GOP saved by the Tea Party!

[Vol Horn 4 Life]

They separated the conservative movement from Obamacare and the Democrats took full ownership. Now that this Titanic of a law has hit the iceberg, the Dems will go down with it into the depths of an icy hell.

Obama perfectly played the desperate snake oil huckster today selling his healthcare law like a man begging for his last meal.

Over half a billion dollars on a website that doesn't work. 71% of the target audience doesn't even know what it is. This is the worst marketing campaign next to the "new Coke" debacle....maybe even worse.

Nice job! You took the bait hook, line and sinker. Now choke on it as your party goes down in flames!

 

[dillohorn]

I certainly hope so.

 

[Third Coast]

What's left then, the teabaggers and the minutemen?

 

[Uninformed]

As opposed to the leechers and socialists? I guess I don't get your question.

 

[CanaTigers]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Vol Horn 4 Life]

New coke failed miserably because they did virtually no market research before making the change. It's considered a model for bad marketing. They countered that by reverting back to "classic coke" which saved the brand.

 

[Seattle Husker]

As long as the GOP continues to fight/stall elements of the ACA they'll give ammo to the left for a ready made excuse why it hasn't been successful. There is some truth to the lefts claim but if the GOP can truly step aside then all the ongoing blame (and/or credit?) can be the lefts alone.

Incidentally, NPR had an article on this topic this morning, at least as it relates to healthcare.gov:The Link

 

[majorwhiteapples]

Just like SS and Medicare, just step aside and let us blow billions upon billions of money.....yea right

If the website is not proof enough I don't know what is.....

 

[Horn6721]

I quit reading after this bs
'Which led to the first big problem — money. When it became clear that HHS would need more money to build the federal exchange than had been allocated in the original law, Republicans in Congress refused to provide it."

635 million wasn't enough? maybe if they'd use a bid process instead of wasting most of the money on a Canadian firm that was known to have failed at lesser projects they might have some basis
but really?
they spent 635 mil?
and they knew it had failed with only a few hundred people logging in?

what crap
but HEY!!
let's blame it on those evil Pubs.
They left out Bush's name.

That racist looney rightwing rag, The Slate, summed reality up best
'Either the White House knew how bad things were and wasn’t playing it straight or it didn’t know how bad things were and is just inept'

 

[HornHuskerDad]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Roger35]

This reminds me of the 'Romney in a landslide' fervor a yr ago. The TP'ers convinced THEMSELVES via fox noise and isolated echo chambers. And then reality hit em like a baseball bat. Poor gomers, still suffering from post election trauma syndrome a.k.a. Obama derangement syndrome.

Keep at it fellas, the rest of the country will see you in a coupla decades, if y'all decide to catch up with us then.

 

[Seattle Husker]

Horn6721-

I'm not at all versed on this topic but can speak to my experience as a Sr. leader in IT at a $15B company. The politics of which states would or would not participate in the Federal Exchange had to make for a significantly evolving requirements which is a significant impediment to success for any technology solution implementation.

I believe the original article claimed at $300M budget for healthcare.gov.

I have no concept how the federal government works, their IT partners operate or how difficult it must be to coordinate with the states.

I do know that the FBI/DEA wasted $1.2B on building a solution to track all their requests for information with the Telecom, Internet providers and other misc. companies. That project was shelved after 2-3 years of effort.

 

[Vol Horn 4 Life]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Roger35]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[majorwhiteapples]

The voice of the left, please get out and speak in public 35, you can do nothing but help the Tea Party!!!! Keep driving numbers towards us, thank you!!!!

 

[Vol Horn 4 Life]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Seattle Husker]

If only a Healthcare.gov could be as simple as a single healthcare provider and a handful of plans for a defined set of employee use cases with what I imagine if very straight forward eligibility criteria (i.e. your active employee status, PT/FT schedule and base pay rate).
How many different insurance companies did Healthcare.gov have to work with in how many different states with how many different structured plans for how many different eligibility use criteria?

This doesn't let the Feds off the hook but that technology solution was anything but simple. I lead a project to implement an outsourced benefits provider for my company last year that spent $3.9M for a 35k employee company based only in the US.

I read today that 54 different companies were involved in healthcare.gov due to government regulations. Not a single one of them was responsible for the end-to-end solution. Whether due to mandated government bureaucracy or project management incompetence clearly the effort was very complicated.

 

[ShAArk92]

In reply to:

---

---