Even if you think the GOP is "losing" on the OBBB, based solely on selective use of polling, it is helpful to be truthful and accurate while describing it, even if you oppose it. The "cuts" are not cuts at all (Medicare spending will continue to increase), unless you're 1) an illegal or "undocumented" immigrant, and 2) you're an able-bodied person between ages 18-64 who refuses to work at least 20 hours a week, even in a "community service" volunteer position. Those are weaker work requirements than Bill Clinton eventually agreed to in the 1990s welfare reform bills. And it ignores the $50 billion rural hospital fund that helps those marginal facilities. I would never hire this author's firm for a truthful and rational analysis. Do better. It does underscore the need for the GOP to come up with a common-sense health care/insurance reform proposal, not unlike the Consumer Choice and Health Security Act of the early 1990s.
That poll comes from SSRS, which is heavily biased toward Democrats and has a low "C" rating from Nate Silver. I am adept at reading and adjusting poll results, and wouldn't trust SSRS any farther than I could throw the building where their offices are located.
No, not just redistricting. This is an astoundingly narrow understanding of what is happening.
Democrats are fighting FIVE internal civil wars, the most important of which is that they are pitting illegal criminal alien invaders vs. their own inner city residents; they are still diddling with green when the whole tech sector is demanding more power, more oil than ever; they are still trying to support Israel on the one hand and people like Mamdani who has posed with Muslim terrorists, on the other; they still don't know whether to claim Biden was a good president or an Alzheimer's patient; and they still have not resolved the war on men.
Meanwhile, the GOP is riding not one, not two, but FOUR waves:
*Deportation is removing at least so far up to 1 million Democrat voters. At a rate of self-deports and administration deports of 2m a year, the D party will be down close to 4 million voters by 2028.
*Voter roll purges are overwhelmingly removing more Ds than Rs. By my estimates, this will account for another minimum of 1m missing D voters.
*Voter registration shifts are, with very temporary primary periods in NJ and PA, all moving heavily to Rs (NM +5,000 since September, NC down to just a 6,000 D lead, PA Ds now have a lead of less than 10% of what they had eight years ago when they lost. Since Nov., we're looking at an astonishing 2.1m shift nationwide. Look for this to grow. (AZ's R lead is now 3x what it was in 2020.)
*Redistricting, already ensures a LOCK for the GOP in 2026 by at least 1 safe seat and possibly 3, regardless of what happens in any "tossup" or with any D-R flip, of which there will be some
*The Supes are about to boot racial districting, which will add another minimum 10 House seats.
This is why Ken Martin is saying "elections don't matter," because, well, they won't matter for Ds in the near future. Ordinary people, while they may not tell pollsters as much, are getting PERSONALLY afraid of Ds' violence. Now we learn that Trump admin people have to relocate into military bases because of the terror threats by Ds against them. No, this is not going to reverse, and no single bill---pass or not---is in any way going to affect any of these shifts.
Please post a link about those "record numbers." The only thing I've read is that Rs are voting more heavily than usual in New Jersey. I think the polls there will get the governor's race wrong.
That margin's almost 3x what the trend was from 2020-2022, and the biggest swing in one party’s direction in a loooong time. Voter registrations, demographics and the like haven't changed much since November (because they tend to change slowly and 6 months isn't that long), so the overperformance has all been turnout based.
Doesn't guarantee anything, of course--I wouldn't make any bets on the outcome of the midterms one way or the other right now–but it's also not consonant with a ‘Dem Civil War’ hypothesis.
"Since Nov., we're looking at an astonishing 2.1m shift nationwide. "
I'm curious about that number - The NY Times had a much smaller 360,000 voter swing since November. Why the difference? The NY Times article was in August so it should be larger now, but not six times as big.
The Rs continue to gain in FL, but not as fast as you say. In FL, Ds were 31.4% of registrations a year ago, and are now 30.6%. Rs were 39.5%, and are now 40.9%. In raw numbers, the R advantage didn't grow by 400,000 but by 231,383. The 361,949 D loss has to be counterbalanced by the R loss of 130,576. Netting it out yields a material difference from your claim.
Larry, I had a finance career in which getting the right numbers -- ALL of them, correctly interpreted -- was absolutely critical. Get it wrong in finance, and you will have a short career. Yes, the news in FL has been good for the Rs, especially over time. But don't b.s. yourself (and certainly not me) by blowing smoke. I'm good at this, and you will not slip anything past me. Numbers talk, b.s. walks.
Prior to finance, I was a journalist in the day when it was an honorable calling. One of the rules of honest journalism was: "If your mother tell you she loves you, check it out." Given you miss in FL, I would be interested in links to the numbers in AZ and NC. Please post those links so I can check for myself. Thanks.
FL now is R +11. Was D+ in 2021. That is a massive, almost supernatural shift.
Moreover, I made a living pointing these kinds of numbers out in 2016 when I correctly predicted Trump with "300=312 EVS" (304) and in 2024 when I correctly had Trump at 312.
When Ds begin to minimize or try to "explain" these numbers, they look up and suddenly they're down 11 points in a state they once controlled. Same is happening in NC where Ds had a 175,000 lead and now are under 10,000, or in AZ, where in 2020 Rs had a 100,000 lead and today it's three times that (324,000). Following the Amazing Zohran's election, you'll probably see both NC and FL gain massive numbers of people fleeing NYC.
I don't think anyone is disputing that you've been ahead of the curve in recognizing the importance of tracking voter registration and that's given you crystal ball-like powers. But now that voter registration is the new polling, the level of rigor needs to be taken up a notch by everyone.
Just trying to get you and Jim on the same page! I appreciate your work!
Correct. And yes, reg is the "new polling," which is problematic because all the gains Rs have made aren't even counting states such as GA, which few doubt has moved further R, but does not do voter reg by party, nor do WI or MI. But it's important that I used NC counties and FL counties that mirror GA to call GA (as did Seth Keshel). I don't think anyone is applying the phenomenal shift of, well, illegitimate voters leaving the system due to deportations and voter roll purges.
To be even clearer: I'm not minimizing anything. Yes, the Ds have cratered in FL over time. It's good news. But the Rs did not gain 400,000 over the Ds since last year. They gained 231,383. There's a difference: 168,617 to be exact. It might not matter to you, but it matters.
If, as seems likely, Mamdani is elected in NYC, I don't think outmigration will be "massive." Not because I minimize anything, but because when it comes to moving, there is enormous friction from a variety of directions. There isn't a big cohort of people who can just pick up stakes and clear out.
I also don't want to underplay it. My point is that changes of this kind happen on the margin. The media will surely inflate the exodus, because that's what they do. But the actual numbers will change roughly with the speed that an aircraft carrier changes direction as opposed to, say, my pickup truck.
I am analytically conservative. This by no means is a matter of denying change or dramatic results, yet when it comes to the numbers I try very, VERY hard to be cold-hearted and accurate, having learned the pain of blowing air up my own pant legs.
I would like to see hard evidence for your first two points, and better quantification on the others, meaning shifts in percentage terms and accounting for variations over time. I'm not calling b.s., but I have a rock solid hard numbers background and need the evidence before I'll be greatly swayed.
Reps missed a real opportunity. They could have simply taken 2019 spending numbers, increased everything by 2% and change, for the population increase, while killing any spending insanity either Party has chucked into thousand page omnibus spending bills, over the years.
As for healthcare, both sides refuse to acknowledge the underlying problem. It is the perfect storm of US healthcare being wildly too expensive, with far too many people residing in the US, unable to cover or even contribute to their own health insurance and/or healthcare costs, whether thru the workplace or unsubsidized insurance.
Those of us who played with dinosaurs as children, were taught the US secret sauce was our vast Middle Class, 10% at the top , 10% at the bottom, and 80% in the middle that were economically self sufficient. Tax payer programs provided for the bottom 10%, and needs they could not cover themselves, while all enjoyed the highest living standards in the world.
40% Of Californians and 36% of New York state residents are now Medicaid dependent. Only a few other states even approach that percentage, and they have far less population, so they add far fewer people to the total national Medicaid numbers. If 40% of Wyoming residents were Medicaid dependent, the federal government would be paying for the medical care of 250K people. When it is 40% of Californians it adds 13 million people to the rolls. Generally speaking, the US is now most poor, in the most populated places in the US.
Nationwide, roughly 89 million people are now Medicaid dependent, or 26% of the population, before we get to other subsidized medical care, outside the workplace. It all has to be paid by someone. On top of that, toss in Medicare, where the vast majority of retirees take out far more, than they paid in, even accounting for the time value of money.
Insurance is based on the notion, in any natural occurring group, some people will use more resources, others will use less, while the premiums collected from all, will cover total expenditures.
In the US, more than 25% of people no longer pay any healthcare premiums, and virtually no direct costs. Nearly no Medicare enrollee uses less resources than they paid in, except those who perish before age 65. This means whatever we have, we do not have medical insurance, but some sort of medical Ponzi scheme, ultimately paid by taxpayers or with printed dollars. That problem is far more important than how it effect elections.
I can't comment on the details of the law, and I won't make it up. What I will do is mention something that I know about: SNAP.
Where I live, you can buy SNAP cards for 50 cents on the dollar from rural drug addicts who buy meth with the cash. Oregon has a 10-cent deposit on bottles and cans, so they also will go buy a pallet of bottled or canned water, pour the contents onto the grocery store parking lot, and redeem the containers for cash.
This fraud could be ended easily. First, put a name on the SNAP card. If someone is elderly or disabled and has a caregiver, put that person's name on the card too. Require a photo I.D. to use a SNAP card. That this isn't done shows how stupid the lawmakers are. On the bottle/can return side of things, make returns be for store credit only, not cash. People could sell their credit for 50 cents on the dollar, but fraud would be reduced.
Too long and meaningless to read. Nothing to see here.
It's getting harder and harder to keep reading political musing everyday. Because everyday, sites like the LP and FP have to find topics to write about. The FP is branching out, but not to the type of "news" I am looking for. Human interest can only go so far. I have also found it easier to listen to the audios on the FP. They don't cover the whole article but then, current writing styles seem to tend towards the way to long. I'm pretty sure no one cares about such musings lf mine. But with three years of Trump to go, nothing today seems relevant to the ending 3 years from now. Even if the Dems take control o,f the House or Senate, they'll have no power to get anything done. Except we would have to tolerate 2 years of the left pushing made up impeachment articles and even ore nothing getting done. With no policies or principles that's all the Dems would have.
So I ask, why should anyone care? Isn't there more different news to report? Bari at CBS will be a great story to watch.
But a once a week round up from the LP would be great. A quick synopsis of what they said during the week. Not different topics like their weekend articles now have.
What the name of a bill was or is, is irrelevant, as we saw with the Inflation reduction act. The falsity in the name will soon be exposed, people will look for the effects it has on their lives.
Or as the Who reminds us, see the new boss, same as the old boss.
What is FP? I stink at acronyms. As for this site, I think it's high quality. But there are some clunkers, such as the article these comments are attached to.
It was a ridiculous bill that had a good part and lots of bad that will mostly show up after the midterms. How a supposedly conservative party can add to our massive debt is beyond me. My accountant tells me I had an effective tax rate of 6.4% last year, I pay more in sales tax, why I needed even more tax breaks I don't know.
It put lots of money towards DHS and ICE for immigration, one useful piece.
Medicaid is a mess. Funded by the feds and horribly administered by the states. Many states put confusing and crazy hoops to jump through to dissuade people who need Medicaid from getting on it. What they do is put the power of enrollment in the hands of social workers who can accept or deny based on if they like the person applying or not. In our state you can go through the county social services if you are on welfare or if you are simply applying you go through an out of state third party of customer service who are so poor they themselves have no health insurance and the phone backlog is hours. Make sure your phone is charged and that you don't have to go to work. Everyone below a certain income threshold is required to go on Medicaid, not via the affordable care act. Medicaid is a mess.
Want to keep immigrants off Medicaid? Good luck with that. Hospital emergency rooms still treat every person that walks through the door, have to, it's the law.
The GOP still has too many of the old style ones that haven't become Democrats. Kick the poor to the gutter and huge tax breaks for the rich.
When OBBB was first touted as such I shuddered because of the extreme hype, and as a conservative independent it made me think of a Barnim and Bailey circus with so much to see and when it’s over it leaves one thinking ‘wow’ that was great, but which acts did I really remember.
Even if you think the GOP is "losing" on the OBBB, based solely on selective use of polling, it is helpful to be truthful and accurate while describing it, even if you oppose it. The "cuts" are not cuts at all (Medicare spending will continue to increase), unless you're 1) an illegal or "undocumented" immigrant, and 2) you're an able-bodied person between ages 18-64 who refuses to work at least 20 hours a week, even in a "community service" volunteer position. Those are weaker work requirements than Bill Clinton eventually agreed to in the 1990s welfare reform bills. And it ignores the $50 billion rural hospital fund that helps those marginal facilities. I would never hire this author's firm for a truthful and rational analysis. Do better. It does underscore the need for the GOP to come up with a common-sense health care/insurance reform proposal, not unlike the Consumer Choice and Health Security Act of the early 1990s.
That poll comes from SSRS, which is heavily biased toward Democrats and has a low "C" rating from Nate Silver. I am adept at reading and adjusting poll results, and wouldn't trust SSRS any farther than I could throw the building where their offices are located.
No, not just redistricting. This is an astoundingly narrow understanding of what is happening.
Democrats are fighting FIVE internal civil wars, the most important of which is that they are pitting illegal criminal alien invaders vs. their own inner city residents; they are still diddling with green when the whole tech sector is demanding more power, more oil than ever; they are still trying to support Israel on the one hand and people like Mamdani who has posed with Muslim terrorists, on the other; they still don't know whether to claim Biden was a good president or an Alzheimer's patient; and they still have not resolved the war on men.
Meanwhile, the GOP is riding not one, not two, but FOUR waves:
*Deportation is removing at least so far up to 1 million Democrat voters. At a rate of self-deports and administration deports of 2m a year, the D party will be down close to 4 million voters by 2028.
*Voter roll purges are overwhelmingly removing more Ds than Rs. By my estimates, this will account for another minimum of 1m missing D voters.
*Voter registration shifts are, with very temporary primary periods in NJ and PA, all moving heavily to Rs (NM +5,000 since September, NC down to just a 6,000 D lead, PA Ds now have a lead of less than 10% of what they had eight years ago when they lost. Since Nov., we're looking at an astonishing 2.1m shift nationwide. Look for this to grow. (AZ's R lead is now 3x what it was in 2020.)
*Redistricting, already ensures a LOCK for the GOP in 2026 by at least 1 safe seat and possibly 3, regardless of what happens in any "tossup" or with any D-R flip, of which there will be some
*The Supes are about to boot racial districting, which will add another minimum 10 House seats.
This is why Ken Martin is saying "elections don't matter," because, well, they won't matter for Ds in the near future. Ordinary people, while they may not tell pollsters as much, are getting PERSONALLY afraid of Ds' violence. Now we learn that Trump admin people have to relocate into military bases because of the terror threats by Ds against them. No, this is not going to reverse, and no single bill---pass or not---is in any way going to affect any of these shifts.
Why are Dems voting in record numbers if there’s a ‘civil war’ going on?
Please post a link about those "record numbers." The only thing I've read is that Rs are voting more heavily than usual in New Jersey. I think the polls there will get the governor's race wrong.
Dems are, on average, +13 in elections since November 2024: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1JGk1r1VXnxBrAIVHz1C5HTB5jxCO6Zw4QNPivdhyWHw/htmlview#gid=415249345.
It's included flipping red (sometimes deep red) districts in Iowa, Florida, Oklahoma and Pennsylvania. Here's Reuters reporting on it: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/democrats-have-excelled-special-elections-what-does-that-mean-midterms-2025-10-09/)
That margin's almost 3x what the trend was from 2020-2022, and the biggest swing in one party’s direction in a loooong time. Voter registrations, demographics and the like haven't changed much since November (because they tend to change slowly and 6 months isn't that long), so the overperformance has all been turnout based.
Doesn't guarantee anything, of course--I wouldn't make any bets on the outcome of the midterms one way or the other right now–but it's also not consonant with a ‘Dem Civil War’ hypothesis.
"Since Nov., we're looking at an astonishing 2.1m shift nationwide. "
I'm curious about that number - The NY Times had a much smaller 360,000 voter swing since November. Why the difference? The NY Times article was in August so it should be larger now, but not six times as big.
Dunno. I reported, as did many other places, that the shift was bigger. In FL alone, you have 400,000 since Nov. In AZ we have had 230,000 net since Nov. NV +19,000, NC was D+175,000 in 2021, is +6,000 today. The Slimes is pretty good at cherry picking or at defining data so it fits their template. Heck, FL was D+ in 2021, meaning there has been a 1.2 million shift just in FL in four years. https://dos.fl.gov/elections/data-statistics/voter-registration-statistics/voter-registration-reports/voter-registration-by-party-affiliation/
The Rs continue to gain in FL, but not as fast as you say. In FL, Ds were 31.4% of registrations a year ago, and are now 30.6%. Rs were 39.5%, and are now 40.9%. In raw numbers, the R advantage didn't grow by 400,000 but by 231,383. The 361,949 D loss has to be counterbalanced by the R loss of 130,576. Netting it out yields a material difference from your claim.
Larry, I had a finance career in which getting the right numbers -- ALL of them, correctly interpreted -- was absolutely critical. Get it wrong in finance, and you will have a short career. Yes, the news in FL has been good for the Rs, especially over time. But don't b.s. yourself (and certainly not me) by blowing smoke. I'm good at this, and you will not slip anything past me. Numbers talk, b.s. walks.
Prior to finance, I was a journalist in the day when it was an honorable calling. One of the rules of honest journalism was: "If your mother tell you she loves you, check it out." Given you miss in FL, I would be interested in links to the numbers in AZ and NC. Please post those links so I can check for myself. Thanks.
FL now is R +11. Was D+ in 2021. That is a massive, almost supernatural shift.
Moreover, I made a living pointing these kinds of numbers out in 2016 when I correctly predicted Trump with "300=312 EVS" (304) and in 2024 when I correctly had Trump at 312.
When Ds begin to minimize or try to "explain" these numbers, they look up and suddenly they're down 11 points in a state they once controlled. Same is happening in NC where Ds had a 175,000 lead and now are under 10,000, or in AZ, where in 2020 Rs had a 100,000 lead and today it's three times that (324,000). Following the Amazing Zohran's election, you'll probably see both NC and FL gain massive numbers of people fleeing NYC.
I don't think anyone is disputing that you've been ahead of the curve in recognizing the importance of tracking voter registration and that's given you crystal ball-like powers. But now that voter registration is the new polling, the level of rigor needs to be taken up a notch by everyone.
Just trying to get you and Jim on the same page! I appreciate your work!
Correct. And yes, reg is the "new polling," which is problematic because all the gains Rs have made aren't even counting states such as GA, which few doubt has moved further R, but does not do voter reg by party, nor do WI or MI. But it's important that I used NC counties and FL counties that mirror GA to call GA (as did Seth Keshel). I don't think anyone is applying the phenomenal shift of, well, illegitimate voters leaving the system due to deportations and voter roll purges.
To be even clearer: I'm not minimizing anything. Yes, the Ds have cratered in FL over time. It's good news. But the Rs did not gain 400,000 over the Ds since last year. They gained 231,383. There's a difference: 168,617 to be exact. It might not matter to you, but it matters.
If, as seems likely, Mamdani is elected in NYC, I don't think outmigration will be "massive." Not because I minimize anything, but because when it comes to moving, there is enormous friction from a variety of directions. There isn't a big cohort of people who can just pick up stakes and clear out.
I also don't want to underplay it. My point is that changes of this kind happen on the margin. The media will surely inflate the exodus, because that's what they do. But the actual numbers will change roughly with the speed that an aircraft carrier changes direction as opposed to, say, my pickup truck.
I am analytically conservative. This by no means is a matter of denying change or dramatic results, yet when it comes to the numbers I try very, VERY hard to be cold-hearted and accurate, having learned the pain of blowing air up my own pant legs.
Oooook. Check back with me later. BTW, CT today just saw a massive decline in D #s.
I would like to see hard evidence for your first two points, and better quantification on the others, meaning shifts in percentage terms and accounting for variations over time. I'm not calling b.s., but I have a rock solid hard numbers background and need the evidence before I'll be greatly swayed.
Reps missed a real opportunity. They could have simply taken 2019 spending numbers, increased everything by 2% and change, for the population increase, while killing any spending insanity either Party has chucked into thousand page omnibus spending bills, over the years.
As for healthcare, both sides refuse to acknowledge the underlying problem. It is the perfect storm of US healthcare being wildly too expensive, with far too many people residing in the US, unable to cover or even contribute to their own health insurance and/or healthcare costs, whether thru the workplace or unsubsidized insurance.
Those of us who played with dinosaurs as children, were taught the US secret sauce was our vast Middle Class, 10% at the top , 10% at the bottom, and 80% in the middle that were economically self sufficient. Tax payer programs provided for the bottom 10%, and needs they could not cover themselves, while all enjoyed the highest living standards in the world.
40% Of Californians and 36% of New York state residents are now Medicaid dependent. Only a few other states even approach that percentage, and they have far less population, so they add far fewer people to the total national Medicaid numbers. If 40% of Wyoming residents were Medicaid dependent, the federal government would be paying for the medical care of 250K people. When it is 40% of Californians it adds 13 million people to the rolls. Generally speaking, the US is now most poor, in the most populated places in the US.
Nationwide, roughly 89 million people are now Medicaid dependent, or 26% of the population, before we get to other subsidized medical care, outside the workplace. It all has to be paid by someone. On top of that, toss in Medicare, where the vast majority of retirees take out far more, than they paid in, even accounting for the time value of money.
Insurance is based on the notion, in any natural occurring group, some people will use more resources, others will use less, while the premiums collected from all, will cover total expenditures.
In the US, more than 25% of people no longer pay any healthcare premiums, and virtually no direct costs. Nearly no Medicare enrollee uses less resources than they paid in, except those who perish before age 65. This means whatever we have, we do not have medical insurance, but some sort of medical Ponzi scheme, ultimately paid by taxpayers or with printed dollars. That problem is far more important than how it effect elections.
I can't comment on the details of the law, and I won't make it up. What I will do is mention something that I know about: SNAP.
Where I live, you can buy SNAP cards for 50 cents on the dollar from rural drug addicts who buy meth with the cash. Oregon has a 10-cent deposit on bottles and cans, so they also will go buy a pallet of bottled or canned water, pour the contents onto the grocery store parking lot, and redeem the containers for cash.
This fraud could be ended easily. First, put a name on the SNAP card. If someone is elderly or disabled and has a caregiver, put that person's name on the card too. Require a photo I.D. to use a SNAP card. That this isn't done shows how stupid the lawmakers are. On the bottle/can return side of things, make returns be for store credit only, not cash. People could sell their credit for 50 cents on the dollar, but fraud would be reduced.
Too long and meaningless to read. Nothing to see here.
It's getting harder and harder to keep reading political musing everyday. Because everyday, sites like the LP and FP have to find topics to write about. The FP is branching out, but not to the type of "news" I am looking for. Human interest can only go so far. I have also found it easier to listen to the audios on the FP. They don't cover the whole article but then, current writing styles seem to tend towards the way to long. I'm pretty sure no one cares about such musings lf mine. But with three years of Trump to go, nothing today seems relevant to the ending 3 years from now. Even if the Dems take control o,f the House or Senate, they'll have no power to get anything done. Except we would have to tolerate 2 years of the left pushing made up impeachment articles and even ore nothing getting done. With no policies or principles that's all the Dems would have.
So I ask, why should anyone care? Isn't there more different news to report? Bari at CBS will be a great story to watch.
But a once a week round up from the LP would be great. A quick synopsis of what they said during the week. Not different topics like their weekend articles now have.
What the name of a bill was or is, is irrelevant, as we saw with the Inflation reduction act. The falsity in the name will soon be exposed, people will look for the effects it has on their lives.
Or as the Who reminds us, see the new boss, same as the old boss.
Reminder to self, It's about the comments stupid!
What is FP? I stink at acronyms. As for this site, I think it's high quality. But there are some clunkers, such as the article these comments are attached to.
Free Press. Bari Weiss
Thanks.
It was a ridiculous bill that had a good part and lots of bad that will mostly show up after the midterms. How a supposedly conservative party can add to our massive debt is beyond me. My accountant tells me I had an effective tax rate of 6.4% last year, I pay more in sales tax, why I needed even more tax breaks I don't know.
It put lots of money towards DHS and ICE for immigration, one useful piece.
Medicaid is a mess. Funded by the feds and horribly administered by the states. Many states put confusing and crazy hoops to jump through to dissuade people who need Medicaid from getting on it. What they do is put the power of enrollment in the hands of social workers who can accept or deny based on if they like the person applying or not. In our state you can go through the county social services if you are on welfare or if you are simply applying you go through an out of state third party of customer service who are so poor they themselves have no health insurance and the phone backlog is hours. Make sure your phone is charged and that you don't have to go to work. Everyone below a certain income threshold is required to go on Medicaid, not via the affordable care act. Medicaid is a mess.
Want to keep immigrants off Medicaid? Good luck with that. Hospital emergency rooms still treat every person that walks through the door, have to, it's the law.
The GOP still has too many of the old style ones that haven't become Democrats. Kick the poor to the gutter and huge tax breaks for the rich.
When OBBB was first touted as such I shuddered because of the extreme hype, and as a conservative independent it made me think of a Barnim and Bailey circus with so much to see and when it’s over it leaves one thinking ‘wow’ that was great, but which acts did I really remember.
Yadda YaddaYadda the Republicans will keep the house and Senate in 2026 and win the presidency again in 2028.