Democrats holding “I love Obamacare” rally on Friday

Pat Powers

South Dakota Democrats are holding an “I love Obamacare” rally in Sioux Falls on Friday:

Since South Dakota is one of the states that has opposed the measure the strongest, and where the new Government entitlement is the least popular, I wonder how that’s going to go. And who is going to show up in support of it?

34 thoughts on “Democrats holding “I love Obamacare” rally on Friday”

  1. “Since South Dakota is one of the states that has opposed the measure the strongest, and where the new Government entitlement is the least popular…”

    Seriously? Has anyone told Republican Governor Dennis Daugaard this?

    “I wonder how that’s going to go. And who is going to show up in support of it?”

    Oh, I predict 75 to 100 people at least, you just watch…… And actually, county Democratic meetings have more than doubled in attendance since the election of Trump…No wonder some choose to not have any town hall meetings…

  2. “And actually, county Democratic meetings have more than doubled in attendance since the election of Trump”

    Doubles as in there were only 2 that showed up for County Democratic meetings and now you have 4? 🙂

        1. Listen, I am not saying that the Democrats are going to win big in ’18, but don’t be surprised if for the first time in years, that they fill out the entire constitutional slate for every office from dog catcher to governor.

          Women especially are upset and are coming out in troves to the Party’s meetings. In fact, west river Republican sheriffs will probably have opponents in ’18 for the first time since the days of Kneip or Berry…. 😉 Happy Friday!

          1. Trove, definition 1: a collection of objects.

            So is that how you see women or did you mean “droves”?

            Are the women coming out in droves (and how many do you mean by that) the ones who support abortion? What are they upset about? Are they concerned that people are being asked to take responsibility for themselves for a change?

            1. The reality scares you, doesn’t it? First Trump, then the Patriots, then “Moonlight,” and then the SDSU comeback, it is obviously a continual phenomenon that has yet to quit…. Thus, Republicans should be worried about 2018….

              Oh, thanks for the english lesson by the way. I am confident that you were sincere. Some I guess, have no sympathy for dyslexia…. But you probably tolerate it given your tolerance of “Dubya.”

          2. When your group gets out of that sedan to protest please warn them not to obstruct traffic, no pushing or punching, and no damaging of property ok like breaking windows or burning cars?

            1. Good points, especially in a state where some want to criminalize assembly….

  3. You just can’t make this up.

    There are just some fights you don’t fight. The SDDP needs to focus on being relevant at the county, legislative, and state level and need to be able to think beyond their base.

    Taking a generally unpopular stand to appeal to your base is just about the most stupid thing I can imagine.

    1. Then why did Republican Governor Daugaard want to bring the ACA to South Dakota?

        1. It’s called “Profiles of Courage.” He was right and I believe only the unexpected election of Trump, and thus the potential ill fate of the ACA, has truly prevented it.

      2. Because he has turned into a soft and squishy establishment type. I’m glad his time as governor is coming to an end. His spine has turned to jelly over time.

    2. Troy says: “Taking a generally unpopular stand to appeal to your base is just about the most stupid thing I can imagine.”

      Perhaps you missed the 2016 Presidential campaign.

  4. I certainly don’t have all of the answers when it comes to healthcare. But if hospitals cannot turn people away, especially in emergency rooms, someone will always be paying for the uninsured. Assuming that they have little money themselves, that bill is picked up by those that are insured or by the government. Right?

    The Democrats prefer the government. Who do Republicans feel should pick up the tab? Should the poor be forced to pay tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars over many years?

    And should Republicans support medicaid at all? What’s the difference philosophically between that concept and Obamacare?

  5. Should be the “I’m being forced to pay more for less and not necessarily the doctor of my choosing” Rally

    Obamacare must be killed

    1. “Less?” I suppose you could say that if you forget how the ACA got rid of the “donut hole” for Medicare, extended the life of Medicare and Medicaid, allows you to have an annual physical at no additional cost, kids can stay on your insurance plan until 26, there is no longer a pre-existing condition clause, free contraception, and no longer any life time expenditure caps….

    2. I guess EO thinks it’s all okey-dokey for the government to force people to pay for insurance they maybe don’t want and maybe don’t need. If someone has enough ready cash that they can pay for their day-to-day medical bills, why should they lose the option to get a simple catastrophic plan? I know that liberals think that the almighty government is the answer, but then they have a lot of folks in their party who are unable to think for themselves and want a nanny state to do their thinking for them

      1. “I guess EO thinks it’s all okey-dokey for the government to force people to pay for insurance they maybe don’t want and maybe don’t need.”

        You and I live in South Dakota most likely. I will also assume, that like me, you are a homeowner. Do you really think that when you pay your homeowners insurance you are not paying into a fund that also funds hurricane claims, which as of yet South Dakotans have never had to claim or deal with?

        The rest of your comments are merely conjecture…….

  6. Trump has a valid point when he says the easiest course for the GOP would be to do nothing and let the ACA continue to implode. In fact, the AHCA under consideration in the House could serve as the “well, we tried” rebuttal when things fall apart.

    Given the “solution” for Medicaid expansion in the AHCA, SD is looking like it was very smart to avoid Medicaid expansion. Seeing the federal share of costs drop from 90% to 60% will cause much stress in statehouses, not to mention enrolees and providers.

    Be wary of the “20 million covered” number. That number was an *estimate* issued by Obama’s HHS. Heritage Foundation researchers looked at actual enrollments and determined that 11 million people received insurance through Medicaid expansion and only 2-3 million received coverage through the exchanges.

    Some are claiming the ACA was successful in bending the health insurance cost curve. That’s only true if you don’t include increased deductibles and copays associated with post-ACA policies. And the insurance companies aren’t getting right off the exchanges – most (including Avera and Sanford) have lost money by underestimating coverage costs and/or selling relatively low-priced policies in order to secure market share for themselves and their health systems.

    1. It’s ironic that you would quote the Heritage Foundation to indict the ACA, when the Foundation was the one which originally conceived the ACA in response to HillaryCare back in ’93-94.

      Your “60%” concern, however is offset by continue declines in health care costs in the future do to a proactive preventive health care policy, as well as through greater savings to the health care industry in general, where once unpaid health care bills, which are paid under the ACA, will negate any greater costs to the State’s part of Medicaid in the future because the greater costs will not exist because of health bills paid which were once not paid are then paid under the ACA as preventive bills verus emergency bills with the latter much more expensive for the overall system absent the ACA’s existence.

      “Some are claiming the ACA was successful in bending the health insurance cost curve. That’s only true if you don’t include increased deductibles and copays associated with post-ACA policies.”

      But does not your above mentioned contention not only prove my alleged “preventative” health care policy financial benefit, but it also speaks to the hidden genius of the ACA. And keep in mind, everyone talks about these high deductibles, but deductibles were going up on a yearly basis before the ACA too, but thanks to the ACA (and the Heritage Foundation of 1993-94, too) more people are covered today with a far better preventative health care agenda to bring costs down now and into the future…

      1. “Genius” and “ACA” don’t seem to belong in the same sentence unless you’re saying, “It was pure genius of the democrats to sabotage America’s health care system with the false promises of the ACA; it will give the government the opportunity to take over health care in it’s entirety once the ACA collapses the American health care system.”

        That maybe works.

        1. You want to see collapse, then just let the Republicans pass TrumpCare, that will definitely be an emergency situation….

    1. I’m at work and my wife is at work, so I can’t be there to watch the idiotfest. Frequently on my way to work I see a lady driving her vehicle which has a “Proud Democrat” bumpersticker on the rear window; I keep asking myself, “What does she have to be proud of”?

      1. The list is endless and doesn’t include a dependency upon the obvious failures of “trickle-down” economics….

    2. Romney’s “53%” don’t all work 8 to 5 anymore nor necessarily on Fridays…

  8. LOL. I’ve seen the same bumper sticker and had just a bit of a different take.

    I have a friend who is a Knicks fan which haven’t been good since the days of Clyde and Willis. He has a sticker that says “Proud of my Knicks.” When asked about it he says he is proud of who they used to be hoping they might someday be as they were.

    Maybe she’s Proud of the anti-Communist, hard on Cuba, tax cutting, fiscally responsible Kennedy Democrat years? Probably not because she’d just be a Republican. 🙂

    1. Do you mean the President Kennedy who called for peaceful co-existence in his June of 1963 American University speech long before it was fashionable. Do you mean the President Kennedy who ran on a 1960 party platform that called for what would later be known as Medicare and Medicaid? Do you mean the President Kennedy who was hard on Cuba, but who obviously would have understood fifty years later, and 25+ plus years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, that the best way to change Cuba today is not with an invasion but with a willingness towards peaceful coexistence, cooperation and trade. Do you mean the President Kennedy who promoted the first form of supply-side economics, since Coolidge, with his tax cut in 1962 that was paid for in time and place without adding to the national debt like Reagan and Bush43’s tax cuts…. Yah, there is a lot be proud as a Democrats, whether we are talking about JFK or Barack Obama some fifty years later…. But I think it is fair to say that the Nixon of 1960 was not a Russian lover nor apologist like Trump is today…. Just how proud are some of you?

Comments are closed.