Patterico's Pontifications

3/4/2010

Obama’s 50+1 Strategy

Filed under: Health Care,Obama — DRJ @ 3:45 pm



[Guest post by DRJ]

ABC News’ Jake Tapper questioned Press Secretary Robert Gibbs about President Obama’s 50+1 health care reform strategy:

TAPPER: And then another question. The president, when he was running for president, told the Concord Monitor that you have to break out of the 50-plus-one pattern of presidential politics; we’re not going to pass health-care reform with a 50-plus-one strategy. He was talking more about building consensus. And I understand that the health-care reform bill, the first iteration of it passed the Senate with 60 votes, with a supermajority. But is he not pursuing a 51 – 50-plus-one strategy for this final step?

GIBBS: No, because — he’s talking about electoral strategy, not vote-counting in the House —

TAPPER: But he did say “we’re not going to pass health-care reform with a 50-plus-one strategy.”

GIBBS: We’re not going to — we’re not going to get it through — we’re — you’re not going to get legislation through Congress if only 50 percent plus one in the country think it’s a good idea. That’s why, if you look at poll after poll, people want — people want health-care reform and the debate on health-care reform to continue. They want to see progress made. They want to see Democrats and Republicans work together to get something done. That’s what the —

TAPPER: Well, Robert, the polls indicates that the American people are very divided about this bill. In fact, pluralities disagree with it, this bill.

GIBBS: And majorities believe we have to keep going. And if you break out individual concepts of what’s contained in the president’s plan, some of which are Republican ideas, they poll in the upper 60s, so —

TAPPER: Right. But on this specific bill, can you say anything other than the president is doing anything other than pursuing the 50- plus-one strategy?

GIBBS: I don’t believe he’s pursuing that strategy. I think there are far more than 50 percent of the people that live in this country know and understand that we have to change, for them, the cost of health care. Yes.

TAPPER: They don’t support this bill.

GIBBS: Well, we’re working on that Jake.

— DRJ

29 Responses to “Obama’s 50+1 Strategy”

  1. More cowbell, please.

    Mike K (2cf494)

  2. TAPPER!!!

    Ira (28a423)

  3. Never let the facts get in the way of Teh Narrative!
    Gibbs needs to work on his Baghdad Bob imitation.

    AD - RtR/OS! (f85527)

  4. Mr. Tapper’s questions are irrelevant — he wasn’t dressed as a pimp. /Leftist-Reasoning

    Pons Asinorum (95faa4)

  5. In the interest of keeping the truth in the forefront of public consciousness:

    Shameful.

    MD in Philly (70a1ba)

  6. 4.Mr. Tapper’s questions are irrelevant — he wasn’t dressed as a pimp. /Leftist-Reasoning
    Comment by Pons Asinorum —

    Maybe it was Gibbs who should have been dressed as a pimp…

    MD in Philly (70a1ba)

  7. @6 MD — (heh) don’t think it would work, pimps have much more integrity than Gibbs, although that’s not saying much.

    Here’s a clip of Mr. Obama’s statment, from Breitbart’s.

    Pons Asinorum (95faa4)

  8. GIBBS: …people want health-care reform and the debate on health-care reform to continue.

    OBAMA (right after the health care lovefest): Every idea has now been put on the table. Every argument has been made…Now is the time to make a decision about the future of health care in America.

    I think they need to get on the same page.

    Paul (4cc23d)

  9. Maybe it was Gibbs who should have been dressed as a pimp whore…

    FTFY!

    after all, he’s doing it for money. %-)

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  10. I actually think Gibbs is right in his characterization of Obama’s comments. He was talking about the political aspects of Presidential elections, where each side has 45% and then fights over the 10% in the middle, with one side winning 5.5-4.5 or 6-4 on that remaining 10%. He says you can’t govern or deliver promised legislation on that arrangement, and then says you won’t get comprehensive health care reform on that basis.

    But, on the other hand, what he is DOING is taking his 53-47 victory, and using it as an excuse 14 months later to cram-down a bill that is unpopular. It’s not 50+1, it is about 50+15 — but it’s against him.

    Shipwreckedcrew (96a8a6)

  11. They STILL think their problem is one of getting across the message to a disengaged populace. Effing amazing. Especially when their approval keeps slipping. What are they thinking, that the people are getting less knowledgeable as the debate goes on? [perhaps they are if they read the LA Times]

    Kevin Murphy (805c5b)

  12. What the hell is wrong with you people? Don’t you know that Obama of The Intelligent, who refuses to release his university grade records, knows what is best for you stupid unwashed masses? How can you question He Who Would Be King?

    And don’t you stupid people understand that it is Robert Gibbs Of The Glib’s job to protect Obama of The Intelligent, He Who Would Be King, and convince you that you are too stupid to know what is best for you?

    I am sure that the whole problem is that the world’s greatest orator has simply not given enough speeches about Obamacare. Only 35, and it should have been 70.

    retire05 (1e885c)

  13. It’s almost as if people forget the bill passed with 60 votes.

    imdw (8f8ead)

  14. Maybe it was Gibbs who should have been dressed as a pimp…

    Comment by MD in Philly — 3/4/2010 @ 3:59 pm

    Gibbs is not the pimp….

    Jeff Weimer (952d52)

  15. Gibbs’ usual pretzel logic. Gibbs is fast wresting the “Most Useless Press Flack” trophy away from the sausage-fingered grip of Scotty McClelland.

    GeneralMalaise (2e0f70)

  16. One of these days Gibbs is gonna wise up and just stop calling on Jake…

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  17. When Gibbs talks, you must be ready to duck real quick.

    EART (9d1bb3)

  18. Gibbs is the perfect face of the inept White House. What a goof.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  19. Never thought I’d see the day when a WH spokesblowhole would make McClelland look almost capable by comparison. Gibbs is Bahgdad Bob squared.

    Dmac (799abd)

  20. Blobbert Glibbs. What a complete assface. How is he credible in any form? Blatant lying now passes for “democracy”. These fools need to suffer defeat upon defeat for the remainder of this country’s existence.

    Ashen (eb959c)

  21. “I see nothing, I hear nothing,” Gibbs doing his best Sergeant Schultz impersonation.

    Marie (02b253)

  22. Are we fighting Eastasia or Eurasia today? My viewscreen is on the blink.

    Ag80 (f67beb)

  23. imdw — the Senate bill passed with 50 votes. But that bill hasn’t yet received a single vote in the House.

    And the House bill has not passed the Senate with 60 votes.

    They are separate pieces of legislation until they are made identical, and they cannot be signed into law until that happens.

    The House wants substantial changes to the Senate bill. So, what will become the Senate bill subject to signature by the Pres will NOT get 60 votes.

    shipwreckedcrew (3dde12)

  24. I know impeachment is only for high crimes misdemeanors – but is there any way it could be done out of mercy, kind of like shooting a horse?

    The Founders did not anticipate this.

    Amphipolis (b120ce)

  25. #24 Amphipolis:

    The Founders did not anticipate this.

    Good question.

    I rather think they felt they had a similar situation on their hands with “Mad King George,” and dealt with it by starting up a whole ‘nother country.

    We don’t have that luxury today, and that is what I think they did not anticipate.

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  26. “imdw — the Senate bill passed with 50 votes. But that bill hasn’t yet received a single vote in the House.”

    Look it up again.

    http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/12/24/health.care/index.html

    “The bill passed in a 60-39 party line vote after months of heated partisan debate”

    “The House wants substantial changes to the Senate bill. So, what will become the Senate bill subject to signature by the Pres will NOT get 60 votes.”

    What I’m guessing Obama is now angling for is the house to pass the senate bill and then changes being made later in the budget process as part of normal budget reconciliation, rather than a special reconciliation bill. I’m not even sure what changes the house demands, or if there’s a hurry to have them in place now or in the next year.

    My guess is Obama is welcoming a fight that is about budgets and health care.

    “The Founders did not anticipate this.”

    Reading what the federalist papers have to say about requiring supermajorities in the senate is quite instructive.

    imdw (164e30)

  27. Why not have a 50 strategy-as in letting each of the fifty states decide for themselves how to reform health care within their borders?

    Michael Ejercito (526413)

  28. Comment by imdw — 3/5/2010 @ 9:31 am

    And the link to those views is…..?

    AD - RtR/OS! (abf357)

  29. You want me to link you to the federalist papers?

    imdw (50eb29)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1015 secs.