*findthumb

A different thumbnail image for this video could not be found for findthumb request by demon_ix.

I think it's political posturing on behalf of the White House. It mirrors their original strategy of allowing the senators and congress to at least publicly appear to design the policy so the president can strike a moderate and neutral position. Since the public option ended up becoming so divisive, by scrapping it they're building a convincing narrative that they were willing to compromise whereas the Republicans simply weren't interested in entering the debate at all.

Will be interesting to see if they're right. The real tragedy though is that they missold it in the first place and allowed it to get to this point. What they initially proposed was an already compromised and moderate position that should have been palatable to Republicans since from my understanding it was quite similar to the one enacted by Mitt Romney in Massachusetts. The point they lost the Senate and the ability to pass the bill in both houses easily in the state that already has mandated health insurance and to a Senator who supported that state plan should have been the talking point for weeks yet I only read it a couple of times in print.

So, something tells me, no matter how much they compromise here, the narrative will still be that they've created a fascist socialist (?) utopia.

Who killed the public option: MEEEEEEEEE!

*dead

This video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by ctrlaltbleach.