General Discussion

I think the messaging on this should have compared the cost of extending the ACA subsidies for a year to Trump's $20 billion bailout to Argentina.

I did see one tweet from Elizabeth Warren, after the Democrats voted to end the shutdown without extending ACA subsidies, where she made this comparison, stating that extending the ACA subsidies for a year would cost taxpayers less than the $20 billion to Argentina. When I read that, I thought, "Why wasn't this the message from the very beginning?".

Instead, the Democrats focused on the devastating consequences of losing the ACA subsidies. All of that is true, of course, but it still leaves voters unsure of how much it would cost to extend it to them. THAT is what those voters who lean right (not crazy MAGA) tend to care about, "what is this going to cost me?", not "what is this going to do to people". I think comparing what the GOP has already spent of the taxpayer money, and on what, to the cost of extending the ACA subsidies combined with what that would to those who rely on the subsidies (comparison of rising premiums) would have had a bigger impact. IMO.