By the way, a link for that story about Weiner. Which makes me even happier I was considerably on the fence about him. And guess what! The Democratic leadership were the ones calling on him to resign.
Let's talk about something relevant to the primary in the primary thread.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Citizens united is godly and we're kicking some ass now. Plus if the economy keeps sucking many working class Democrats won't have the extra cash to donate and will be too busy trying not to end up on the streets to go out and push for votes. So everyone one of those suckers out of a job is less money for the enemy.
And since many hardcore liberals are rich as fuck, they like lower taxes as well and will vote with their wallet when it comes down to it.
So all the working class democrats will be unemployed and won't have any money to give yet the huge numbers of super rich hardcore liberals are not going to make up for it via citizen's united, since that's something a "hardcore liberal" might do? Instead they're going pub?
MY HEAD ASPLODE
Also, "I will go any way on any social position in order to get spending cuts" doesn't really make you socially liberal!
Citizens united is godly and we're kicking some ass now. Plus if the economy keeps sucking many working class Democrats won't have the extra cash to donate and will be too busy trying not to end up on the streets to go out and push for votes. So everyone one of those suckers out of a job is less money for the enemy.
And since many hardcore liberals are rich as fuck, they like lower taxes as well and will vote with their wallet when it comes down to it.
So all the working class democrats will be unemployed and won't have any money to give yet the huge numbers of super rich hardcore liberals are not going to make up for it via citizen's united, since that's something a "hardcore liberal" might do? Instead they're going pub?
MY HEAD ASPLODE
Also, "I will go any way on any social position in order to get spending cuts" doesn't really make you socially liberal!
Citizens united is godly and we're kicking some ass now. Plus if the economy keeps sucking many working class Democrats won't have the extra cash to donate and will be too busy trying not to end up on the streets to go out and push for votes. So everyone one of those suckers out of a job is less money for the enemy.
And since many hardcore liberals are rich as fuck, they like lower taxes as well and will vote with their wallet when it comes down to it.
So all the working class democrats will be unemployed and won't have any money to give yet the huge numbers of super rich hardcore liberals are not going to make up for it via citizen's united, since that's something a "hardcore liberal" might do? Instead they're going pub?
MY HEAD ASPLODE
Also, "I will go any way on any social position in order to get spending cuts" doesn't really make you socially liberal!
Yes it does, my views or socially liberal but I vote on taxes and spending cuts and that alone. If you want support for gay marriage come over to our side, we have punchy and pie 8-) plus we party harder. Give us some votes, let's cut some taxes, and if enough of you come over you can vote in conservatives that support gay marriage and we can have that whole silly history behind us. The gays can get married and taxes will go down.
But if you're going to sit over there and vote against me, well, you're not supporting me so I don't owe you one thing. And if the people that are supporting me want to ban butt sex, well then a favor is a favor and we do owe them something for their vote. Is getting married important enough to you that you'll help us stop the government from robbing people? If so vote right and help us change the party, if you're not going to do that then I guess you didn't really care about it that much to begin with so why I should I give a rats ass. It's your problem now, you deal with it.
"in cities" is just a nice little racial dogwhistle
No it's not. Urban areas vote blue so attacking them is good policy. You punch the other guy and grin to your fans.
And the party of Anthony the race baiter Weiner does not get to talk about racial dog whistles. Quality progressive politics, playing on fear of black people.
you're not just a terrible attack dog for the GOP you're an awful human being
At least my side of the fence didn't spend a week defending a liar and a race baiter who sends dick shots to college students and texts 17 year olds from his office. I'd call that Liberal Lion an awful human being.
I just want to give money back to people who create jobs and support the cultural values (even though I don't agree with them one bit) of the people who well give us their votes.
Mitt's in it to win it, we just have to keep reminding people who hypocritical Democrats are, and that it's not OK if you are a liberal, and the economy is still in the shitter while our, well YOUR, president is waging a massively illegal war and trying to assassinate Americans and spying on good American citizens. At least Bush went to congress, Obama didn't even contend.
It's a winner, and I'm pretty sure the left will trip up on themselves. We can push them along, create KOS accounts and write up diaries complaining about the president to cause arguments and hope for a primary challenge.
I'm not saying that Republicans are inherently worse people than Democrats (they are), but going down the outrage path is really not one that you want to start down, because, you know, glass houses.
Also, "I will go any way on any social position in order to get spending cuts" doesn't really make you socially liberal!
It makes you Mitt Romney!
Is Global Climate Change considered a Social Issue?
I was mostly thinking about abortion. But he's had every position on every issue, so it could be anything.
Though I find his abortion stance (I don't care, what will get me elected) less abhorrent than Rick Santorum. Who's militantly pro-life unless his wife's life is in danger, in which case you can go ahead and induce delivery before the child is full term so it dies within hours. Which is totally not abortion.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
0
Options
Tiger BurningDig if you will, the pictureRegistered User, SolidSaints Tuberegular
Sir Landsharkresting shark faceRegistered Userregular
edited June 2011
I'd say all your blathering about Weiner's pics is a social issue, unless he was using taxpayer dollars in some way I wasn't aware of?
I was going to make a long-winded post about how I haven't once voted Republican but would have no problem voting for Paul over Obama if he got the nomination, but I'll let you guys play it out with this guy first. At least it will be entertaining.
Sir Landshark on
Please consider the environment before printing this post.
Also, "I will go any way on any social position in order to get spending cuts" doesn't really make you socially liberal!
It makes you Mitt Romney!
Is Global Climate Change considered a Social Issue?
I was mostly thinking about abortion. But he's had every position on every issue, so it could be anything.
Though I find his abortion stance (I don't care, what will get me elected) less abhorrent than Rick Santorum. Who's militantly pro-life unless his wife's life is in danger, in which case you can go ahead and induce delivery before the child is full term so it dies within hours. Which is totally not abortion.
Also, "I will go any way on any social position in order to get spending cuts" doesn't really make you socially liberal!
It makes you Mitt Romney!
Is Global Climate Change considered a Social Issue?
I was mostly thinking about abortion. But he's had every position on every issue, so it could be anything.
Though I find his abortion stance (I don't care, what will get me elected) less abhorrent than Rick Santorum. Who's militantly pro-life unless his wife's life is in danger, in which case you can go ahead and induce delivery before the child is full term so it dies within hours. Which is totally not abortion.
Citizens united is godly and we're kicking some ass now. Plus if the economy keeps sucking many working class Democrats won't have the extra cash to donate and will be too busy trying not to end up on the streets to go out and push for votes. So everyone one of those suckers out of a job is less money for the enemy.
And since many hardcore liberals are rich as fuck, they like lower taxes as well and will vote with their wallet when it comes down to it.
So all the working class democrats will be unemployed and won't have any money to give yet the huge numbers of super rich hardcore liberals are not going to make up for it via citizen's united, since that's something a "hardcore liberal" might do? Instead they're going pub?
MY HEAD ASPLODE
Also, "I will go any way on any social position in order to get spending cuts" doesn't really make you socially liberal!
Yes it does, my views or socially liberal but I vote on taxes and spending cuts and that alone. If you want support for gay marriage come over to our side, we have punchy and pie 8-) plus we party harder. Give us some votes, let's cut some taxes, and if enough of you come over you can vote in conservatives that support gay marriage and we can have that whole silly history behind us. The gays can get married and taxes will go down.
But if you're going to sit over there and vote against me, well, you're not supporting me so I don't owe you one thing. And if the people that are supporting me want to ban butt sex, well then a favor is a favor and we do owe them something for their vote. Is getting married important enough to you that you'll help us stop the government from robbing people? If so vote right and help us change the party, if you're not going to do that then I guess you didn't really care about it that much to begin with so why I should I give a rats ass. It's your problem now, you deal with it.
Well it's not really my problem, I'm Canadian (and on the left too which makes me actually socialist by American standards), I'm merely hoping that you guys don't shift to the right even more
If you don't care about deficits, you can cut taxes without spending cuts. As Obama has done.
People don't understand the economy and the dolts think it runs like a household. But cutting spending is something you can use as a carrot to some people. Plus we can use spending cuts on shiny liberal items (hello planned parent hood) to get them to cave on other things. And other spending, like say ethanol subsidies, is just stupid shit that screws up all sorts of other things and should be stopped because it's stupid, not because it's a money drain. I'm fine with funneling silly amounts of cash into Iowa, it's a red state.
First off, where did I say that I'm white. Second off I'm a social liberal, but social issues do not determine my vote at all. I could care less about the culture wars outside of how they can be used to win elections. I support gay marriage, I'm pro choice, and I'm an atheist. But none of those things impact how I vote one bit. That stuff is all bullshit for bloggers on both sides to get their collective panties in a wad over and to drag out the fools on both sides. And if either granting, or banning gay marriage can net a political advantage that gets some quality entitlement cuts, I'll support either. I honestly don't give a crap one way other the other.
Honestly, most of the time I disagree with the "no general politics thread" policy. Then one guy brings a politics related thread down to youtube levels on the one day he will ever post on the forums and it makes sense.
Now that we've re-established that the modern conservative movement has no coherent ideology beyond "cut taxes and hate liberals", how about that GOP primary?
So, what do you think will happen first, Rick Perry declaring he's running or Jon Huntsman pulling out of the race?
Lawndart on
0
Options
Sir Landsharkresting shark faceRegistered Userregular
edited June 2011
From the Santorum article, "The Santorums decided against aborting their baby. For Rick and Karen Santorum, the birth of their premature son, Gabriel Michael, on October 11, 1996, confirmed their beliefs about partial-birth abortion; the idea that the state might condone violence against this tiny but undeniably human creature seemed impossibly barbaric. Their baby died 2 hours after birth."
I don't like the guy but I don't see any hypocrisy here.
Sir Landshark on
Please consider the environment before printing this post.
Note: I am not in any way making fun of the suffering his wife endured, or that of his family in general. That she had to make that choice is tragic, and I strongly support her/their freedom to make it.
He, on the other hand, is a hypocritical goose of the silliest of orders.
Forar on
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
Pubs were seen as "given the keys" in 2010. They were too help fix things, and bring the economy back.
They've done bupkis in this regard. Not ONE jobs bill has been brought forth by the pubbies. No economy boosting bills, and nothing addressing the future.
Their whole "let the private sector drive the recovery" is laughable. The private sector hasn't done a dmn thing during the last 3 years, they've been hiding in their money bins, "too scared" to do any expanding and hiring.
They won't hire anyone because the economy hasn't recovered because people arent spending because they don't have jobs because the private sector won't hire anyone...
From the Santorum article, "The Santorums decided against aborting their baby. For Rick and Karen Santorum, the birth of their premature son, Gabriel Michael, on October 11, 1996, confirmed their beliefs about partial-birth abortion; the idea that the state might condone violence against this tiny but undeniably human creature seemed impossibly barbaric. Their baby died 2 hours after birth."
I don't like the guy but I don't see any hypocrisy here.
Apparently they took the baby home and introduced to to their other kids too
From the Santorum article, "The Santorums decided against aborting their baby. For Rick and Karen Santorum, the birth of their premature son, Gabriel Michael, on October 11, 1996, confirmed their beliefs about partial-birth abortion; the idea that the state might condone violence against this tiny but undeniably human creature seemed impossibly barbaric. Their baby died 2 hours after birth."
I don't like the guy but I don't see any hypocrisy here.
I assume it is something further in the article since I'm not paying to get the full access.
Now that we've re-established that the modern conservative movement has no coherent ideology beyond "cut taxes and hate liberals", how about that GOP primary?
So, what do you think will happen first, Rick Perry declaring he's running or Jon Huntsman pulling out of the race?
I don't think either will happen.
IMHO I like Huntsman, but I think he's angling for 2016 and just using this race to get his name out there and some press attention as he's largely unknown. He'll come across as being sane and smart after the current clown brigade and gain a name for himself.
I don't think Perry will run, there isn't room for both him and Bachman, I think he knows this.
Now that we've re-established that the modern conservative movement has no coherent ideology beyond "cut taxes and hate liberals", how about that GOP primary?
So, what do you think will happen first, Rick Perry declaring he's running or Jon Huntsman pulling out of the race?
Huntsman, I think, is mostly running to improve name recognition for 2016. So he'll stick around at least until he can be in a couple debates and what not. Perry will be in by the end of July. I think the next debate is mid-July, so Huntsman will stick around well past Perry's entering the race. But maybe not before Palin jumps in. I wouldn't be shocked if her lazy, ambitious ass just jumps in on whatever the filing deadline is so she has to do as little work as possible.
And the hypocrisy is that that was an abortion! One of a type he quite specifically wants to deny to others. Also one which would have been illegal in a bunch of states (especially Iowa) if GOP state legislatures have their way.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
IMHO I like Huntsman, but I think he's angling for 2016 and just using this race to get his name out there and some press attention as he's largely unknown. He'll come across as being sane and smart after the current clown brigade and gain a name for himself.
I just can't see any Republican candidate with the potential to defeat Obama. For all his (many) faults, I believe the "vital center" of the voters will end up voting for him. They'll probably look at the other guy/girl/robot, and think they'd rather get punched in the face than being shot in the face.
People don't understand the economy and the dolts think it runs like a household.
When country's economy actually runs like a business. Which means all you have to do is fire people until it's profitable, then sell it to a rich idiot.
Mitt's perfect! I'll call China, tell them to get the oversized check ready. Wait, China's too smart to buy us? Crap.
Michele Bachmann is giving a speech to some Republican group in New Orleans, and man is she hamming it up with her "just one of the folks" rhetoric, combined with "all our candidates are awesome!"
Man, the primaries are going to be dull as fuck if all the candidates just flop around being nice to each other. C'mon, if you don't want to spread rumors about illegitimate black babies, at least bring back some zippy phrases like "voodoo economics".
Pubs were seen as "given the keys" in 2010. They were too help fix things, and bring the economy back.
They've done bupkis in this regard. Not ONE jobs bill has been brought forth by the pubbies. No economy boosting bills, and nothing addressing the future.
Their whole "let the private sector drive the recovery" is laughable. The private sector hasn't done a dmn thing during the last 3 years, they've been hiding in their money bins, "too scared" to do any expanding and hiring.
They won't hire anyone because the economy hasn't recovered because people arent spending because they don't have jobs because the private sector won't hire anyone...
Part of the idea is that if the economy still sucks in 2012, people will blame Obama. Poll wise, people still appear to blame Bush for it, and the Pubs made a huge fuss about being in charge now after the 2010 elections, which shot their "blame the dems" approach in the foot.
They had a great shot at sweeping into a house and just going hardcore economy and then sweeping into power in 2012 as the party of ideas and economic recovery, but instead got voted in on the economy and have spent pretty much every waking moment since trying to pass nothing but social issue bills and threatening to shoot the economy in the head. They're losing moderates in droves because they obvious reality is that the tea party candidates have absolutely no interest in fiscal matters. They need to turn that around or they're just going to scrape by on an electoral map that should favor the hell out of the gop next year. But they're too stuck on social issues and trying to make sure everything is still a mess and praying people blame Obama for it.
kildy on
0
Options
AbsalonLands of Always WinterRegistered Userregular
I just can't see any Republican candidate with the potential to defeat Obama. For all his (many) faults, I believe the "vital center" of the voters will end up voting for him. They'll probably look at the other guy/girl/robot, and think they'd rather get punched in the face than being shot in the face.
The republican doesn't have to beat Obama. The republican can stand back and let the economy defeat him. Greece is the word right now, and that's just the most pressing issue.
Every degenerate cockdick "moderate" with a keyboard is constantly hectoring "Obamanomics" like they are getting paid to be as blunt, simplistic and smug as possible. A majority still consider Obama being less culpable than the cockroaches that laid the ground for him, but the education of the electorate has only just begun and there is not a single incentive for congress republicans to make the US population less unhappy and scared.
I just can't see any Republican candidate with the potential to defeat Obama. For all his (many) faults, I believe the "vital center" of the voters will end up voting for him. They'll probably look at the other guy/girl/robot, and think they'd rather get punched in the face than being shot in the face.
They have no chance if they keep getting hung out to dry by congressional republicans. The Ryan Budget loyalty test completely fucked them, and they need to avoid having anything near that shitty come up again, especially in the general. Which means they need to get the Freshmen under control and stop this whole "oh yeah? You think we're bluffing? We'll not only fail to increase the debt ceiling, we'll LOWER IT BITCHES!" kind of crazy talk.
It's hard to unseat an incumbent. Harder when polling seems to indicate they're not being blamed for the shit economy. So they need an actual plan of attack, and some seriously marketing in order to make this competitive. Which means a Romney, unless they feel that watching Bachmann get crushed by the moderate and R/Sane voters fleeing in terror.
Good lord, Bachmann just blamed Obama for the increase in the price of gold since his inauguration, and claimed that meant Obama was at fault for "devaluing your money".
Uh...what?
Also, the new GOP talking point in response to the Ryan "fuck Medicare" plan is apparently "Obama's taking money from seniors to give it to young people through Obamacare, and he wants Medicare to fail because that means seniors will have to use Obamacare".
Posts
Let's talk about something relevant to the primary in the primary thread.
So all the working class democrats will be unemployed and won't have any money to give yet the huge numbers of super rich hardcore liberals are not going to make up for it via citizen's united, since that's something a "hardcore liberal" might do? Instead they're going pub?
MY HEAD ASPLODE
Also, "I will go any way on any social position in order to get spending cuts" doesn't really make you socially liberal!
It makes you Mitt Romney!
He's like the Ferengi of politics.
Yes it does, my views or socially liberal but I vote on taxes and spending cuts and that alone. If you want support for gay marriage come over to our side, we have punchy and pie 8-) plus we party harder. Give us some votes, let's cut some taxes, and if enough of you come over you can vote in conservatives that support gay marriage and we can have that whole silly history behind us. The gays can get married and taxes will go down.
But if you're going to sit over there and vote against me, well, you're not supporting me so I don't owe you one thing. And if the people that are supporting me want to ban butt sex, well then a favor is a favor and we do owe them something for their vote. Is getting married important enough to you that you'll help us stop the government from robbing people? If so vote right and help us change the party, if you're not going to do that then I guess you didn't really care about it that much to begin with so why I should I give a rats ass. It's your problem now, you deal with it.
Is Global Climate Change considered a Social Issue?
Your side has had guys who bribe mistresses to keep quiet about affairs, solicit prostitutes, sexually harass employees and later lie about conflicts of interest, made deals with terrorists, tried to solicit a 14-year-old for sex, sent sex texts to underage congressional pages, helped defraud the savings and loan industry, and a host of other scumbags.
I'm not saying that Republicans are inherently worse people than Democrats (they are), but going down the outrage path is really not one that you want to start down, because, you know, glass houses.
I don't really give a hoot about the deficit and I don't think you do either.
I was mostly thinking about abortion. But he's had every position on every issue, so it could be anything.
Though I find his abortion stance (I don't care, what will get me elected) less abhorrent than Rick Santorum. Who's militantly pro-life unless his wife's life is in danger, in which case you can go ahead and induce delivery before the child is full term so it dies within hours. Which is totally not abortion.
I was going to make a long-winded post about how I haven't once voted Republican but would have no problem voting for Paul over Obama if he got the nomination, but I'll let you guys play it out with this guy first. At least it will be entertaining.
Got a link for that Santorum story, bum?
So we can cut taxes.
Sorry, yeah.
Well it's not really my problem, I'm Canadian (and on the left too which makes me actually socialist by American standards), I'm merely hoping that you guys don't shift to the right even more
If you don't care about deficits, you can cut taxes without spending cuts. As Obama has done.
People don't understand the economy and the dolts think it runs like a household. But cutting spending is something you can use as a carrot to some people. Plus we can use spending cuts on shiny liberal items (hello planned parent hood) to get them to cave on other things. And other spending, like say ethanol subsidies, is just stupid shit that screws up all sorts of other things and should be stopped because it's stupid, not because it's a money drain. I'm fine with funneling silly amounts of cash into Iowa, it's a red state.
Oh fuck, not the Deacon Dance.
Thread is borked.
Honestly, most of the time I disagree with the "no general politics thread" policy. Then one guy brings a politics related thread down to youtube levels on the one day he will ever post on the forums and it makes sense.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
So, what do you think will happen first, Rick Perry declaring he's running or Jon Huntsman pulling out of the race?
I don't like the guy but I don't see any hypocrisy here.
It's like he's living the only moral abortion is my abortion as some kind of guideline.
Note: I am not in any way making fun of the suffering his wife endured, or that of his family in general. That she had to make that choice is tragic, and I strongly support her/their freedom to make it.
He, on the other hand, is a hypocritical goose of the silliest of orders.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Pubs were seen as "given the keys" in 2010. They were too help fix things, and bring the economy back.
They've done bupkis in this regard. Not ONE jobs bill has been brought forth by the pubbies. No economy boosting bills, and nothing addressing the future.
Their whole "let the private sector drive the recovery" is laughable. The private sector hasn't done a dmn thing during the last 3 years, they've been hiding in their money bins, "too scared" to do any expanding and hiring.
They won't hire anyone because the economy hasn't recovered because people arent spending because they don't have jobs because the private sector won't hire anyone...
Apparently they took the baby home and introduced to to their other kids too
I assume it is something further in the article since I'm not paying to get the full access.
I don't think either will happen.
IMHO I like Huntsman, but I think he's angling for 2016 and just using this race to get his name out there and some press attention as he's largely unknown. He'll come across as being sane and smart after the current clown brigade and gain a name for himself.
I don't think Perry will run, there isn't room for both him and Bachman, I think he knows this.
Huntsman, I think, is mostly running to improve name recognition for 2016. So he'll stick around at least until he can be in a couple debates and what not. Perry will be in by the end of July. I think the next debate is mid-July, so Huntsman will stick around well past Perry's entering the race. But maybe not before Palin jumps in. I wouldn't be shocked if her lazy, ambitious ass just jumps in on whatever the filing deadline is so she has to do as little work as possible.
And the hypocrisy is that that was an abortion! One of a type he quite specifically wants to deny to others. Also one which would have been illegal in a bunch of states (especially Iowa) if GOP state legislatures have their way.
aka
"Jon Huntsman pulling out of the race"
When country's economy actually runs like a business. Which means all you have to do is fire people until it's profitable, then sell it to a rich idiot.
Mitt's perfect! I'll call China, tell them to get the oversized check ready. Wait, China's too smart to buy us? Crap.
Man, the primaries are going to be dull as fuck if all the candidates just flop around being nice to each other. C'mon, if you don't want to spread rumors about illegitimate black babies, at least bring back some zippy phrases like "voodoo economics".
Part of the idea is that if the economy still sucks in 2012, people will blame Obama. Poll wise, people still appear to blame Bush for it, and the Pubs made a huge fuss about being in charge now after the 2010 elections, which shot their "blame the dems" approach in the foot.
They had a great shot at sweeping into a house and just going hardcore economy and then sweeping into power in 2012 as the party of ideas and economic recovery, but instead got voted in on the economy and have spent pretty much every waking moment since trying to pass nothing but social issue bills and threatening to shoot the economy in the head. They're losing moderates in droves because they obvious reality is that the tea party candidates have absolutely no interest in fiscal matters. They need to turn that around or they're just going to scrape by on an electoral map that should favor the hell out of the gop next year. But they're too stuck on social issues and trying to make sure everything is still a mess and praying people blame Obama for it.
The republican doesn't have to beat Obama. The republican can stand back and let the economy defeat him. Greece is the word right now, and that's just the most pressing issue.
Every degenerate cockdick "moderate" with a keyboard is constantly hectoring "Obamanomics" like they are getting paid to be as blunt, simplistic and smug as possible. A majority still consider Obama being less culpable than the cockroaches that laid the ground for him, but the education of the electorate has only just begun and there is not a single incentive for congress republicans to make the US population less unhappy and scared.
They have no chance if they keep getting hung out to dry by congressional republicans. The Ryan Budget loyalty test completely fucked them, and they need to avoid having anything near that shitty come up again, especially in the general. Which means they need to get the Freshmen under control and stop this whole "oh yeah? You think we're bluffing? We'll not only fail to increase the debt ceiling, we'll LOWER IT BITCHES!" kind of crazy talk.
It's hard to unseat an incumbent. Harder when polling seems to indicate they're not being blamed for the shit economy. So they need an actual plan of attack, and some seriously marketing in order to make this competitive. Which means a Romney, unless they feel that watching Bachmann get crushed by the moderate and R/Sane voters fleeing in terror.
Uh...what?
Also, the new GOP talking point in response to the Ryan "fuck Medicare" plan is apparently "Obama's taking money from seniors to give it to young people through Obamacare, and he wants Medicare to fail because that means seniors will have to use Obamacare".