ObamaCare, So Successful That People Can’t Afford To Use It


Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

 photo obamacaremoremoney_zps73f4e5f0.jpeg

Hey Obamabots, what good is “affordable” health insurance if it costs you too much to use it?

In a survey taken in the fall, The Commonwealth Fund, a private, independent health care research organization, found that about 40 percent of adults nationwide who had high-deductible private insurance plans reported delaying care because of the cost.

In another, the Gallup Poll, which annually asks about health care cost and use every November, reported that the percentage of Americans who had insurance and chose not to go to a health care professional for a routine visit or a need because of cost hit an all-time high of 34 percent.

“Last year, many hoped that the opening of the government health care exchanges and the resulting increase in the number of Americans with health insurance would enable more people to seek medical treatment,” Gallup said. “But, despite a drop in the uninsured rate, a slightly higher percentage of Americans than in previous years report having put off medical treatment, suggesting that the Affordable Care Act has not immediately affected this measure.”

The problem is easy to identify but difficult to solve. Health care is extremely expensive in the U.S., and to keep from busting their budgets, companies that provide coverage to their employees and families increasingly are turning to plans that keep monthly premiums lower by increasing deductibles and charging more for out-of-pocket costs, said Linda Schwimmer, vice president of the New Jersey Health Care Quality Institute.

“More and more of [the cost] is being put on the employee, and because of that, they’re reluctant to get the care they need because they’re concerned about the cost,” she said.

Once again proving that the Affordable Care Act is a total misnomer.

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

ObamaCare will never cut costs. It can’t. Not with all of it’s mandates and required coverages. So to artificially lower the up-front cost of health insurance it had to hike the back-end copays and deductibles that kick in when we actually go to use it.

The result? Pay through the nose, or go without medical care.

Given the abysmal Obama economy, the choice is clear. Feed your kids, and skip the colonoscopy. To most folks a $4,000 deductible might as well be $400,000. And those $75 prescriptions buy a whole lotta diapers.

The best part is, Obama knew he was hoodwinking us. And he didn’t care. That’s the real story of Jonathan Gruber.

Gruber’s attempt to downplay his role in the ACA is unconvincing, for reasons we suggested here. But the most damming comments by Gruber were not his “glib” words about the American public but his accurate analysis of the Affordable Care Act. For instance, in one of the videos that became controversial, Gruber is taped saying“What the American public cares about is costs. And that’s why even though the bill that they made is 90% health insurance coverage and 10% about cost control, all you ever hear people talk about is cost control.” That is not glib; regardless of whether you think the law was sold deceptively in the way Gruber suggests, his understanding of the law’s focus on coverage over cost is correct. Whether or not Gruber was “the architect” of the law, whether or not his more noxious comment can fairly be associated with the law, he understands the law—and that is damming enough.

They purposefully obfuscated ObamaCare’s effects. Obama lied, health care died.




Epic: Phil Kerpen Pwns Gruber Saying, “Thanks For Helping Us Destroy Sh*tty Law You Passed”…


Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.


Hat/Tip to WeaselZippers.


Via Truth Revolt:

Phil Kerpen, an author, syndicated columnist, and president of American Commitment, shook hands with Jonathan Gruber immediately following Tuesday’s House Oversight Committee hearing and said, “Thank you for helping us destroy the sh*tty law you passed.”

Kerpen announced his pwnership via Twitter:


And Kerpen seems intent on keeping Gruber honest.

Read the full story here.


In 2014 Nancy Pelosi Doesn’t Know Jonathan Gruber: In 2009, She Mentions Him By Name During Presser


 photo sealoftheliar_zpscdb72e93.jpg

Hat/Tip to WeaselZippers.

See the problem with the older politicians like Nancy Pelosi is that they forget that the internet exists. Or maybe they don’t understand how it works, I mean after all, that’s what staffers and interns are for, right?

Well anyway, she either doesn’t know, or doesn’t care because she has done it again.

That’s right. She’s lied.

* GASP!! *

And don’t expect this article to feature her lies down through the years the last two days. We just don’t have that kind of bandwidth! I mean, who do you think we are? WeaselZippers?

But I digress. The former Speaker of the House recently had some interesting comments on Jonathan Gruber.





Update: Busted.

March 18, 2010:

… On November 30th, Krugman wrote about the CBO report, relying on Gruber’s analysis. He, too, concluded it was “good news for reform advocates.” That same day, Harry Reid took to the floor of the Senate that same day, saying “just a few days ago an MIT economist — one of the nation’s foremost economists — a man by the name of Jonathan Gruber, analyzed our bill and concluded it will help Americans pay less and get more.”

Reid read from the piece on the floor of the Senate, saying that it provided substantiation from Gruber “who is one of the most respected economists in the world” that the Senate bill would reduce the deficit. Nancy Pelosi touted “the Gruber analysis” on the Speaker’s website.






ObamaCare & Transparency don’t go hand-in-hand: taxpayers foot the bill



Hat/Tip to Political Calculations.

obama finger“I will also hold myself as President to a new standard of openness. Going forward, anytime the American people want to know something that I or a former President wants to withhold, we will have to consult with the Attorney General and the White House Counsel, whose business it is to ensure compliance with the rule of law. Information will not be withheld just because I say so. It will be withheld because a separate authority believes my request is well grounded in the Constitution.

Let me say it as simply as I can: Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency.” – Barack Obama in remarks welcoming Senior Staff & Cabinet Secretaries to the White House, January 21, 2009.


Oh how the times have changed.

In 2009 President Obama vowed to be open, honest and transparent with the American people.

In 2014? Eh, not so much.

How ObamaCare’s Lack of Transparency Costs Taxpayers

How does the absence of transparency in government cost taxpayers’ money?

That question arises today because of a news article in the New York Times, which reports that up to two million of the individuals who enrolled for health insurance coverage through the federal government’s or their state’s Affordable Care Act (ACA) “marketplace” are in for a very rude surprise when they file their income tax returns in April 2015.

It seems that by not requiring proof of income, millions of folks who did sign up for ObamaCare through the government run exchanges are going to be on the hook, once the tax bill is due because they may not qualify for some or all of the health care subsidies they received.

The Obama administration is contacting hundreds of thousands of people with subsidized health insurance to resolve questions about their eligibility, as consumer advocates express concern that many will be required to repay some or all of the subsidies.

Of the eight million people who signed up for private health plans through insurance exchanges under the new health care law, two million reported personal information that differed from data in government records, according to federal officials and Serco, the company hired to resolve such inconsistencies.

The government is asking consumers for additional documents to verify their income, citizenship, immigration status and Social Security numbers, as well as any health coverage that they may have from employers. People who do not provide the information risk losing their subsidized coverage and may have to repay subsidies next April.

Now the Obama administration could have avoided all this by using that transparency that the President touted way back in 2009.

The sad part of all this is that if the Obama administration and authors of the PPACA (popularly known as “Obamacare”) had been willing to be honest with consumers and transparent about the true cost of health insurance on the ACA exchanges, all the tax liability risks for these consumers and the potential loss of insurance coverage could have been avoided.

A much more effective approach would have been to only indicate the full cost of the health insurance options available to Obamacare consumers, who would be fully responsible for paying the full cost of the policies they purchase. Since the subsidies for Obamacare are provided in the form of an income tax credit, subsidy-eligible consumers could then have lowered the income tax withholding on their paychecks to account for the tax credit.

Not only would this method have made more sense, been more practical, been actually and factually transparent, it also would have kept more people from getting kicked off of their health care plans.

The advantage of this approach for these consumers is that they would not now be at risk of losing their health insurance coverage. They might still have an issue with the size of the tax credit, but they could avoid losing their health insurance.

This approach would also have largely eliminated the need to even have a Healthcare.gov and state government-run “marketplaces”.

But no. That would have meant providing full transparency into the full cost of the subsidy tax credit-eligible health insurance coverage available on the government-run “marketplaces”, which was the last thing that either President Obama or the authors of the PPACA wanted given its opportunities for graft.

Talk about your fundamental transformation…


No Religious Freedoms for Businesses?


In a recent Op-Ed, Mr. Leonard Pitts, Jr. tried to make the case that violating someone’s 1st Amendment rights is the same as the idea that one’s personal liberty ends where the next person’s begins.

Let me also use a quote to make my point.  “Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves; and, under a just God, can not long retain it.” A direct quote correctly attributed to President Abraham Lincoln in a letter to Henry L. Pierce, April, 1859. In this letter, he was declining an invitation to speak at an event in Boston, honoring Thomas Jefferson’s birthday. Lincoln explained that Jefferson gave us, as a nation, a great gift which was the idea that all men are created equal in the eyes of their Creator. He said that Jefferson, “had the coolness, forecast, and capacity to introduce into a merely revolutionary document, an abstract truth, applicable to all men and all times, and so to embalm it there, that to-day, and in all coming days, it shall be a rebuke and a stumbling-block to the very harbingers of re-appearing tyranny and oppression.”
Hobby Lobby

That is precisely what those who propose that Hobby Lobby and other businesses forgo their 1st Amendment right to freedom of religion due to the onerous regulations of the Affordable Care Act are asking.

Mr. Pitts says that the “crazy part” is that under the ACA, those businesses can just opt out of offering their employees any insurance at all. So in his eyes, and in the eyes of many on the left, it is either kowtow to our wishes or just stop offering health benefits to your workers.

I say the “crazy part” is just what Lincoln said, that “those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves,” and this is exactly what the government is asking the Supreme Court to do. Uncle Sam wants the court to take away Hobby Lobby’s freedom of religion, yet what happened to Mr. Pitts’ quote about swinging your fist, but not hitting my nose?

Just saying that “If a Hobby Lobby executive has no interest in contraceptive care, good for her,” is on the face of it a rather crass statement and not germane at all to the discussion. The case before the court has nothing to do with personal preferences. That is why his argument that this creates a slippery slope where some future company can decide, for religious purposes not to hire women or persons of a particular faith, etc… doesn’t fly. The idea that adhering to the Constitution will lead to violations of the Civil Rights Act of 1965 is a straw man argument, at best.

If I were to obtain a job at the store of a Hasidic gem merchant, should I be upset that there’s no bacon in the cafeteria?

If I am a Mormon and there is tea and coffee in the break room, do I have the right to demand my employer removes them because in my faith, I abstain from those beverages?

Hobby Lobby’various birth control methodss owners believe that life begins at conception and that adhering to the regulations in the ACA violates their religious beliefs or forces them to either pay millions of dollars in fines or stop offering health benefits entirely.

The ironic part of this story is that Hobby Lobby offers SIXTEEN other forms of birth control listed in Obamacare.

While Mr. Pitts is absolutely entitled to his opinion, he damages his credibility when he calls Hobby Lobby’s desire to remain true to their religious tenets, “faintly Talibanesque,” and that allowing them to decline to cover certain contraceptives and abortifacients is “anathema to our ideals of individual liberty and yes, religious freedom.”

Really? So telling a business what they can and cannot do as it relates to their 1st Amendment rights is “faintly Talibanesque,” yet allowing the wishes of a few employees to be forced upon all businesses upholds the ideals of religious freedom?

Let us not forget that the right to swing a fist ending where someone else’s nose begins is a two way street.

To read Mr. Pitts’ article, click here.


The Big “Stinkburger” … Obamacare


I’m at work right now and I have to admit I’m in a very good mood. Some liberals didn’t take my previous post very kindly and that does sadden me somewhat … NOT!!

Regardless of how many times they say it or how loud they proclaim that people are swarming the system to try to get signed up,  and  millions of people are rushing to get insurance.  And  America is now cognizant of the fact that Obamacare is a good deal after all,  it doesn’t change the fact that Obamacare is one big “stinkburger!”  (I wish I’d have thought of that one originally)   And this one I just can’t stop laughing at …  Righties are still moaning on and on about millions of people who are alleged to have lost their insurance because of Obamacare. What they are not telling us is how glad most of those people are that they were able to get off their old policies and onto some new ones that actually work and are often much cheaper than what they were paying before.

Whew! Delusional? Ignorant?  Both. It’s just your typical everyday ordinary liberal, the kind Obama and company loves.  Obama can tell them anything and they’ll fall over themselves to be the first to repeat such nonsense.

Moving away from mindless drivel we’ll check out some facts …

Via: Yahoo Finance

The Coming Obamacare Shock for 170 Million Americans

Barack Obama declared victory this week as the deadline to avoid the penalty for the individual mandate to carry health insurance passed on Monday.  “The Affordable Care Act is here to stay,” the President insisted as he announced that 7.1 million people had enrolled in private insurance through Obamacare. “The debate over repealing this law is over.”

Consider that presidential wish casting in a midterm cycle in which Democrats will have to constantly defend their support for the unpopular law. As Jimmy Fallon pointed out later the same evening, the numbers were neither impressive nor reliable. “It’s amazing what you can achieve when you make something mandatory,” Fallon told his laughing audience, “fine people if they don’t do it — and keep extending the deadline for months.”

The public has hardly been in a celebratory or a laughing mood. Polls show that the American public remains as opposed to the ACA as ever, with 55 percent of Quinnipiac respondents disapproving of the law. Only 39 percent approve of Obama’s handling of health care policy, which has until recently been a Democratic Party strength. For that matter, Obama only gets a 40 percent approval rating on the economy and jobs, to which House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi wants the debate to turn now that the Obamacare debate “is over.”

Pelosi and Obama may want to be careful with that wish casting, because the two debates are now closely related. A new study from the American Health Policy Institute – recently launched by former Bush administration Deputy Secretary of HHS Tevi Troy – shows that large employers expect to face steep compliance costs, starting in the fall. Their cost estimates range between $4,800 and $5,900 per employee over the next decade.  The total cost to large employers over the next decade will run between $151 billion and $186 billion, according to the 100 companies surveyed by AHPI that employ 10,000 or more people.


Thanks to Earl of Taint for the great pic!

Original Post:  Cry and Howl


Obama, the Super President


I don’t get it. Everything that Barack Obama has done has been such a success I just don’t understand why he doesn’t fix the so-called part-time job problem. I mean the stimulus created millions of shovel-ready jobs. According to Nancy Pelosi, Obamacare created four million more jobs. His $535 million loan to Solyndra kept the company from going under for a couple of months, it wasn’t his fault they mis-managed the money. The $3 billion he invested into Cash For Clunkers made it possible for millions of people who normally wouldn’t be able to afford a new car, to get one.

Operation Fast and Furious was looking like a resounding success until the unfortunate death of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. Obama and  Holder did make sure Agent Terry had bean-bag ammunition for protection. Look, Obama and Holder don’t know the difference between bean-bags and real bullets so they did the best they could under the circumstances. So we can’t hold them resp0nsible for any “bumps in the road” on the highway to prosperity for the American people.

hggcjcf.kkfogNow, I for one appreciate Obama killing Osama. I don’t need to know why no-one saw his body and I don’t care about the numerous changes in the story. It’s too bad the Navy SEALs aren’t around to tell us how Barack single-handedly guided the SEALs into position to take Osama out. That must have been so exciting! Obama at the helm, instructing the SEALs as to how to engage the enemy, and finally guiding the very bullets into the 9/11 master mind’s head! Wow! It’s like a Vince Flynn or Brad Thor novel!

The unfortunate slaying of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and the other three Americans at Benghazi clearly wasn’t Obama’s or Hillary Clinton’s fault. If it wasn’t for that lousy anti-Muslim video, they’d be alive right now. Hey, Obama was going to  send help but Chris Stevens said “Don’t bother Barack! We’ve g0t this under control!”

All those things without even mentioning the Affordable Care Act. Providing low cost health care to every American; making the best medicines and doctors the world has available to all.  The success of that one thing is enough to convince me Obama can fix anything.

The amount of successes Barack Obama has had is stunning. I believe he could simply do an Executive Order commanding all businesses to hire every unemployed person in America, pay them 10 to 15 dollars an hour, with 40 hours of guaranteed work. Can you imagine how wonderful that would be? Zero unemployment with the stroke of his pen.

Original Post: Cry and Howl


ObamaCare Damage: 100% Health Insurance Premium Increases for Next Year



In a follow-up to a story we covered last December, the CEO of Aetna,Mark Bertolini, warned of 100% health insurance premium increases for next year.  Doug Ross (no relation) has more…

I’m guessing the administration’s infamous “Enemies List” just got bigger by one.

Aetna CEO Warns of Approaching Health Insurance ‘Premium Rate Shock’ in 2014 for Consumers and Others Under Accountable Care Act

Steep increases in insurance costs may leave patients with less money to cover deductibles and copayments for clinical laboratory tests

Next year, consumers and small businesses can expect what one health insurance CEO says will be, “Premium rate shock for 2014.” As this happens, clinical laboratories and pathology groups are likely to find it even more difficult to collect co-pays, deductibles, and out-of-pocket fees from patients who had medical laboratory tests performed.

The premium rate shock remark was made by no less than Mark Bertolini, the CEO of Aetna, Inc. (NYSE: AET). In his speech at an investor conference, he predicted premiums would rise by 20% to 50% next year before the government subsidies are applied. In some markets, rates could double, he added.

Aetna is not alone in seeking steep hikes in health insurance premiums. Blue Shield of California is seeking a rate increase of 12% to 20% for more than 300,000 individuals, The Los Angeles Times reported. These new rates would go into effect in March, the company said.

And, ironically, the “official” name for ObamaCare is the Affordable Care Act ?  Of course, like all liberal efforts, it achieves the exact opposite of it’s stated intent.

Doug has far more coverage, so get over there and check it all out.  He also sums it up perfectly.

As conservatives predicted, Obama, Pelosi and Reid all lied about Obamacare as they rammed it through Congress, sight unseen. Rates are going to skyrocket. Employers will drop coverage. Physicians will stop accepting Medicare patients. Insurance carriers will go bankrupt. Care, when you can find it, will be rationed. And the system is going to melt down, with the poor and seniors suffering most.

The people were warned, and they chose not to listen.  Now, everyone will suffer for the Obama voters.  If you voted for Obama, you voted for this.  We tried to warn you.  Doug Ross, myself, hundreds-if not thousands of others tried to raise the warning, but too many decided to be “low information.”

Elections have consequences, and the Obama voters are going to be suffering more and more for their support of Hope and Change.


Happy Thanksgiving from Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services


This turkey died so that white man can live his sinful lifestyle!

Hello Americans of all races, religions and sexual preferences!  I am Kathleen Sebelius the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. And yes, I am a human woman.

I am not an animal!  I am a human being!

No.  I am not a Romulan woman who’s had her ears scaled back.  I am a fully functioning human though many have mistaken me for a Romulan.  Silly isn’t it?  I mean I’m not even closely related to Vulcans like the Romulans are.  Look, I am not an animal, I am a human being!  So knock it off!

Anyway.  What did I want to talk about?

Oh yes.

As you know the so-called holiday of Thanksgiving is fast approaching.  But what you may not know is that Thanksgiving was promulgated by the white man after massacring native Americans of color.  And yes I realize that the noble race of native Americans were here on this continent before the country of America the slave holders came into existence so calling them “Americans” is an insult but “native American” is easier to type on my English language keyboard than finding a software program that’ll type in a dialect of the indigenous peoples of this continent.

Oh I’m sure there are software programs that do just that but here at the Department of Health and Human Services I am too busy trying to undo the damage caused by triumphalist American culture to go online and search for it.

Because we at the Department of Health and Humans Services are all about two things:  protecting the health of all Americans and screwing the Catholic Church.

Did I say we were about two thing?  I’m sorry.  Three things:  protecting the health of all Americans, undoing the damage caused by meat-based culture and screwing the Catholic Church.

Did you know the Catholic Church is run by white men?  And that can’t be good.

Anyway I’m sure you are probably looking forward to a traditional Thanksgiving with lots of turkey followed by a few games of American football.  (And isn’t typical of arrogant Americans?  Stealing the name of football from non-racist, socialist Europeans and applying it to a game that has nothing to do with feet.  God.  Americans make me sick.)

Oh yes.  I’m sure you are looking forward to that meal.  Sounds like fun doesn’t it? Maybe to the dull-witted it does.

Lift up your minds Americans!

Meat is murder!  And your so-called game of football is violent, misogynistic and encourages testosterone-laden behavior.  Typical testosterone-laden behavior I’d expect from the soon to be crushed Catholic Church.

And so, under the authority granted to me by the Affordable Care Act I am banning the consumption of meat, meat by-products and any sandwiches sold at Blimpies which may or may not be meat or meat by-products.  (We’re still testing them at HHS to find out exactly what they are.)

I am also banning the so-called game of football.  (Did a Catholic invent this game?  I wouldn’t be surprised.)

I am also changing the name of this holiday.  Thanksgiving? What have you to be thankful for?  Thousands of years of northern European aggression, patriarchy and poor dietary choices?

No.  The new name will be “Redistribution Day.“  It is my hope that by calling it “Redistribution Day” we will remember that there are fat cat bankers and capitalists in our midst who aren’t paying their fair share.  Just like the Catholic Church.

And instead of meat why not eat something the government wants you to eat such as carrots or Brussels sprout?

And instead of so-called football why not watch the WNBA?  Women’s basketball.  Truly a sport uninfluenced by testosterone.  What better way to lift up your minds than by watching seven-foot tall lesbians of color?

And so in closing I’d like to wish all my fellow Americans a very happy and joyous Redistribution Day.

Because we at the Department of Health and Human Services are all about two, no three, no four things:  protecting the health of all Americans, undoing the damage caused by meat-based culture, social engineering and screwing the Catholic Church.

That is all.

Original Post: Manhattan Infidel


This Regulation Nation Will Explode Under An Obama Second Term


Americans are learning more about the “fiscal cliff” approaching at the beginning of next year, when tax rates for families and small businesses are set to spike and new taxes in President Obama’s health-care spending law take effect. But unless there’s real change in Washington, we’re also headed for a steep “regulatory cliff” that could compound the damage.

The above quote is a warning from Ron Portman in an opinion piece he wrote for the Wall Street Journal this past Thursday. This article is worth a read because he talks about a number of stifiling regulations that the Obama administration has put on the back burner until after the elections. You know _ when Obama will have more flexibility.

After three years of bureaucratic excess, the Obama administration has been quietly postponing several multibillion-dollar regulations until after the November election. Those delayed rules, together with more than 130 unfinished mandates under the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial law, could significantly increase the regulatory drag on our economy in 2013.

According to Senator Portman, the Labor Department has put off until after the elections plans for something called the Fiduciary Rule. A study by the Oliver Wyman Group found that this rule would seriously hurt middle-class people with  IRA accounts.

A study last year by the Oliver Wyman Group found that the Fiduciary Rule could result in higher retirement account minimums and cause 7.2 million individual retirement account (IRA) holders to lose access to investment advice. Even the Labor Department was unable to show that the rule’s illusory benefits outweigh its substantial costs.

The Senator goes on to tell us about the EPA and its planned Ozone Rule. He says it is “so strict that up to 85% of U.S. counties monitored by the EPA would be in violation.” The EPA itself estimates this rule will cost industry 90 billion dollars.  The EPA Portman tells us is also planning more controls on power plants that they estimate will cost one dollar every three cents in benefits. How insane is that?

And, not to be out done, the Transportation Department has plans to make cars more expensive.

Consumers can also look forward to a new Department of Transportation rule that will increase the costs of new cars and trucks by mandating expensive new technology. First proposed in 2010, the Rear-View Camera Rule would require that all cars and trucks be equipped with a rear-view camera and video display on the dashboard, at a cost of some $2.7 billion to auto makers and car buyers.

On top of all of this, we know that a tonne of new regulations yet to come from Obama’s Affordable Care Act and also from the results of the Dodd-Frank legislation. The insanity of the Obama administration can not be underestimated. Our economic growth, for the last two quarters has been barely positive. It won’t take much to send America back into recession just like the Euro Zone is today. The Obama administration seems hell-bent on putting the final nail in our economic coffin.

I share this information with you, dear readers,not because I think you need any more reason to want Obama out of office. I share this information on thee off chance that some may need more reason to set aside what ever occupies your time on the days leading up to the elections and I ask that you volunteer your time to your local Republican Party and/or your local Tea Party to help turn out the vote on election day.

I read an article other day that I unfortunately did not bookmark. But, the author made a compelling case that this election, contrary to the expert¡s opinions, will be decided more by the base of the parties than it will by the so-called independent voters. The point made by the author was that the party that can energize its base in the toss-up states to turn out the vote, will win.

Well, that’s what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?

Original Post:  Conservatives on Fire