Reminds me of what I just read over at fivethirtyeight. From Nate Silver:

"On the one hand, I'd have trouble being persuaded that progressives would actually prefer to maintain the status quo than to pass a bill without a public option. Now, I can certainly imagine a bill being so bad that it would be a net setback to progressives' goals -- say you had something without a public option, employer mandate, or a national exchange, but with a strict individual mandate and which only provided subsidies up to 200 percent of poverty -- and that this bill were funded through a fairly regressive means like a value added tax. That would be a pretty terrible piece of policy and progressives (and most everyone else not employed by an insurance company) would be right to oppose it. But if you took something more like the current House bill, stripped it of the public option (replacing it with co-ops, I guess) and maintained everything else, this bill would still accomplish several important progressive and pubic policy goals (and avoid a major near-term political disaster for the President). Progressives, rightly, would like such a bill less. But for them to prefer the status quo to such a solution doesn't seem credible. That's why a lot of people have trouble taking the progressives' threats at face value."

I can't imagine a mandate for individuals that would drive people to private insurnace companies only. I believe it would be a form of "forced insanity" to do so if there is no public option and make for a very short lived majority in the house and senate for democtats!

Am I the only one who never liked Steny Hoyer?

Shut up Stenny, let Nancy do the talking. Most women have to be strong (few options) and Speaker Pelosi said it all, with conviction. Hoyer says "we'll have to see" is the bs response you use against your kids. Now if we could only get the Pres to talk like Nancy. I am sooooo disappointed. Obama isn't looking at all like a leader. Rock star yes, leader no. Tell me I'm dreaming.

Flood Steny with calls and e-mails and let him know that a PO is must for any Bill to pass. Keep flooding your Reps and Senators. Anger and quantity is apparently all they understand. Not a dime to any of them until they deliver a PO.

Keep in mind this is supposed to be who is next in line in the House folks. We are going to have to change that.

Nancy needs to give Steny a GD collar correction. No wonder people see the Dems as weak.

Thanks Steny
yeah, that was brilliant
i think it is called tripping over your ego.

The Dems are like a really bad baseball team that competes against itself. Like the Dodgers - remember when they signed Kevin Brown to a $105 million dollar deal?? Then couldn't get rid of him? Or bid against themselves for Jason Schmidt, $57 million for 3 years and his arm was shot? Just write a damn HB bill and ram it through already. Geez.

Does the slow pace of Health Care and Insurance reform have you down? Are you a liberal progressive? Ever voted for the "lesser-of-two-evils?" Then I'm talking to you. Like most of you I've considered leaving the party and not voting and/or leaving the party for a third party.

However, both of those actions are problematic. If you leave the party out of frustration then corporations and authoritarian government wins. My heart and mind would love to support Nader or a Nader-like idealist, but it seems that route has a poor result also, ends with a Republican in the White House and they win. Both poor outcomes.

CHANGE YOUR REGISTRATION.

FROM DEMOCRAT TO "I Decline-to-State-a-political-party."

What does that solve or change you may rightly ask. Well, first it's a clear message to Democratic candidates and the Democratic Party that they can no longer take you for granted. It's a way of sending a strong message that doesn't require a fund-raising machine or great personal wealth to achieve.

Secondly, it keeps you "IN THE GAME." With Republicans ability to steal elections, EVERY VOTE COUNTS.

Imagine if over the next few days or weeks large numbers of progressive voters were to leave the party. I'm thinking it would attract notice by the Emanuel's and Max-the-axe-of-reform Baucus-types.

Right now we're sitting at the table with nothing. Making Democrats work for us gives a chance at a winning hand AND a decent poker face. I've read that people do NOT lightly change their party registration. If that's true a mass exodus of registered voters just might briefly compete with big money. I think it's worth a try.

Vote for the Democratic Party "lesser-of-two-evils," because that's the default position, as not voting helps Republicans. But, take away the Democratic Party's belief that progressives are "in-the-pocket." Changing your registration tells the party they're on "PROBATION," until such time they can get their act together.

I know it's a small difference but it just might be enough to help pass the public option and help the progressive agenda. There's no penalties for changing registration as long as it's done 15 days before the election. To have an effect on this debate you need to do it yesterday.

What the heck else is working for Progressives?

If the Democrats ain't dancin' with them what brung 'em, they should be prepared to walk home.