Hey, remember when Democrats thought that Obamacare wouldn’t still be an issue by Election Day? – And by that I mean Election Day, 2010. Turns out, not so much:
…in the political battle over Obamacare, now in its fifth smash year, the news [that Obama was unilaterally ignoring parts of the employer mandate] was one more indication that the front has moved to the next presidential election and beyond to the incoming administration.
The law “will be on the front burner in Washington and in every Republican campaign through 2016,” predicts Patrick Davis, a GOP consultant in Colorado.
That election likely will mark the fourth straight election cycle in which the ACA is a major issue, if not the central issue—an eternity in politics. Call it Obama’s Forever War.
I am predisposed to think kindly of a pundit who makes a Joe Haldeman reference: but I must note that there is a reason why Obamacare is still an issue after five years. The Democrats brutally shoved this law down the throat of the American people, ruthlessly ignoring public opinion the entire time. These tactics might have been glossed over, except that Obamacare has hit none of its projected implementation checkpoints, has not improved coverage, has not increased coverage, and will not push down prices. And now we are all waiting with [bated**] breath to see what disasters will be inflicted on group insurance plans – and the fallout from that will make last winter’s controversy over individual insurance plans being canceled, mutated, or out-and-out degraded look like a high school Debate Night.
I mention all of this because the above article shows that there are still Democratic strategists out there who seem to think that this is all just another controversy. It’s not. It’s a epic-level disaster for Democrats who aren’t named Barack Obama*. And this issue will not go away until Obamacare does.
*Barack Obama is excluded from that solely because on the strength of his re-election team. I freely admit it: he had a great technical shop, and one that was much better than Romney’s. Fortunately, I am not the only person who realizes that.
[**As noted in comments. I’d normally come up with a clever sleazy rationalization for using ‘baited’ for ‘bated,’ except that I have a cold.]