This horrific choice, to focus on the Affordable Care Act rather than the economy, besides costing Democrats their House majority—not to mention platoons of Democratic governors and state legislators who would have been handy in drawing the congressional redistricting maps the next year—created scar tissue that remains to this day.When he suggests that the Democrats focused on the Obamacare RATHER than the economy, he must be ignorant of the fact that - at the time of its passage - health care was the number one reason why Americans were going bankrupt. And perhaps he's unaware of the fact that health care reform slowed the rise in health care costs substantially (more good news on that today!) In other words, he's not paying attention to the fact that Obamacare WAS a way of focusing on the economy.
But the bigger picture is that Mr. Cook is limited to ONLY seeing things like this through the lens of how it affects elections...not the millions of people who now have affordable health care. Given the ubiquity of that lens, one has to assume that Cook and his friends would have suggested that passage of the Civil Rights Act in 1964 was a "horrific choice" for Democrats.
Now, don't get me wrong. The reality is that politicians have to walk a tightrope between pushing for reforms and not getting ahead of the public. After all, you can't get anything done if you can't get elected. That's democracy. But I agree with President Obama...the scales on that one have become unbalanced.
What’s most important to the American people right now, the resounding message not just of this election, but basically the last several is: Get stuff done. Don't worry about the next election. Don't worry about party affiliation. Do worry about our concerns.Perhaps if pundits like Charlie Cook were to pay at least some attention to the concerns of the American people - rather than always focusing on elections - things would fall more into balance.