[quote]People loosing health insurance when it's goal was to insure the uninsured without affecting those already insured. Is disastrous.[/quote]Yes, the sheer [i]inconvenience[/i] of people having to switch from their crappy plans to slightly better ones is practically hurricane Katrina. [quote]The overall reduction in our working working middle class and people now working less. Is disastrous.[/quote]...As is all of those people choosing to work fewer hours because they can actually get healthcare without having to get it through an employer's plan! The horror! [quote]The shrinkage of the private sector (shifting to public) and over regulation of the healthcare portion. Is disastrous.[/quote] What are you talking about? Do you mean the expansion of Medicaid?

An additional five percentage points on household income over roughly 400 thousand dollars doesn't affect the middle class - in fact, it affects households earning about eight times the median income. It's basically just a reversal of the bush cuts for the 1%. On Obamacare, so far most costs have been offset significantly by subsidies, to the point where it's cheaper for many people, even those who fall outside the Medicaid expansion (though those in poverty in red states have been largely shafted by state Republicans). Of course, even when we're talking about people well above the poverty line, only five percent of Americans got their health insurance on the individual market, anyway, so the effect is limited. It certainly hasn't ruined everyone's lives - most people wouldn't even have noticed it. On the other points, as far as I'm aware, Obama hasn't really changed anything significant when it comes to federal welfare, and the relatively high unemployment figures are attributable to the financial crisis, obviously. Meanwhile, illegal immigration hasn't 'skyrocketed', though it seems like it's increased a bit since the financial crisis knocked it down (the population of unauthorised immigrants, according to Pew, had been growing steadily over Bush's term, but took a sharp decline in Obama's first term - though again, that's because of the GFC, what you're actually claiming is wrong), and it'd be hard for you to pin sole blame on Obama for the shutdown, considering that it was mostly just a product of the house attempting to legislate by force. And if you think it's a good idea for the government to default on its debts, then I don't think you understand what that means. I invite you to keep going if you want, but only if you check your claims, and make sure you can pin down the blame to a specific action or piece of legislation (or collection of those) from the President.

Which is unfortunate, and among the reasons why I think the cost of post-secondary education needs some serious addressing.