Obamacare Premiums to Rise Almost 25% and Some Consumers Down to One Insurer … What Happened to the $2500 Premium Reduction?



As stated at Town Hall, just days after Barack Obama gave Obamacare a ringing endorsement, it is now confirmed that consumers will be feeling the wrath of Obamacare premiums rising as much as 25%. As reported by the AP, as per the administration, Obamacare premiums will go up sharply next year under President Barack Obama’s health care law, and many consumers will be down to just one insurer. According to CNN, the average premium increase masks wide variation among the states. In Arizona, the benchmark plan’s average premium will increase 116% in 2017. Remember this when you go to the polls America. I can’t say we did not warn you and tell you this from day one. You were lied to America by the current president, do we really want 4 more years of Democrat lies?

Remember when this liar told you Obamacare would reduce your premiums up to $2500 a year?

Premiums will go up sharply next year under President Barack Obama’s health care law, and many consumers will be down to just one insurer, the administration confirmed Monday. That’s sure to stoke another “Obamacare” controversy days before a presidential election.

Before taxpayer-provided subsidies, premiums for a midlevel benchmark plan will increase an average of 25 percent across the 39 states served by the federally run online market, according to a report from the Department of Health and Human Services. Some states will see much bigger jumps, others less.

Moreover, about 1 in 5 consumers will only have plans from a single insurer to pick from, after major national carriers such as UnitedHealth Group, Humana and Aetna scaled back their roles.


“Consumers will be faced this year with not only big premium increases but also with a declining number of insurers participating, and that will lead to a tumultuous open enrollment period,” said Larry Levitt, who tracks the health care law for the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation. [...]

In some states, the premium increases are striking. In Arizona, unsubsidized premiums for a hypothetical 27-year-old buying a benchmark “second-lowest cost silver plan” will jump by 116 percent, from $196 to $422, according to the administration report. [...]

Dwindling choice is another issue.

The total number of HealthCare.gov insurers will drop from 232 this year to 167 in 2017, a loss of 28 percent. (Insurers are counted multiple times if they offer coverage in more than one state. So Aetna, for example, would count once in each state that it participated in.)

Daily Commentary – Tuesday, October 25, 2016 – So Is It What Trump Says or How He Says It?

  • It’s his arrogance that gets him in trouble and I don’t much care for it, although some do.

Daily Commentary – Tuesday, October 25, 2016 | Download

Wikileaks Show New Podesta Email Exposes the Democrat Playbook For Rigging Polls Through “Oversamples”



From Zero Hedege comes the following report on more information coming from Podesta’s emails. This time it is the Democrat play book on how they rig polls by purposely over-sampling to get the outcome they they want. Imagine that? Just recently an ABC/WAPO poll has Clinton up by 12 points over Trump. Really, who honestly believes any candidate would have a 12 point lead? It happens when you skew polling data and over sample by 9 points. So what is this farce intended to do, depress the voting turnout of course and have people believe that Hillary is so far out ahead, there is no reason to vote.

Shameful, simply, corrupt and shameful.

WIKILEAKS-fake polls

“METHODOLOGY – This ABC News poll was conducted by landline and cellular telephone Oct. 20-22, 2016, in English and Spanish, among a random national sample of 874 likely voters. Results have a margin of sampling error of 3.5 points, including the design effect. Partisan divisions are 36-27-31 percent, Democrats – Republicans – Independents.”

More from the emails of Podesta and the rigging of polling results:

Now, for all of you out there who still aren’t convinced that the polls are “adjusted”, we present to you the following Podesta email, leaked earlier today, that conveniently spells out, in detail, exactly how to “manufacture” the desired data. The email starts out with a request for recommendations on “oversamples for polling” in order to “maximize what we get out of our media polling.”

I also want to get your Atlas folks to recommend oversamples for our polling before we start in February. By market, regions, etc. I want to get this all compiled into one set of recommendations so we can maximize what we get out of our media polling.

The email even includes a handy, 37-page guide with the following poll-rigging recommendations.  In Arizona, over sampling of Hispanics and Native Americans is highly recommended:

Research, microtargeting & polling projects
-  Over-sample Hispanics
-  Use Spanish language interviewing. (Monolingual Spanish-speaking voters are among the lowest turnout Democratic targets)
-  Over-sample the Native American population

For Florida, the report recommends “consistently monitoring” samples to makes sure they’re “not too old” and “has enough African American and Hispanic voters.”  Meanwhile, “independent” voters in Tampa and Orlando are apparently more dem friendly so the report suggests filling up independent quotas in those cities first.

-  Consistently monitor the sample to ensure it is not too old, and that it has enough African American and Hispanic voters to reflect the state.
-  On Independents: Tampa and Orlando are better persuasion targets than north or south Florida (check your polls before concluding this). If there are budget questions or oversamples, make sure that Tampa and Orlando are included first.

Meanwhile, it’s suggested that national polls over sample “key districts / regions” and “ethnic” groups “as needed.”

-  General election benchmark, 800 sample, with potential over samples in key districts/regions
-  Benchmark polling in targeted races, with ethnic over samples as needed
-  Targeting tracking polls in key races, with ethnic over samples as needed

Sorry Liberal Media, a Polarizing and Corrupt Hillary Clinton Could Never Heal a Divided Nation


The Hill writes … Could a President Clinton heal a divided nation?

The answer, NO!!!! Note to Te Hill, what makes you think she wants to? One does not get to be one of the most polarizing figures, coupled with being a compulsive liar and corrupt individual that sooner belongs in jail than running for president and think that they could ever heal a divided nation. The idea that Hillary could heal anything is a joke. Establishment Republicans and RINO’s may go along with her, but they are just as much of the problem as Hillary is. If Hillary Clinton wins in 2016, look for a further divided United States as she pushes for more liberal policies and attacks the 2nd Amendment. It is getting to critical mass in the US and a split would not be out of the question.

What Difference does It Make that I further divide America?

Hillary Clinton_What Difference Does it make

If she wins the White House, Hillary Clinton will face the daunting task of healing the national divisions exposed by a vicious campaign season.

Whether Clinton could knit the nation back together is an open question. Her supporters say she will do what she can, but that the GOP will have to play its part. Opponents argue that she is uniquely ill equipped for the task.

The Democratic nominee and former secretary of State has been a polarizing figure for decades. She is the most unpopular nominee of modern times, with the sole exception of her Republican counterpart, Donald Trump. To many conservatives, she represents everything that is wrong with liberal politics.

Yet Clinton has sought to make overt appeals to Republican voters. Invited to deliver a closing statement at the third and final presidential debate of 2016 last week, she said that she was “reaching out to all Americans — Democrats, Republicans and independents — because we need everybody to help make our country what it should be.”

If Clinton wins, said former Republican Sen. Judd Gregg (N.H.), “For the first time in our history, we will have a president who more than half the people don’t trust and don’t like. That means that, rather than having the historic honeymoon period — being given the benefit of the doubt for a time — she won’t have that, unless she creates it.”

Next Page →

Support Scared Monkeys! make a donation.

  • NEWS (breaking news alerts or news tips)
  • Red (comments)
  • Dugga (technical issues)
  • Dana (radio show comments)
  • Klaasend (blog and forum issues)
E-mail It