Hellobee Boards

@boiledpnut: This. Thank you. I couldn't have said it more perfectly myself.

@Rock n Roll: Did Romney come up with a better plan? Because from what I've heard, he just says he wants to repeal Obamacare but he doesn't seem to be offering an alternative plan (an alternative plan to the one that he created in the first place).

@prettylizy: I was saying to my husband last night that what the USA really needs is someone sort of like Harper: fiscally conservative, but doesn't want to touch the abortion or gay marriage issues with a ten foot pole!

@dookie32: I don't think so, I think he just keeps saying he will repeal it and that's what those voters are looking for.

And I also think it's funny that he's sooo against it when he ushered in the plan in Massachusetts. That is what I hate most about politics- the only way to get elected is to make it in one of the major parties, but the only way to do that is to be a cookie cutter diehard that believes in all of the party's platform. So, I feel the candidates are rarely realistic about their own true feelings and are constantly pandering to the base. That makes them very distasteful to those outside their base.

@sslm: thanks!

I do want to point out that obamacare was a compromise. Democrats wanted single payer, republicans wanted the mandate.

@sslm: And when it comes to Romney, he would make Bush-era tax cuts permanent -- tax cuts that are estimated to cost us more than $1 trillion over the next decade, according to the CBO. His plan to cut the deficit is incomplete and lacks Congressional support. He's put forth no concrete plan for dealing with Social Security or Medicare. Repealing Obamacare will end up costing more money (ETA: $109 billion), and as a stated priority for his administration, doesn't do much more for the economy than you point out Obama did by focusing on passing the plan himself. He would deregulate the financial industry, while deregulation was largely responsible for the 2007-2008 financial crisis. He would deregulate fossil fuels, which would not only be obviously detrimental to the environment, but eliminate opportunities for job growth created by explorations into alternatives to fossil fuels.

Essentially, I fail to see how he would change a thing -- at least in a positive manner.

@honeybear: I agree with this in theory, but I think health care is a universal right. I don't think it's fair if one state gets it and another doesn't. Why should vaccines be covered in Massachusetts and not Virginia, you know? Maybe it's because my state would never vote for it and I still think people here deserve to benefit from it.

@Rock n Roll: @jedeve: Just to play the devil's advocate, he could believe it's a state issue and not a federal issue.

@dookie32: I think you've missed the point. It's the fact that he's not even talking to anyone. In order for the republicans to compromise with Obama, Obama has to talk to them. You're completely out to lunch if you think I'm actually suggesting more golf is the key to fixing their problems.

@jedeve: I understand. But the means to the end have significance. Consider that if the ACA's individual mandate had been upheld under the Commerce Clause, as the administration argued it should have been, it could have meant that a future Republican president and Republican Congress could enact social legislation that you may not like so much.

@Rock n Roll: I do not doubt that Romney fully appreciates the federalism issues here. He went to Harvard Law, and I assume they teach the basics of the Constitution there. So did President Obama, of course. But federalism arguments make for wonky sound bites, so perhaps that is why the argument was not quite so clear. I agree that pols often tailor their message to their audience.