It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obamacare Facebook page comments mostly from small group of supporters

page: 1
18
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:
+1 more 
posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 10:16 PM
link   
Possible sock puppets on the move to promote the unpopular Obama.Care.

Seems many "comments" under various aliases are from the same sources !!

No wonder the ACA is such a screaming success for "millions".

Re-Defining "subsidies"





Americans began heading anew this weekend to President Obama’s official Obamacare Facebook page to gather information on the new round of health care enrollment, share their experiences shopping for insurance on the federal exchange and voice their opinions on the president’s signature domestic achievement.

However, what some would view as a robust marketplace of ideas is actually controlled by just a few, an analysis of the Web page shows.

Sixty percent of the site’s 226,838 comments generated from September 2012 to early last month can be attributed to fewer than 100 unique profiles, according to an analysis completed by The Washington Times with assistance from an outside data analytics team. Many of those profiles belong to just one person who created multiple aliases or personas to widen her influence and multiply her voice.


Obamacare Facebook page comments mostly from small group of supporters





posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 10:17 PM
link   
And their trending column is targeted towards lefties.

Two party propaganda.



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 10:57 PM
link   
Shock and awe...

This has become so normal that nobody even bats an eyelash at it any more. It's just expected and shuffled past like last nights left overs. I don't think they are even really trying anymore.

They've given up and this is what we are left with. Half hearted efforts to sucker you in. Unfortunately it still works just fine for a lot of folks.
edit on 11/16/2014 by Kangaruex4Ewe because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 11:02 PM
link   
from the article:


Ms. Huynh told The Times that she has never been paid for her posts but has volunteered for the California Democratic Party and was approached to become an Obamacare patient advocate. She said she was too busy to contribute in that way and felt she could better spread the message online. She has a full-time job but has declined to name her employer.





and She doesn't even know the pointlessness of it all !!

Definitely in the running for this year's "Duh" awards.




posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 12:19 AM
link   
If the ACA is so bad why not direct some of your anger at the Republican architects of it. Oh yeah, partisan politics.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 12:43 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen



. Many of those profiles belong to just one person who created multiple aliases or personas to widen her influence and multiply her voice


'HER' = Valerie Jarrett ???


Oh heck, wrong 'HER' ....LOL




Once The Times made known it was conducting an investigation into the audience on the site, at least three pro-Obamacare commentators disappeared or deactivated their accounts.


Figures....




edit on 17-11-2014 by snarky412 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 12:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: tavi45
If the ACA is so bad why not direct some of your anger at the Republican architects of it. Oh yeah, partisan politics.


Well like they said...

The Republicans wrote it but read it and scrapped it.

Then the Democrats passed it before reading it.

Somebody had to find the skeleton key right?



But Bush had a better idea that they all hated.

And then came Gruber.
edit on Nov-17-2014 by xuenchen because:




posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 12:52 AM
link   
a reply to: snarky412


Once The Times made known it was conducting an investigation into the audience on the site, at least three pro-Obamacare commentators disappeared or deactivated their accounts.



THOSE must have been Valerie's accounts !!!




posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 12:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: snarky412


Once The Times made known it was conducting an investigation into the audience on the site, at least three pro-Obamacare commentators disappeared or deactivated their accounts.



THOSE must have been Valerie's accounts !!!





Ah, I knew she had a role in there somewhere
She's always lurking in the background, pulling the strings



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 05:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: tavi45
If the ACA is so bad why not direct some of your anger at the Republican architects of it. Oh yeah, partisan politics.


Nobel invented dynamite, but you can't blame him when some moron blows himself up.
2nd line.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 05:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Kangaruex4Ewe

PT Barnum would be proud.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 08:17 PM
link   
I'm going to log in farcebook only to post on the wall there. It'll only be two words.

STOCKHOLM SYNDROME



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 08:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: tavi45
If the ACA is so bad why not direct some of your anger at the Republican architects of it. Oh yeah, partisan politics.


Well like they said...

The Republicans wrote it but read it and scrapped it.

Then the Democrats passed it before reading it.

Somebody had to find the skeleton key right?



But Bush had a better idea that they all hated.

And then came Gruber.


That's not true.

The Heritage Foundation wrote it, the Republicans and Democrats passed it in Massachusetts and would have taken it to the national level.....but the Democrats beat them to it. So now they are against it.

Gruber was there to help consult the Republicans, and he was there to consult the Democrats.

Why do you guys have to lie to make a political point and why is this thread full of buzzwords and talking points from the MSM and talk radio? Vallerie Jarrett, stockholm syndrome.....damn.

I hear the talking heads saying the same things. Me thinks some folks need to step away from the tv/radio and learn how to think independently.

Seriously, I'm worried about you guys.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 08:46 PM
link   
a reply to: sheepslayer247

The Republican plan died in Committee I believe.

Summary Of A 1993 Republican Health Reform Plan

They must have read it.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 08:52 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

I was talking about the original plan that they did pass in Massachusetts. You know, that was when Gruber was helping Romney and the republicans with the ins and outs of the legislation.

But thanks for providing that link. It does prove that the Republicans ARE supportive of this sort of healthcare plan, are only against it because they get no credit for it and have their base brainwashed in to thinking they really oppose such legislation.




posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 09:15 PM
link   
a reply to: sheepslayer247

Romney had a full Democrat State Senate and Legislature for "Romneycare"

The Legislature made many changes.....

and Romney vetoed parts of it.



In Fall 2005, the House and Senate each passed health care insurance reform bills. The legislature made a number of changes to Governor Romney's original proposal, including expanding MassHealth (Medicaid and SCHIP) coverage to low-income children and restoring funding for public health programs. The most controversial change was the addition of a provision which requires firms with 11 or more workers that do not provide "fair and reasonable" health coverage to their workers to pay an annual penalty. This contribution, initially $295 annually per worker, is intended to equalize the free care pool charges imposed on employers who do and do not cover their workers.

On April 12, 2006, Governor Romney signed the health legislation.[19] He vetoed eight sections of the health care legislation, including the controversial employer assessment.[20] He vetoed provisions providing dental benefits to poor residents on the Medicaid program, and providing health coverage to senior and disabled legal immigrants not eligible for federal Medicaid.[21] The legislature promptly overrode six of the eight gubernatorial section vetoes, on May 4, 2006, and by mid-June 2006 had overridden the remaining two.

Romney.Care



Massachusetts Democrats *OWN* Romney.Care


edit on Nov-17-2014 by xuenchen because:




posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 09:55 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen


On April 12, 2006, Governor Romney signed the health legislation.


Only Democrats own it? Once again, you lie. Romney signed it......ouch.


He vetoed eight sections of the health care legislation, including the controversial employer assessment.[20] He vetoed provisions providing dental benefits to poor residents on the Medicaid program, and providing health coverage to senior and disabled legal immigrants not eligible for federal Medicaid.


Ahhh, how sweet of him.

Obama signed the ACA and gets to "own" it. Romney signed the MHCR....and gets to own it.

Of course, that is only true if we are not being hypocrites.

ETA: Notice how you failed to address the Gruber issue? How convenient.

edit on 11/17/2014 by sheepslayer247 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 10:07 PM
link   
a reply to: sheepslayer247

Democrats *OWN* Obama.Care

All arguments fail.

Complete rebuttal breakdown.

The cats are out of the bags.

Gruber is now the new pain in the Democrats' ass (and Romney's too if you like).






posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 10:09 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Actually the insurance industry and their lobbyists own the ACA. Corporations and lobbyists own the vast majority of our politicians.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 10:10 PM
link   
a reply to: snarky412

this is SOP for intelligence and special operations activities....once you're "blown", immediately disengage, roll up the operation, and exfil.

it's also interesting to note that the use of force multipliers is a very important part of current U.S. military doctrine...
edit on 11-17-2014 by Daedalus because: spelling



new topics

top topics



 
18
<<   2 >>

log in

join