Plurality now approves of Obamacare

[Angel of Death]

...for the first since the Presidential election.

[King]

Tax day was good to the American people.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

Once they realized the downfall of America was gonna be gay wedding cakes they cooled on the whole Obamacare conspiracy thing.  I'll take it, I guess.

[Lief 🗽]

The American People are singing President Barack Obama's praises from the mountain tops, content in the security their new, affordable health insurance has provided them, and are now joining together in an unprecedented nationwide movement to give the man the third term he so obviously deserves.

[Likely Voter]

This chart is exemplifies everything wrong with politics:

[King]

Yea, "No Impact" should really be 80-90% in all three categories.

[Likely Voter]

Yea, "No Impact" should really be 80-90% in all three categories.

True, unless you have kids and/or a pre-existing condition then you are almost sure to be in the 'helped' category.

But the worst thing is that there is a massive partisan divide in the 'hurt' category. I would love to see how those people said they were hurt. Sure some (very few) people come out losers, but there is no way that it is weighted by party to such a significant amount.

[Skill and Chance]

Yea, "No Impact" should really be 80-90% in all three categories.

True, unless you have kids and/or a pre-existing condition then you are almost sure to be in the 'helped' category.

But the worst thing is that there is a massive partisan divide in the 'hurt' category. I would love to see how those people said they were hurt. Sure some (very few) people come out losers, but there is no way that it is weighted by party to such a significant amount.

Many people who already had generous employer-sponsored plans that exceeded the minimum Obamacare standards are finding that they now cover less with more cost sharing.  They are generally upper-middle class with white collar jobs and probably vote R outside of the Northeast and CA.

[Likely Voter]

Yea, "No Impact" should really be 80-90% in all three categories.

True, unless you have kids and/or a pre-existing condition then you are almost sure to be in the 'helped' category.

But the worst thing is that there is a massive partisan divide in the 'hurt' category. I would love to see how those people said they were hurt. Sure some (very few) people come out losers, but there is no way that it is weighted by party to such a significant amount.

Many people who already had generous employer-sponsored plans that exceeded the minimum Obamacare standards are finding that they now cover less with more cost sharing.  They are generally upper-middle class with white collar jobs and probably vote R outside of the Northeast and CA.

yes I am aware of that but there is no way that adds up to 38% of Republicans. I suspect that most of that 38% think their taxes have been raised and/or Medicare benefits have been cut (both of which are untrue, unless they were on one of those 'Cadillac' plans). Just look at the chart over awareness of the costs of Obamacare, the ignorance goes up most with Republicans.

[Skill and Chance]

Yea, "No Impact" should really be 80-90% in all three categories.

True, unless you have kids and/or a pre-existing condition then you are almost sure to be in the 'helped' category.

But the worst thing is that there is a massive partisan divide in the 'hurt' category. I would love to see how those people said they were hurt. Sure some (very few) people come out losers, but there is no way that it is weighted by party to such a significant amount.

Many people who already had generous employer-sponsored plans that exceeded the minimum Obamacare standards are finding that they now cover less with more cost sharing.  They are generally upper-middle class with white collar jobs and probably vote R outside of the Northeast and CA.

yes I am aware of that but there is no way that adds up to 38% of Republicans. I suspect that most of that 38% think their taxes have been raised and/or Medicare benefits have been cut (both of which are untrue, unless they were on one of those 'Cadillac' plans). Just look at the chart over awareness of the costs of Obamacare, the ignorance goes up most with Republicans.

You don't think that $100K-500K managerial types are ~30% of Republicans nationally?  Clearly the lower end of that range votes Dem in some metro areas, but throw in small business owners who formerly had no role in their employees' healthcare and liked it that way and that should get you there.

[Samantha]

Yea, "No Impact" should really be 80-90% in all three categories.

True, unless you have kids and/or a pre-existing condition then you are almost sure to be in the 'helped' category.

But the worst thing is that there is a massive partisan divide in the 'hurt' category. I would love to see how those people said they were hurt. Sure some (very few) people come out losers, but there is no way that it is weighted by party to such a significant amount.

I am a perfectly healthy 27 year old female and my employer already offers insurance (no subsidy)—I have never opted into my employers health plan because I can not afford to. Since the ACA took effect...I still can't afford it, but am being forced to buy it anyhow for the benefit of private insurance companies the country. How have I benefited? How am I better off being forced to spend ~100$ a month I don't have for a product that I don't need (or even believe in ethically)? If anything, it's a big part of those 'helped me' Democrats who are deluding themselves—it's mostly healthy millenials who got the shaft.

[Ebsy]

We can't sacrifice the healthcare system so that a few Millennials can be irresponsible. Anyone with any basic understanding of healthcare policy understands that the insurance pool can only operate if there are enough young and healthy people subsidizing more elderly and ill. If you don't like it, well, no one cares.

[Likely Voter]

Of course Obamacare has some 'losers', notably those on Cadillac plans and young healthy people who dont want insurance or want those cheap crappy plans that got cancelled.  My point is that this doesn't add up to 22% of Americans and more notably it isn't heavily distributed to Republicans. There are just more Republicans that think they are being hurt. My bet is that this is mostly because of the misinformation in right wing media and especially the lie that Obamacare was cutting Medicare benefits (used extensively in the last three elections).

Again this chart shows that there is a high correlation between party and lack of knowledge on the law:

[IceSpear]

Or people are just reflexively saying it helped/hurt based on their party affiliation with no actual reason to justify it. Occam's Razor.

[AggregateDemand]

When you have nothing to brag about and no real achievements, you let everyone know that a plurality support your plans. Pathetic.

[Lief 🗽]

um... this thread is literally us bragging about Obama's achievements.

[Joe Republic]

And I'm pretty sure Obamacare is no longer in the "plans" stage.

[Nutmeg]

And I'm pretty sure Obamacare is no longer in the "plans" stage.

It's definitely still just a plan, because Obama is a incompetent do-nothing who has actively worked to undermine all that is good about America but can't get anything done except consolidate all power to do nothing in himself and use it for bad.

[Ebsy]

And I'm pretty sure Obamacare is no longer in the "plans" stage.

It's definitely still just a plan, because Obama is a incompetent do-nothing who has actively worked to undermine all that is good about America but can't get anything done except consolidate all power to do nothing in himself and use it for bad.

So... many... contradictions...

[Brewer]

And I'm pretty sure Obamacare is no longer in the "plans" stage.

It's definitely still just a plan, because Obama is a incompetent do-nothing who has actively worked to undermine all that is good about America but can't get anything done except consolidate all power to do nothing in himself and use it for bad.

That was absolutely incomprehensible.

[Flake]

And I'm pretty sure Obamacare is no longer in the "plans" stage.

It's definitely still just a plan, because Obama is a incompetent do-nothing who has actively worked to undermine all that is good about America but can't get anything done except consolidate all power to do nothing in himself and use it for bad.

Would you like to resubmit that post?

[publicunofficial]

When you have nothing to brag about and no real achievements, you let everyone know that a plurality support your plans. Pathetic.

Yeah, conservatives are smart enough to know that real political achievement is passing laws and having nobody support them. It builds GRIT.

[Kushahontas]

We can't sacrifice the healthcare system so that a few Millennials can be irresponsible. Anyone with any basic understanding of healthcare policy understands that the insurance pool can only operate if there are enough young and healthy people subsidizing more elderly and ill. If you don't like it, well, no one cares.

[bedstuy]

Yea, "No Impact" should really be 80-90% in all three categories.

True, unless you have kids and/or a pre-existing condition then you are almost sure to be in the 'helped' category.

But the worst thing is that there is a massive partisan divide in the 'hurt' category. I would love to see how those people said they were hurt. Sure some (very few) people come out losers, but there is no way that it is weighted by party to such a significant amount.

I am a perfectly healthy 27 year old female and my employer already offers insurance (no subsidy)—I have never opted into my employers health plan because I can not afford to. Since the ACA took effect...I still can't afford it, but am being forced to buy it anyhow for the benefit of private insurance companies the country. How have I benefited? How am I better off being forced to spend ~100$ a month I don't have for a product that I don't need (or even believe in ethically)? If anything, it's a big part of those 'helped me' Democrats who are deluding themselves—it's mostly healthy millenials who got the shaft.

You have health insurance, which you needed. 

There is no such thing as being healthy and not needed health insurance.  Healthy people get hit my buses or get a chronic illness, and suddenly, they're no longer healthy people.  Maybe you want to believe you're immortal, but you are not.

[Slander and/or Libel]

Yea, "No Impact" should really be 80-90% in all three categories.

True, unless you have kids and/or a pre-existing condition then you are almost sure to be in the 'helped' category.

But the worst thing is that there is a massive partisan divide in the 'hurt' category. I would love to see how those people said they were hurt. Sure some (very few) people come out losers, but there is no way that it is weighted by party to such a significant amount.

I am a perfectly healthy 27 year old female and my employer already offers insurance (no subsidy)—I have never opted into my employers health plan because I can not afford to. Since the ACA took effect...I still can't afford it, but am being forced to buy it anyhow for the benefit of private insurance companies the country. How have I benefited? How am I better off being forced to spend ~100$ a month I don't have for a product that I don't need (or even believe in ethically)? If anything, it's a big part of those 'helped me' Democrats who are deluding themselves—it's mostly healthy millenials who got the shaft.

You have health insurance, which you needed. 

There is no such thing as being healthy and not needed health insurance.  Healthy people get hit my buses or get a chronic illness, and suddenly, they're no longer healthy people.  Maybe you want to believe you're immortal, but you are not.

Not to mention the fact that it seems pretty unlikely that there's employer-sponsored health care with no employer subsidy, right? Does this happen? Or am I just hopelessly cloistered?