @MikeJ:

    Perhaps we should refer to Republicans as Ephraimites.

    That would actually be ironic in Romney’s case, as Mormons think of themselves as the spiritual heirs of Ephraim.

  136. 136
    Davis X. Machina says:

    @lacp: The sheer volume of pie it’s consuming will kill it off soon enough.

  137. 137
    mainmati says:

    @Political Observer: Wow, that’s going to take a looooong time if he’s doing it by himself.

    Moran.

  138. 138
    Ash Can says:

    I continue to think PO is a spoof. Think about what all it’s said here:

    — A Romney/Ryan administration would be bad for the country

    –The Ohio state board of elections is crooked

    — The polls are a joke

    — Regardless of what the polls say, it’s foolish to sit on your hands and not get involved with campaigning/GOTV

    Yes, PO has said all this here — you just have to read between the lines a little. It’s all there. (Nevertheless, Kay’s doing the right thing. Enough does get to be enough after a while.)

  139. 139
    MikeJ says:

    @Cacti: The Ephraimites were the ones that could not pronounce Democraticshibboleth correctly, and because of it, 42,000 of them were mown down.

    I did not know about the connection to the Mormons. I find that hilarious.

  140. 140
    Enhanced Mooching Techniques says:

    @Ridnik Chrome:

    Reads troll like a magazine…

    Not hard really. Most people talk to themselves on the Intertubes, trolls more so. Read that way just about every post from him is “I’m scared and it’s your fault”

  141. 141
    Democrat Partisan Asshole says:

    Being annoyed, put off, disturbed, creeped-out, etc., with Romney is a pretty natural reaction IMHO.

    @SatanicPanic: On that, good sir, we agree.

  142. 142
    catclub says:

    I have noticed that Romney is trending up today on intrade and Iowa election markets – and the stock market went down.

    I think this also happened the last time Romney had a boost in the polls. Must be some very mixed feelings of Obama haters on Wall street.

  143. 143
    Herbal Infusion Bagger says:

    @Political Observer:

    And on November 8th, it’s time to send the invoice and dust off the resume, right?

    ‘Cos otherwise you would have said “and I’ll be sticking around afterwards?”

  144. 144
    replicnt6 says:

    People, people, we (and the rest of the world) have our math, but PO has the Real Math. He knows shit nobody else on earth knows. Kneel before his mighty proclamation of UNLIMITED CORPORATE CASH!

  145. 145
    Herbal Infusion Bagger says:

    Virginia, NC, and FL so securely in Romney’s column that he’s now going to pound the ground in the Midwest to clinch victory,

    I believe the reporting is one staffer moving from NC to Ohio.
    Oh yeah. Pouring those resources in.

    So, you paid hourly or by the post? I’m guessing hourly, but with a minimum number of posts per blog.

    What’s the hourly rate, BTW? I’d guess about $30-40/hour – ‘cos I’d reckon the political consulting firm is billing your time as a “Political Social Media Consultant” or whatever can’t be charging Crossroads or Romney or whoever’s paying the bills less than $120/hour, and a 5x markup would be too high a margin to justify, and Romney and the RW haven’t managed getting value for their campaign $$$ to well, so overpaying you would be easy to do.

  146. 146
    Ash Can says:

    More points emphasized by PO:

    — Romney wouldn’t be doing nearly as well in the polls if it weren’t for the number of racist whites in this nation

    — The Romney campaign’s ground game is a joke

    Out of the mouth of a spoof comes the truth.

  147. 147
    Political Observer says:

    @Herbal Infusion Bagger:

    I’ll be here well into the Romney Presidency supporting his positive agenda for America.

    Ohio is moving our way, the momentum is with us, and we are on the verge of an historic victory.

  148. 148
    Yutsano says:

    @Political Observer: And grammar fails too. You still have yet to say what Willard will do positively for the country.

  149. 149
    pseudonymous in nc says:

    Trolly is so cute, you just want to pat it on its ickle hayd and see if it wets its pretend diaper again.

  150. 150
    replicnt6 says:

    … and we are on the verge of an historic victory.

    PO’s got a point here: in every other presidential general election between a white guy and a black guy, the white guy’s gotten stomped. The rich white man has been oppressed long enough: Mitt’s gonna bring this one home.

  151. 151
    Yutsano says:

    And mea maxima culpa Kay, I fed the beast. Bad me!

  152. 152
    Seanly says:

    @Comrade Scrutinizer:

    Word. The parody troll is a little headache inducing.

  153. 153
    Cacti says:

    I agree with Political derp that Romney’s result will be historic.

    He’ll be the first candidate to lose 4 different “home” states: Michigan, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and California.

    Utah will pull through for him though. lol

  154. 154
    Chyron HR says:

    Obviously 538’s model (which says that Obama has a 72% chance of winning Ohio) is flawed, because it fails to factor in Romney being the White Horse Messiah who’s destined to become President.

    (This is what Republicans actually believe.)

  155. 155
    Herbal Infusion Bagger says:

    @Political Observer:

    No you won’t. You only added that after you realized you’d revealed you’d be out of here by November 7th. And you haven’t denied you’re being paid.

    Come on – “Romney’s positive agenda for America”? No GOP true believer who gives a sh*t enough to come onto hostile territory is that enthusiastic about Romney. You’re pasting from the script sheet, man.

  156. 156
    Redshift says:

    @Ash Can: One more — the Teabagger Hoveround voter-suppression brigade is going to keep Democrats from voting in Ohio, too!

  157. 157
    Herbal Infusion Bagger says:

    @Political Observer:

    Ohio is moving our way, the momentum is with us

    Too bad it’s not showing up at the polls. 538 shows a 7-point decline since last week on the chances of Romney being elected. Similar with Sam Wang’s meta-margin. I know this is what your script tells you to peddle, but it’s a fricking hard sell, and the urgency you’re selling it makes you look like a paid shill or a parody.

    The race is close, but you’ve stalled at closing the gap, and your guys had poor strategy by piddling away too many assets by overpaying for ad time, dumping money into states that were at best long shots (PA, WI) and having a weak ground game. But in the end, Romney’s position on GM is what’s going to likely doom him in OH, and (as likely as not) cost him the presidency.

    So, unfortunately, no staff position for you with a political appointee post-election.

  158. 158
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Herbal Infusion Bagger: do you really care what the answer is?

  159. 159
    El Cid says:

    OK I DUN BEEN POSTIN HERE TO THEESE LOSERS ALL DAY WHERE’S MAH 15 CENT I GOT TO DO THIS A LOT JUST TO GET MORE FUNYUNS AND YOU SAID YOU’D GET ME MONEY FROM YESTERDAY GIMME MAH 15 CENT

  160. 160
    gex says:

    @SatanicPanic: Plus it helps sell the “they stole the election” whining that is sure to come. The same way the dissection of the polling sampling methods is designed to make an Obama victory seem like it came out of nowhere because we all know what the polls REALLY showed.

  161. 161
    Redshift says:

    @Herbal Infusion Bagger: To be fair, they didn’t have a lot better options than dumping money into PA and WI. They pretty much saturated Ohio, and if they don’t win that, PA or WI is part of pretty much any combination of 270+ they have even a slight chance of putting together.

    Perhaps they could have spent more hiring a good ground game with UNLIMITED CORPORATE CASH, but I believe that even post-Citizens United, there are still difficult constraints on that. And the fact is, there really aren’t any solid large-scale GOTV companies out there for hire (as they discovered with Sproul, GOP electioneering consultants have discovered that grifting is more profitable than doing the work), and you can’t create one from scratch in the post-primary period.

  162. 162
    Herbal Infusion Bagger says:

    do you really care what the answer is?

    I would like to know what the hourly rate for PO is, just to know how much adding “Social Media blah blah Consulting” can plump up one’s billable rate in the GOP political field.

  163. 163
    1badbaba3 says:

    @kay: This may be the coolest thing evah written in these here parts. Truly, we are in the prescence of greatness. Ta.

  164. 164
  165. 165
    Triassic Sands says:

    @japa21:
    The ads are good news. Unfortunately, he’s not mentioning it to the national audience. He never mentioned it in his convention speech, nor has he mentioned it in any of the debates. Those were the four times he had national audiences.

    I guess I think a program of this importance, not to mention expense, needs a national audience. Without widespread support for Medicaid, it is going to continue to be subjected to cuts (on the state level) and attacks (by national Republicans). Ignoring it, fixes nothing.

  166. 166
    Triassic Sands says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    If Medicaid was a closed issue when the PPACA passed, the Supreme Court reopened it by making its expansion voluntary.

    I have always thought that it was a mistake to expand coverage by simply
    expanding Medicaid, which is already under assault, and not just by Republicans. Since Medicaid’s “savings” are achieved through lower reimbursement rates to doctors and hospitals, it is already unpopular with many health care professionals. In many places, it is difficult or impossible for Medicaid recipients to find doctors who will see and treat them. Dramatically increasing the rolls of Medicaid will only aggravate that problem. Having a Medicaid card, but no doctor is not a reasonable description of health care coverage. It might have been all right if the program enjoyed widespread support, but it doesn’t, and refusing to defend it isn’t going to help. Because so many Americans are un- or misinformed about Medicaid, it is easy for people to attack it, even many who will someday need its help.

    There is no debate left to have as far as we’re concerned.

    And if only Democrats were voting in the US I wouldn’t have written my comment.

    Unfortunately, the same can not be said for the majority of Americans.

  167. 167
    Triassic Sands says:

    @Kay:

    I understand your comment and concerns. And I don’t entirely disagree. But I think we’ve gone beyond that point. By using Medicaid to significantly expand health care coverage, Obama has aggravated one problem that already exists — Medicaid patients having trouble finding doctors (especially specialists) who will treat them. Medicaid has long been the target for right wing attacks, and having it fly under the radar, as you say, may have been the best approach. However, states have been cutting back on Medicaid for years now, and by adding millions of new people to the program, we have a situation where we need to dramatically increase support for the program. That can’t be accomplished by addressing a small number of targeted audiences (see japa21’s link above).

    If you ask most Americans about Medicaid, they are woefully un- and misinformed about the program. How can we expect people to support such an expensive program, if they don’t even understand it.

    On September 6, 2012 in the NYTimes:

    Medicaid has long conjured up images of inner-city clinics jammed with poor families. Its far less-visible role is as the only safety net for millions of middle-class people whose needs for long-term care, at home or in a nursing home, outlast their resources.

    With baby boomers and their parents living longer than ever, few families can count on their own money to go the distance. So while Medicare has drawn more attention in the election campaign, seniors and their families may have even more at stake in the future of Medicaid changes — those proposed, and others already under way. [emphasis mine – TS]

    Medicaid spends more than five times as much on each senior in long-term care as it does on each poor child, and even more per person on the disabled in long-term care.

    Romney not only doesn’t care about the so-called “47%,” he’s going after those who, whether they vote or donate to campaigns or not, are not able to defend themselves. I think that requires — morally — a national discussion. Clearly some people disagree.

  168. 168
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Triassic Sands:

    If Medicaid was a closed issue when the PPACA passed, the Supreme Court reopened it by making its expansion voluntary.

    Careful when you drag those goalposts around — you can hurt your back that way.

    Other people on the thread have pointed to the many, many ways the Obama campaign has been talking about Medicaid in stump speeches and commercials, so I’m just going to ignore your fact-free trolling on this from now on.

  169. 169
    graves007 says:

    Their goal is to reign in debt/spending, not give a shit about who gets covered or not. If Mittens wins the election then boohoo to everyone who gets a fuck sandwich as a result. Maybe a little more suffering is what Americans dumb enough to vote for Mitt need. Then again, we are talking about a moron electorate who though George W. Potatohead deserved 2 terms.

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

Comments are closed.