Could Republicans Be Running Scared At Reaction Of Trump Voters To Plan To Destroy ObamaCare?

The Republican Party, despite their majorities in both houses of Congress, are discovering that they have alarmed many Trump supporters–white Rust Belt voters–with their plan to destroy ObamaCare and leave millions of people uninsured.

The right wing does not care about health care, and Paul Ryan has come across as too gleeful at the thought of the destruction of the health care system.

This could be the beginning of a revolt which could upend the Republican majority in the House of Representatives, where a gain of 24 seats would make the Democrats the majority.

The Senate is more difficult for the Democrats to gain in 2018, as 25 D seats are up and only 8 R seats.

But the Senate seems much more cautious about destroying ObamaCare without considering the damage done to Trump supporters, who desperately need health care, and suddenly see the Affordable Care Act, also known as ObamaCare, as something they are not willing to give up for ideological fanaticism of the GOP.

The Health Care battle has just begun, and will reverberate throughout the nation, and Donald Trump is likely to see a massive reaction against him if the Trump voters become victims.

12 comments on “Could Republicans Be Running Scared At Reaction Of Trump Voters To Plan To Destroy ObamaCare?

  1. D March 14, 2017 11:26 pm

    Midterms are usually gains for the White House opposition party. Since the 17th Amendement (elections of U.S. senators directly by the states’ voting citizens) from the 1910s, and taking a 100-year period of 1914 to 2014, which number 26 election cycles, there were only three midterm election gains for the president’s party: 1934, 1998, and 2002.

    Since the presidency has been flipped to the Republicans, with 45th president of the United States, Donald Trump, the 2018 midterm election gains should be with the Democratic Party.

    Will they?

    It’s only March 2017. We’re talking about 20 months from now.

    My own opinion about the Democratic Party has been expressed here. That the Democratic Party has to become a real opposition to the Republican Party. Social issues are not enough. They’re too close on economics, military, and national security. And that renders them brands. Like Coca-Cola [with its red background; Team Red] vs. Pepsi-Cola [with its blue background; Team Blue].

    My own feeling is that Nancy Pelosi, having said, post-Election 2016, that the Democrats don’t want change, and people who agree…they’re trusting that Trump will be a screwup—and people will get desperate to usher the Democrats back into power. I think that may very well fail with Trump getting re-elected in 2020. The party needs to become truly progressive on economics and needs to stop embracing the military industrial complex.

    I think this video says a lot…

    http://youtu.be/-zvKljC0RTY

  2. Pragmatic Progressive March 15, 2017 12:08 pm

    HRC did not lose because she failed to articulate a message aimed at working class Americans. She made concern with the needs of working America a regular topic in her campaign stops. What she didn’t do was make outrageous promises. Trump did. He did it a lot. HRC talked about training and preparing workers to fit into the new economy as their old economy jobs were being lost. She did that often. She didn’t promise to bring the old economy back. Trump did. He won’t.

    Trump told folks what they wanted to hear. A batch of fairy tales. HRC did the best she could to keep it real. Lets stop pretending that Trump had a better message or ran a better campaign. He lied frequently and on a grand scale. And people foolishly believed him. After four years those people will be no better off and many will probably be worse off. I imagine most Democratic strategists know that and are planning for that time.

  3. Princess Leia March 15, 2017 12:09 pm

    Seconded, Pragmatic.

    Winning Progressive’s latest blog entry says it best: Trump’s support of the House GOP’s effort to take away health insurance from tens of millions of Americans in order to provide tax giveaways to the wealthy should end any thought that Trump is a populist. He is not. He just uses fake populist rhetoric to cover for the fact that he is a xenophobic authoritarian.

    https://www.facebook.com/WinningProgressive/posts/1586448278032339

  4. Southern Liberal March 15, 2017 1:52 pm

    The first test for the Democratic party will be the governor’s race for our state (VA) this Fall.

  5. D March 16, 2017 12:18 am

    Pragmatic Progressive writes, “HRC did not lose because she failed to articulate a message aimed at working class Americans. She made concern with the needs of working America a regular topic in her campaign stops. What she didn’t do was make outrageous promises. Trump did. He did it a lot. HRC talked about training and preparing workers to fit into the new economy as their old economy jobs were being lost. She did that often. She didn’t promise to bring the old economy back. Trump did. He won’t.”

    In other words, Hillary offered familiar platitudes. People in their late-40s/early-50s displaced, because they lost their $50,000+ jobs with the economic meltdown in 2008, and into 2009, and couldn’t get jobs paying on the level they used to make…they should go through re-training. They should do that because, in the market of the last 30 years, employers generally prefer to hire people in their 50s over those in their 20s.

    That’s been a familiar tune from Democrats. But, it’s not the solution to the issue of Election 2016 (and today): economics, a.k.a. “income inequality.”

    It is not transformative. It is standard. It is not a motivator.

    “Trump told folks what they wanted to hear.”

    That’s…connecting. He was connecting with voters. If you’re a politician, and especially if you’re seeking the presidency of the United States, you need and will want to do this.

    ” A batch of fairy tales.”

    People don’t consider their livelihoods being gone, and wanting them back, a fairy tale. One candidate offers to deliver what had been lost. The other one does not. If you are a self-identifying independent (and Party ID recently shows independents outnumber Republicans and Democrats), who do you vote for? Do you vote for the one who says there is a way or do you vote for the one who says give up?

    They voted for Trump.

    The self-identified independents voted for Trump with 46 to Hillary’s 42 percent nationwide. (See: http://www.cnn.com/election/results/exit-polls/national/president .) While giving Trump a +4 victory nationally, independents also carried for Trump in all six of his pickup states: Florida +6 (Trump 47%; Hillary 43%); Iowa +13 (Trump 51%; Hillary 38%); Michigan +16 (Trump 52%; Hillary 36%); Ohio +14 (Trump 51%; Hillary 37%); Pennsylvania +7 (Trump 48%; Hillary 41%); Wisconsin +10 (Trump 50%; Hillary 40%).

    “HRC did the best she could to keep it real. Lets stop pretending that Trump had a better message or ran a better campaign. He lied frequently and on a grand scale. And people foolishly believed him. After four years those people will be no better off and many will probably be worse off. I imagine most Democratic strategists know that and are planning for that time.”

    Donald Trump, not Hillary Clinton, won.

    Trump gave people a reason to vote for what he was offering; Hillary did not.

    “She made concern with the needs of working America a regular topic in her campaign stops. What she didn’t do was make outrageous promises.”

    “Concern” isn’t enough. She was the 2016 Democratic nominee for president of the United States, for crying out loud. Voters want to know what YOU, as a MAJOR-PARTY NOMINEE, will do FOR them. WHY should THEY…VOTE FOR YOU?

    “She didn’t promise to bring the old economy back. Trump did.”

    And that, right there, should get you to understand.

    Hillary wasn’t going to do anything or enough for them while Trump would.

    A part of what you’re saying is what you believe is real. But, people’s perceptions are certainly not all the same. That is not the same thing as getting votes and winning elections. You have to have vision. You to have an agenda. You have to tell the voters what you envision and where you want to take them. You have to sell it the people. And Trump did that better than Hillary. THAT is a big part of what Hillary’s defenders, and her apologists, refuse to see. They remain in denial.

  6. Former Republican March 16, 2017 10:59 am

    Pragmatic and Leia are correct about this. The people who voted for Donald Trump were fools. Donald Trump does nothing that doesn’t benefit Donald Trump directly. He doesn’t care who gets screwed in the process. I have no sympathy for Trump voters whatsoever. The ones I do care about are the people who didn’t vote for him. They are going to be paying the price for those foolish people’s choices.

  7. Southern Liberal March 16, 2017 11:17 am

    Trump was offering the past, which favored white male dominance. Hillary was offering the future. The popular vote shows that most voters do not want to go back to the past.

  8. Princess Leia March 28, 2017 12:10 pm

    Winning Progressive was one of the first progressive blogs that we started following. They are on Facebook now.

    Here’s some commentary that Winning Progressive cross-posted on another blog regarding critiquing Democrats:
    http://addictinginfo.org/2011/12/22/the-strategic-failure-of-the-purist-lefts-persistent-attacks-on-president-obama/

    Like them, we believe that any fair analysis of a Democrat must address not only the shortcomings, but also the successes.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.