June 29, 2012

NEWSWEEK/DAILY BEAST POST-SC POLL
— CAC

Obama's handling on health care, per Newsweek:
37% approve, 58% disapprove (44% strongly disapprove).

Approve/Disapprove of Supreme Court Ruling?
Approve 45%
Disapprove 50%

Who should run Congress?
Republicans 38%
Democrats 36%

President?
Obama 47%
Romney 44%

Do you think Barack Obama has done his job well enough to deserve re-election, or is it time to replace him with somebody else?
He has 42%
Time to replace 48%

Does the Supreme Court's decision make you more or less likely to vote for Mitt Romney for President, or does it not impact your opinion?
More likely 32%
Less likely 11%
Not Sure 7%
No Impact 50%

Does the Supreme Court's decision make you more or less likely to vote for Barack Obama for re-election, or does it not impact your opinion?
More likely 14%
Less Likely 29%
Not Sure 5%
No Impact 51%

Generally speaking, do you think the Supreme Court's decision will make our country better off, worse off, or will it not be impacted?
Better off 24%
Worse off 47%
No impact 14%
Not Sure 14%

This poll was conducted immediately after the announcement. Breaks down D+2, ideology 24% liberal 46% moderate 30% conservative.

Not exactly what a lot of political experts would have enjoyed, I think. The nation still disapproves of Obamacare, and calling it, more appropriately, ObamaTax would be effective. The court decision seems to have influenced voter opinions in favor of Romney, though I still suspect the President will enjoy an approval bounce out of this. How long that lasts will depend on Friday's jobs report.

Posted by: CAC at 01:54 PM | Comments (178)
Post contains 267 words, total size 2 kb.

1 President? Obama 47% Romney 44% or is it time to replace him with somebody else? He has 42% Time to replace 48% DaFuq?

Posted by: cajun carrot at June 29, 2012 01:56 PM (mO2XR)

2 The TEA party is finished.

Posted by: James Carville at June 29, 2012 01:57 PM (O6q63)

3 I like that poll.

Posted by: Dianna at June 29, 2012 01:58 PM (1jshM)

4 Suck on it bitches!

Posted by: They call me Barky at June 29, 2012 01:59 PM (TAT66)

5

"President?
Obama 47%
Romney 44%

or is it time to replace him with somebody else?
He has 42%
Time to replace 48%


DaFuq?"

 

 

Simple, no one wants to vote for Romneycare when it comes to this issue.  Mitt Romneycare was the last person the GOP should have nominated, but I remember how everyone was saying Obamacare would be overturned and the election would be all about the economy.....BULLSHIT.

Posted by: doug at June 29, 2012 02:00 PM (gUGI6)

6 CAC, what would be your list of senate seats which are winnable in descending order of probability? Dig the art threads too. They really rile up the right people.

Posted by: D. Hopper at June 29, 2012 02:02 PM (AVfT8)

7 3 The TEA party is finished. Posted by: James Carville at June 29, 2012 06:57 PM (O6q63) President? Obama 47% Romney 44% I see a relation here...

Posted by: cajun carrot at June 29, 2012 02:02 PM (mO2XR)

8 You will pay you new taxes to me, enjoy the shitty new health care I gave you and you will re-elect me as President.

But first you will blow me.

Posted by: Emperor Barak at June 29, 2012 02:02 PM (fRlaj)

9 Newsweek/Daily Beast:  Stalwarts of fairness and polite politics.

Posted by: Soona at June 29, 2012 02:03 PM (+2AB7)

10 Bwhahahahaha!!!!!

Posted by: They call me Barky at June 29, 2012 02:03 PM (TAT66)

11 Newsweek poll, at 10 points to every Republican slot and take them away from the Dem.

Posted by: Vic at June 29, 2012 02:03 PM (YdQQY)

12

Question.  Is this the same Newsweek WaPo sold for a dollar in 2010?

  

Posted by: Scandia at June 29, 2012 02:04 PM (WzLTm)

13 46% moderate. That's a ridiculous sample and we still do very well.

Posted by: Big T Party at June 29, 2012 02:04 PM (EhUTA)

14 DaFuq?


Easy to reconcile the numbers. 5% think Obama does not deserve reelection, but will nevertheless vote for him over Romney, because Romney is "even worse".

Posted by: wooga at June 29, 2012 02:04 PM (vjyZP)

15 So I'm guessing some of the people who disapprove of how Obama went about healthcare felt that he didn't go far enough? I was surprised how much bitching I've heard the last 24 hours about how we still don't have universal healthcare.

Posted by: Adam Smith's Invisible Pimp Hand at June 29, 2012 02:04 PM (ZhEoC)

16 If you like the Post Office, you're gonna love health care. Posted by: Doctor Fish at June 29, 2012 06:56 PM (hvwLi Wife is an RCA for Post Office, which means she gets called in when the Unionistas take vacay or are sick. Guess who has a full schedule next week....

Posted by: cajun carrot at June 29, 2012 02:04 PM (mO2XR)

17 Newsweek poll, at 10 points to every Republican slot and take them away from the Dem.

Posted by: Vic at June 29, 2012 07:03 PM (YdQQY)

See, you've discovered the method to my madness of posting a Newsweek poll.

If the $1 media company can't kiss the President's butt post-decision...

Posted by: CAC at June 29, 2012 02:04 PM (NI/v1)

18 The problem with these polls is that they are too damn long. The questions are too long, the polls go on too long, and the pollee just basically loses interest, stops listening and says anything to get teh damn poll over with.


Posted by: scottst at June 29, 2012 02:05 PM (VzjHz)

19 17 46% moderate. That's a ridiculous sample and we still do very well. Posted by: Big T Party at June 29, 2012 07:04 PM (EhUTA) 3 The TEA party is finished. Posted by: James Carville at June 29, 2012 06:57 PM (O6q63) Romney 44% Again, I find this relevant.

Posted by: cajun carrot at June 29, 2012 02:06 PM (mO2XR)

20

CAC - serious question.

Can we get to 51 in November in the upper chamber?

Posted by: Scandia at June 29, 2012 02:06 PM (WzLTm)

21 SCOTUS decision makes me less likely to vote for Mitt Romney 11%.  WTF does Romney have to do with Obamacare? Nothing obviously the 11% is just raw Obama partisans trying to maximize numbers that make him look good.

Ok I get that, but then why the 14% More likely after scotus decision... Are there really 3% of the population that likes the law if scotus likes it?  Or were 3% of the aforementioned "partisan maximizers" simply slow to grasp which answer would most make Obama look good?

Posted by: Shiggz RocketSurgeon at June 29, 2012 02:06 PM (RfvTE)

22 Eh, I'm kinda burned out on tea leaves since Obamacare was upheld. Let's just have the election already.

Posted by: JDTAY at June 29, 2012 02:06 PM (a0nis)

23 If you like the Post Office, you're gonna love health care.

Posted by: Doctor Fish at June 29, 2012 06:56 PM (hvwLi)


=============


More like, if you like DMV, you're gonna love health care.


I have actually been to post offices that don't make me pull my hair out.....not so with ANY DMV.

Posted by: Tami at June 29, 2012 02:06 PM (X6akg)

24 Do you think Barack Obama has done his job well enough to deserve re-election, or is it time to replace him with somebody else?
He has 42%
Time to replace 48%




Did Newsweak mention that 48% of the people polled are racists?

Posted by: TheQuietMan at June 29, 2012 02:07 PM (hAvUy)

25 Yep, if things continue on their present course it will be a Cartersque landslide.

Posted by: Vic at June 29, 2012 02:07 PM (YdQQY)

26 "ideology 24% liberal 46% moderate 30% conservative"

Well, that ideological breakdown is nowhere near the results of Gallup's polling over the past two-plus decades, which has consistently showed a consistent 2-to-1 gap (approx.) between conservatives and liberals:

http://tinyurl.com/c2hpbf8

Thus, even those these results are good for Republicans/conservatives, these polling results are probably under-reporting the positive news for Republicans/conservatives.

Posted by: Slappy at June 29, 2012 02:07 PM (LTbLf)

27 I posted this at the end of the last thread, but I will re-post it here because I don't want to spread disinformation, which apparently I was. Obama will be at the White House on July 4th to celebrate his daughter's birthday and host military families for a BBQ.

Posted by: ParanoidGirlInSeattle at June 29, 2012 02:07 PM (RZ8pf)

28 The SCOAMT is a democrat, yes?  Ergo, F*&% him, he is my enemy.

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at June 29, 2012 02:08 PM (/i3Yt)

29 Will there be an end to polls once this election is over?  No?  Shit.

Posted by: Soona at June 29, 2012 02:08 PM (+2AB7)

30 At least Harriet Miers wouldn't have thought outside the box when voting with the SCOTUS progressives for a gigantic government grab of power.

Posted by: Valiant at June 29, 2012 02:08 PM (aFxlY)

31 I initially  figured we would get to about 53 in the Senate.  I'll go with 55 now.

Posted by: Vic at June 29, 2012 02:08 PM (YdQQY)

32

The airwaves need to be flooded with commercials bringing the message that ObamaCare is really ObamaTAX.

 

Don't let the squishy squishes come away from this thinking that they are getting "affordable" healthcare for free.

 

This is a huge new TAX which has the side effect of taking away the healthcare you currently have and/or like.

Posted by: Boots at June 29, 2012 02:09 PM (neKzn)

33 Man that Polisee chick is one hot mama. If it wasn't for Moochelle I would be all over Ms. Botox.

Posted by: They call me Barky at June 29, 2012 02:09 PM (TAT66)

34

CAC - touche on the method to madness post.

I'm just a little crispy today.

This does make sense and does give me pause in a good way as not even Tina Brown's merged Beast is bothering to loudly shill the polls for Obama.

Posted by: Scandia at June 29, 2012 02:10 PM (WzLTm)

35 26 SCOTUS decision makes me less likely to vote for Mitt Romney 11%. Posted by: Shiggz RocketSurgeon at June 29, 2012 07:06 PM (RfvTE) MSM did their job very well to pin Romney to this bitch. Which means people REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY hate Ocaremaggedon. I think people will be very interested to hear about tort reform in detail after this fuck up. Cause that was the real killer for them before with the Repub version. Two bullet points is starting to sound a hella lot better than 1000 pages. America, we like to keep it simple, stupid.

Posted by: cajun carrot at June 29, 2012 02:10 PM (mO2XR)

36 >>Simple, no one wants to vote for Romneycare when it comes to this issue. Mitt Romneycare was the last person the GOP should have nominated, but I remember how everyone was saying Obamacare would be overturned and the election would be all about the economy.....BULLSHIT.



Romney enacted Romneycare because the people of the state wanted it, what he didn't do was impose it on the nation against their will. See, that's an argument Mitt Romneycare could make right there. And everyone was saying it would be overturned during the nomination process? Everyone? I disagree, or to quote you : BULLSHIT.

Posted by: Dr Spank at June 29, 2012 02:10 PM (I/Xad)

37 Time to invest in precious metals.

- lead

Posted by: Yosemite at June 29, 2012 02:10 PM (aFxlY)

38 Even if we get to 51 senators.....what is the more likely scenario? They all stick together One of them pulls a John Roberts and ass fucks them at the last minute I'm guessing option two. But it's ok gentlemen drink up, if your household makes under 75k someone else's taxes will pay or your new liver......oh I guess that means the drink and the fucking doctor visits are on me. Fuck you

Posted by: Mr Pink at June 29, 2012 02:10 PM (b2myz)

39

More like a Soc. Security office.  

The DMV's in Montana are awesome.  Three or four  happy old ladies with nothing to do but help.  Usually they have homemade cookies at the one in my county...  

 Coming from NY it was almost too much of a shock to take.

Posted by: garrett at June 29, 2012 02:11 PM (8eGWb)

40

Vic --- don't josh around.

Do you really believe we are gonna take the Senate.

I value both your and CAC's opinion and if your answer remains yes... I'm ordering large beer and sushi tonight.

Posted by: Scandia at June 29, 2012 02:11 PM (WzLTm)

41

If you like the Post Office, you're gonna love health care.


Posted by: Doctor Fish at June 29, 2012 06:56 PM (hvwLi)

 

 

---------------------------------------------

 

 

I tell people to visit the VA  waiting room on  a Monday morning to give them a feel of what "free" healthcare will be like.

Posted by: Soona at June 29, 2012 02:11 PM (+2AB7)

42

I see MO, WI, ND, MT, NE going to the Rs, possibly FL or VA.

With the 5 I see, and Brown holding on in MA, that's 51 seats.

Outside shot at NM, really outside shot at MI, OH, PA.

Posted by: CAC at June 29, 2012 02:12 PM (NI/v1)

43 CAC - thanks.

Posted by: Scandia at June 29, 2012 02:13 PM (WzLTm)

44

I'm having a hard time understanding why Obama isn't imploding in the polls.

 

Posted by: Fresh at June 29, 2012 02:13 PM (O7ksG)

45 Did Newsweak mention that 48% of the people polled are racists? Posted by: TheQuietMan at June 29, 2012 07:07 PM (hAvUy) Yes, + or - 3% (19 times out of 20)

Posted by: Ed Gibbon at June 29, 2012 02:13 PM (4eNxd)

46 TSA was the analogy used most correctly in these comments a few days ago.

Posted by: scottst at June 29, 2012 02:13 PM (VzjHz)

47

I'm having a hard time understanding why Obama isn't imploding in the polls.

 

I have a Gift!

Posted by: Barakhenaten I at June 29, 2012 02:14 PM (8eGWb)

48 Do you really believe we are gonna take the Senate.
I value both your and CAC's opinion and if your answer remains yes... I'm ordering large beer and sushi tonight.

Posted by: Scandia at June 29, 2012 07:11 PM (WzLTm)


Yes, getting to 53 would only take 6 new R's 55 would be 8.

Posted by: Vic at June 29, 2012 02:14 PM (YdQQY)

49 25 CAC - serious question.
Can we get to 51 in November in the upper chamber?


And if not in 2012, can we do it by 2014?

Posted by: wooga at June 29, 2012 02:14 PM (vjyZP)

50 I'm having a hard time understanding why Obama isn't imploding in the polls.

Posted by: Fresh at June 29, 2012 07:13 PM (O7ksG)

Most are still RV polling. Also notice the quiet nudging of the scale to make the samples more and more Democratic or liberal.

 

Imagine if this poll had been 40% Conservative, 40% moderate, 20% liberal, as most agree on. 2-1 Con-Lib.

 

 

Posted by: CAC at June 29, 2012 02:14 PM (NI/v1)

51

The sample is necessarily skewed.

 

Newsweak: Approve/Disapprove of Supreme Court Ruling?

Me: *slap*

 

See, my demographic has been completely skipped over.

Posted by: Wm T Sherman at June 29, 2012 02:14 PM (w41GQ)

52 But we will not get to 60. Not possible.  Republicans haven't had 60 in the Senate in over 100 years which is why SCOTUS is always liberal.

Posted by: Vic at June 29, 2012 02:15 PM (YdQQY)

53 Posted by: CAC at June 29, 2012 07:12 PM (NI/v1) I know it won't happen, but, for entertainment purposes only. Illinois goes to R. SHHHHH... just, imagine. Think of the MSNBC reaction. Then go clean yourself up.

Posted by: cajun carrot at June 29, 2012 02:15 PM (mO2XR)

54 32--- "...I don't want to spread disinformation, which apparently I was. Obama will be at the White House on July 4th to celebrate his daughter's birthday and host military families for a BBQ." Thanks for the update.

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at June 29, 2012 02:16 PM (C8mVl)

55

Yeah, TSA is the more likely result of having the federal government take over the healthcare system and then unionize all the doctors as Jan Schakowsky wants to do.

 

Even in the belly of the beast in Illinois, there are DMV offices (called sec of state but whatever) that function somewhat efficiently.

 

Unlike TSA, where you have to get nekkid and let strangers touch your junk.

 

Posted by: Boots at June 29, 2012 02:16 PM (neKzn)

56

I think the reason Mr. Hankey still polls so well is that everyone loves a good shit.

Posted by: wth at June 29, 2012 02:16 PM (wAQA5)

57 Everybody loves me, I gave them some free health care. Free untill I tax the hog-snot out of them anyways.

Posted by: They call me Barky at June 29, 2012 02:17 PM (TAT66)

58 The minute this country went from being run by Yalies to being run by Harvard guys I knew we were in for problems.

Posted by: scottst at June 29, 2012 02:17 PM (VzjHz)

59 TSA was the analogy used most correctly in these comments a few days ago.

Posted by: scottst at June 29, 2012 07:13 PM (VzjHz)

 

TSA people with blue gloves running your healthcare. Where do I sign up ?

Posted by: The Jackhole at June 29, 2012 02:19 PM (nTgAI)

60 people are dumb, so I can't say this finding is in error, but it sure is strange that it's Obama 47/Romney 44, but 42/48 keep him/replace him. So crazy.

Posted by: ace at June 29, 2012 02:19 PM (aw5Tx)

61 @63 Now the IRS will be the ones touching our junk.

Posted by: JDTAY at June 29, 2012 02:19 PM (a0nis)

62

Vic,

Not sure we need to get to 60 votes. If we get the majority, we get the gavel and we get to set the rules and rules are esoteric and completely at the discretion of the majority leader and speaker over in the house.

Obamacare is a tax and we have legal precedent to confirm such and can invoke reconcilliation to repeal with 51 votes... correct???

Posted by: Scandia at June 29, 2012 02:19 PM (WzLTm)

63 The minute this country went from being run by Yalies to being run by Harvard guys I knew we were in for problems.Posted by: scottst

There was this great quote on one of the Ricochet podcasts, "There's always a Harvard man at the center of any disaster."

Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at June 29, 2012 02:20 PM (famk3)

64

Posted by: Doctor Fish at June 29, 2012 07:15 PM (hvwLi)

 

 

-----------------------------------------

 

 

To be real honest, when Ocare was upheld, I started thinking that I'd quit my job,  collect my severence, get on SS and say, fuck you to the world if that POS law was implemented. 

Posted by: Soona at June 29, 2012 02:21 PM (+2AB7)

65

So, maybe I'm missing something in going over the SCOTUS decision.  It seems to me that they declared that the mandate was unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause and the "Necessary and Proper" Clause, because the government cannot compel her citizenry to participate in commerce.

 

Then, they said - and these were all 4 of the "liberal" justices and Roberts - that the mandate is constitutional ONLY if it is considered a tax.

 

So if Obama (et.al.) wants to see the mandate stand, he MUST admit that it is, indeed, a tax (which is what his legal team was  arguing  at some point before SCOTUS).

 

If he doesn't want to admit that it is a tax (which his legal team ALSO tried to argue before SCOTUS), then he will be in direct opposition to the liberal justices, AND the mandate will fall.

 

Because the mandate can only stand if it is a tax.

 

So Roberts put the Obama administration between a rock and a hard place.

 

Am I getting that right, or am I completely misreading things here? 

Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at June 29, 2012 02:21 PM (0xqzf)

66 It's a tax.  51 votes on budgetary items.  It can also be argued that repeal reduces the deficit/debt (budgetary).  Liberals will howl, but that's the only way it's going to get done as 60 votes ain't gonna happen.

Posted by: Mark at June 29, 2012 02:22 PM (fEXaF)

67 Vic- remember Maine. We are going to lose that seat for sure, that drops us to 46 seats.

Posted by: CAC at June 29, 2012 02:22 PM (NI/v1)

68

Yale?  Harvard?  Fuck those quakebottoms and stickybeaks!

Go Tigers!

Posted by: Zombie Alexander Hamilton at June 29, 2012 02:23 PM (8eGWb)

69 "Free" healthcare?  What is this?  A Medicaid support group?

Cigna, Aetna, UHC, Wellpoint aren't giving their shit away.  If you don't have it already you have to buy it in 2014.

They all signed on to Obamacare - the bastards.

Posted by: Mary Jane Rottencrotch at June 29, 2012 02:23 PM (deJfP)

70 If you like the Post Office, you're gonna love health care.
Posted by: Doctor Fish at June 29, 2012 06:56 PM (hvwLi


I'm sure it will implemented with all the compassion the IRS can muster.

Posted by: huerfano at June 29, 2012 02:24 PM (bAGA/)

71 So, maybe I'm missing something in going over the SCOTUS decision. It seems to me that they declared that the mandate was unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause and the "Necessary and Proper" Clause, because the government cannot compel her citizenry to participate in commerce.

Then, they said - and these were all 4 of the "liberal" justices and Roberts - that the mandate is constitutional ONLY if it is considered a tax.

So if Obama (et.al.) wants to see the mandate stand, he MUST admit that it is, indeed, a tax (which is what his legal team was arguing at some point before SCOTUS).

If he doesn't want to admit that it is a tax (which his legal team ALSO tried to argue before SCOTUS), then he willbe in direct opposition to the liberal justices, ANDthe mandate will fall.

Because the mandate can only stand if it is a tax.

So Roberts put the Obama administration between a rock and a hard place.

Am I getting that right, or am I completely misreading things here?

Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at June 29, 2012 07:21 PM (0xqzf)

 

Now they are calling it a penalty. I hear what you are sayin !

Posted by: The Jackhole at June 29, 2012 02:24 PM (nTgAI)

72

Teresa - your review of how this went down is correct however, it is now law and Obama is under no obligation to admit it is or isn't a tax.

Consider the fact that they argued that it was a tax and equally argued it wasn't a tax in front of the Supreme Court.

This administration only cares about power and not about the details of getting there or having to logically explain anything.

 

Posted by: Scandia at June 29, 2012 02:24 PM (WzLTm)

73 Reading the tea leaves, other than the left elites I think it is dawning on lefties that this is bad news. It was all fun and games when the left thought it would be overturned and it would be a political issue. Now that it is here to stay it doesn't look so good to them. Obamabots not so thrilled other than seeing righties upset, but not so happy about buying insurance. I only hear the elites celebrating.

Posted by: Big D at June 29, 2012 02:24 PM (VSfsH)

74 The nation still disapproves of Obamacare, and calling it, more appropriately, ObamaTax would be effective. But it's not a tax! Think of it as a punishment, a burden, a penalty for living in this free country. You're welcome!

Posted by: Obama 2012 at June 29, 2012 02:25 PM (FcR7P)

75 There has to be a campaign add in there somewhere.. Barky's snuffaluffaguss interview where he swore up and down it wasn't a tax

Posted by: The Jackhole at June 29, 2012 02:26 PM (nTgAI)

76 Wise words from the FLOTUS : "Time and again, history has shown us that there is nothing - nothing - more powerful than ordinary citizens coming together for a just cause," Obama said.

Posted by: Lizabth at June 29, 2012 02:26 PM (JZBti)

77 So if Obama (et.al.) wants to see the mandate stand, he MUST admit that it is, indeed, a tax (which is what his legal team was arguing at some point before SCOTUS).
If he doesn't want to admit that it is a tax (which his legal team ALSO tried to argue before SCOTUS), then he willbe in direct opposition to the liberal justices, ANDthe mandate will fall.
Because the mandate can only stand if it is a tax.
So Roberts put the Obama administration between a rock and a hard place.
Am I getting that right, or am I completely misreading things here? Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at June 29, 2012 07:21 PM


Barry lives by the dopehead's credo.  Never admit anything.

Posted by: huerfano at June 29, 2012 02:26 PM (bAGA/)

78 CAC I though ME was still a tossup????

Posted by: Vic at June 29, 2012 02:27 PM (YdQQY)

79 73
You're right up till the part about the mandate falling, if its labeled a "tax" by the O socialists.

The ONLY way this will go away is if Romney and the R's take over next year.
Its as simple as that.


Posted by: 4 months to go at June 29, 2012 02:27 PM (v1uZf)

80

ObamaCare

The Compassion of the IRS and the efficiency of the DMV.

Posted by: rd at June 29, 2012 02:28 PM (9sUlj)

81
But Intrade has Obama up by 20%!!!!!!!







I'm almost glad that I've been working 2 weeks straight, doing a move at work. This week turned out to SUCK.

Posted by: In before the troll at June 29, 2012 02:29 PM (TIIx5)

82 Obamacare is a tax and we have legal precedent to confirm such and can invoke reconcilliation to repeal with 51 votes... correct???

Posted by: Scandia at June 29, 2012 07:19 PM (WzLTm)

------------------------


Remember that according to the "Byrd Rule" you can not use reconciliation if it reduces the income and increases deficit.

if it does not produce a change in outlays or revenues;if it produces an outlay increase or revenue decrease when the instructed committee is not in compliance with its instructions;if it is outside the jurisdiction of the committee that submitted the title or provision for inclusion in the reconciliation measure;if it produces a change in outlays or revenues which is merely incidental to the non-budgetary components of the provision;if it would increase the deficit for a fiscal year beyond those covered by the reconciliation measure, though the provisions in question may receive an exception if they in total in a Title of the measure net to a reduction in the deficit; andif it recommends changes in Social Security.


http://is.gd/lzvBbF

Posted by: Vic at June 29, 2012 02:29 PM (YdQQY)

83 ObamaCare
The Compassion of the IRS and the efficiency of the DMV.

Posted by: rd at June 29, 2012 07:28 PM (9sUlj)

 

Sign up now for the blue glove plan.

Posted by: The Jackhole at June 29, 2012 02:30 PM (nTgAI)

84 CAC--Nice.  Really nice because this is a al-Newsweak poll.

Posted by: eureka! at June 29, 2012 02:30 PM (xCpfo)

85

nearly 90 posts and still on topic?

So, it's gonna be one of those posts...

Posted by: garrett at June 29, 2012 02:30 PM (8eGWb)

86 shit ate formatting try again

if it does not produce a change in outlays or revenues

if it produces an outlay increase or revenue decrease when the instructed committee is not in compliance with its instructions;

if it is outside the jurisdiction of the committee that submitted the title or provision for inclusion in the reconciliation measure

if it produces a change in outlays or revenues which is merely incidental to the non-budgetary components of the provision;

if it would increase the deficit for a fiscal year beyond those covered by the reconciliation measure, though the provisions in question may receive an exception if they in total in a Title of the measure net to a reduction in the deficit; and

if it recommends changes in Social Security.

Posted by: Vic at June 29, 2012 02:31 PM (YdQQY)

87 nearly 90 posts and still on topic?
So, it's gonna be one of those posts...

Posted by: garrett at June 29, 2012 07:30 PM (8eGWb

 

I like turtles

Posted by: The Jackhole at June 29, 2012 02:31 PM (nTgAI)

88

 

Obamacare....

Think of it as the IRS with a colonscope.

Posted by: wheatie at June 29, 2012 02:32 PM (jPxSq)

89 people are dumb, so I can't say this finding is in error, but it sure is strange that it's Obama 47/Romney 44, but 42/48 keep him/replace him.

So crazy.


Devil you know vs the Devil you don't.

Most people probably haven't seen (or paid attention to) a single Romney ad yet, and have only a vague idea who he is.  For Independent voters, campaign season hasn't started yet.

If most of the 9% undecideds swing Romney, Obama is in trouble.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at June 29, 2012 02:32 PM (SY2Kh)

90 And a poll gthread no less garrett.

Posted by: teej at June 29, 2012 02:32 PM (9ek7+)

91 Posted by: Mark at June 29, 2012 07:22 PM (fEXaF) Well, now that I've chewed on it more. I believe Roberts passive ruling is more about saying, they have to say it's a tax to pass it. Which means the Dems have to admit to it as a tax if they want it to stand. This is where the dumb pundits keep claiming judiciary ninjitsu. I think Roberts did not do the right thing. because it should've been struck as it stands, they passed it as a mandate. He did not say explicitly it was a tax. Roberts said as a tax, it will stand, as a mandate it will not. So they have to do it all over again, which Obama does not want because Oshithead thinks he speaks for the American People, and he says we don't want to do this again. Which means he does not want to do it again because as a tax he's toast. Roberts pulled a sly move to keep the court from being the decider, nothing more. Where the judiciary ninjitsu crowd is getting excited is because they see this as an albatross for the Dems being its election time.

Posted by: cajun carrot at June 29, 2012 02:33 PM (mO2XR)

92 I'm sure it will implemented with all the compassion the IRS can muster.

Posted by: huerfano at June 29, 2012 07:24 PM (bAGA/)







Lube? What's that?

Posted by: Luigi "Cleaver" Graberoni, IRS Agent at June 29, 2012 02:33 PM (TIIx5)

93 So, it's gonna be one of those posts...

Not if we can help it.

Posted by: Those couple of morons obsessed with dick jokes at June 29, 2012 02:34 PM (vbh31)

94 22 The problem with these polls is that they are too damn long.


Speak for yourself, I like long poles.

Posted by: Sandra Fluke at June 29, 2012 02:35 PM (2jQGY)

95 Not exactly what a lot of political experts would have enjoyed, I think.

---------

We're not going to spike the football.  Do you hear me?

Posted by: Crying Boner at June 29, 2012 02:35 PM (vOMX+)

96 @103 - couple?

Posted by: teej at June 29, 2012 02:35 PM (9ek7+)

97

Posted by: cajun carrot at June 29, 2012 07:33 PM (mO2XR)

 

Democrats will continue to call it anything but a tax.  They don't have to admit jackshit.  Will the voting public go along with their semantical argument?  We'll see.

Posted by: Mark at June 29, 2012 02:36 PM (fEXaF)

98 Long is all well and good, but a proper pole needs ample girth!

Posted by: Sandra Fluke at June 29, 2012 02:36 PM (8eGWb)

99

But, but Romney wants to fire teachers. And firefighters. And push your grandmother off a cliff. And tie your dogs to the roof of his car. His sons want to rape your women and his wife wants to dine on the entrails of your babies.

 

I am firmly of the belief that Romney will get a lot of votes here in WA (not enough to win the state, but a decent showing) and yet if you ask anyone here outright if they voted for him they will deny it.

Posted by: ParanoidGirlInSeattle at June 29, 2012 02:37 PM (RZ8pf)

100 101
I don't think so....I think Roberts said "hey, you guys fucked up putting this gu in office; it's not OUR job to kill what they did. It's YOUR job to think before you vote, OR to vote in the first f'in place".    Paraphrased.

The law STANDS now.   The issue is settled in the SC's eyes.
It's up to this country to stop it in Nov.    THAT was the main jist of Roberts' ruling, imo.

Posted by: 4 months to go at June 29, 2012 02:37 PM (v1uZf)

101

Does the Supreme Court's decision make you more or less likely to vote for Barack Obama for re-election, or does it not impact your opinion?
More likely 14%
Less Likely 29%
Not Sure 5%
No Impact 51%

 

--------------

 

No Impact 51%......?

 

This just means that these people have no clue what's in ObamaTaxCare.

No...fucking...clue.

Posted by: wheatie at June 29, 2012 02:37 PM (jPxSq)

102

...if it does not produce a change in outlays or revenues;if it produces an outlay increase or revenue decrease when the instructed committee is not in compliance with its instructions...

 

The former CBO just said that the change that was caused by the SCOTUS decision could increase the  cost  of Obamacare  by $500 BILLION over the next 10 years:

 

 http://is.gd/dBCvgS

 

And if Romney wins the election, then the Pubbies get to decide what gets sent to the CBO for scoring, right?

Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at June 29, 2012 02:37 PM (0xqzf)

103 Cartersque landslide.    Posted by: Vic

I think yes were it not for Barky's skin colour.  There are some real racists in this country, and it isn't the conventional ones the MFM would have you believe.

Posted by: dogfish at June 29, 2012 02:38 PM (N2yhW)

104 "No...Fucking...Clue" Strange how close that is to the vote % barky got in the election.

Posted by: teej at June 29, 2012 02:40 PM (9ek7+)

105

It's up to this country to stop it in Nov. THAT was the main jist of Roberts' ruling, imo.

Wow.  You are giving Roberts a LOT of credit.  I hope you stretched out before all of that contortion.

The only thing I can credit him  for is being a coward and a knave with no sense of duty.

 

Posted by: garrett at June 29, 2012 02:40 PM (8eGWb)

106 Democrats will continue to call it anything but a tax. They don't have to admit jackshit. Will the voting public go along with their semantical argument? We'll see. Posted by: Mark at June 29, 2012 07:36 PM (fEXaF) Then we throw it back at the court and say, "Hey Fuckhead, their still calling it a mandate. Torch this shit like you should have the first time."

Posted by: cajun carrot at June 29, 2012 02:40 PM (mO2XR)

107 No Impact 51%......?

This just means that these people have no clue what's in ObamaTaxCare.
No...fucking...clue.


Also, you have to remember that these are mostly people who don't pay taxes to begin with. Nothin' from nothin' leaves nothin'...

Posted by: Soap MacTavish at June 29, 2012 02:41 PM (vbh31)

108 Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure.

Posted by: steevy at June 29, 2012 02:41 PM (Xb3hu)

109 If you love the IRS, you're going to love ObamaCare.

Imagine filling out the equivalent of a tax form in order to see a specialist.  Each time.

Posted by: Tonic Dog at June 29, 2012 02:43 PM (X/+QT)

110 Obama's gonna win.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at June 29, 2012 02:43 PM (r4wIV)

111 116
Don't mistake what I said.   I think Roberts should have voted it down.
I'm just interpreting what I think he did.    What went through his head.  Not saying I agree with it.

Posted by: 4 months to go at June 29, 2012 02:43 PM (v1uZf)

112 A lot of big companies are going to be starting their health plan enrollment in a few months, and explaining who premiums are going up. TaxOcare may not technically be the reason (yet) but it will not be hard not to associate it with Obama. Now where the fuck's my tiny little violin?

Posted by: Sherlock at June 29, 2012 02:44 PM (ZuemH)

113 Well, now that I've chewed on it more. I believe Roberts passive ruling is more about saying, they have to say it's a tax to pass it. Which means the Dems have to admit to it as a tax if they want it to stand. This is where the dumb pundits keep claiming judiciary ninjitsu.Posted by: cajun carrot

The Dem's don't have to admit dick. They're doing exactly what they did before; swear up and down that it's not a tax.

The ruling is not the golden lasso you think it is.

Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at June 29, 2012 02:44 PM (famk3)

114

Roberts said as a tax, it will stand, as a mandate it will not.

 

That was my interpretation of it.  But IANAL; I studied Engineering.

Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at June 29, 2012 02:44 PM (0xqzf)

115 Donating to mittens is throwing good money after bad…anyone who sends $ to a guy worth a quarter billion is a darned fool and . . . don’t trust a milquetoast to do a man’s job! NoMittObama 2012!

JINDAL/WEST 2012….because America is worth saving and Obamacare is worth repealing!

Posted by: NoMittens at June 29, 2012 02:44 PM (z8Cts)

116 I read the headline as a South Carolina poll and thought, well duh.

Posted by: toby928 at June 29, 2012 02:44 PM (QupBk)

117 Posted by: NoMittens at June 29, 2012 07:44 PM (z8Cts) I love these.

Posted by: toby928 at June 29, 2012 02:45 PM (QupBk)

118 Roberts said as a tax, it will stand, as a mandate it will not.

That was my interpretation of it. But IANAL; I studied Engineering.

Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at June 29, 2012 07:44 PM (0xqzf)

 

WHOA !

Posted by: The Jackhole at June 29, 2012 02:45 PM (nTgAI)

119

Warren, Brennan, Roberts...

Selfish servants of Self not servants  of the Constitution.

 

Posted by: garrett at June 29, 2012 02:46 PM (8eGWb)

120 JINDAL/WEST 2012….because America is worth saving and Obamacare is worth repealing!Posted by: NoMittens

Pragmatic you are nothing if not consistently idiotic.

Get back to Hot Air, you fucking paste eater.

Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at June 29, 2012 02:48 PM (famk3)

121

Posted by: cajun carrot at June 29, 2012 07:40 PM (mO2XR)

 

SCOTUS doesn't care what they call it.  They only care what it is insofar as what they determine it to be.  They could call it lotto winnings and the SCOTUS wouldn't care.

Posted by: Mark at June 29, 2012 02:48 PM (fEXaF)

122

The ruling is not the golden lasso you think it is.

 

Lasso? 

More like a Golden Shower.

Posted by: The Constitution at June 29, 2012 02:48 PM (8eGWb)

123 Donating to mittens is throwing good money after bad…anyone who sends $ to a guy worth a quarter billion is a darned fool and . . . don’t trust a milquetoast to do a man’s job! NoMittObama 2012!
JINDAL/WEST 2012….because America is worth saving and Obamacare is worth repealing!

Posted by: NoMittens at June 29, 2012 07:44 PM (z8Cts

 

Elections, how do they work ?

Posted by: The Jackhole at June 29, 2012 02:48 PM (nTgAI)

124 132
Exactly.

Posted by: 4 months to go at June 29, 2012 02:49 PM (v1uZf)

125 130 -- Hey, you forgot Harry "The Constitution is Whatever Five of Us Say It Is" Blackmun.

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at June 29, 2012 02:50 PM (C8mVl)

126 Republican Supreme Court Imposes Sweeping Taxes On Healthcare

Posted by: NPR Headline News at June 29, 2012 02:51 PM (FcR7P)

127 Posted by: cajun carrot at June 29, 2012 07:33 PM (mO2XR)

You forget, having to backtrack and call it a tax to enforce it might work IF you were dealing with principled people, but you  are dealing with democrats and you (and all conservatives and republicans) should know by now that the "rules" of conduct do not apply to them.

Posted by: Hrothgar at June 29, 2012 02:53 PM (i3+c5)

128 And if Romney wins the election, then the Pubbies get to decide what gets sent to the CBO for scoring, right?

Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at June 29, 2012 07:37 PM (0xqzf)

Per the Byrd rule:

Any senator may raise a procedural objection to a provision believed to be extraneous, which will then be ruled on by the Presiding Officer, customarily on the advice of the Senate Parliamentarian.


If they get the CBO to rate repeal as saving the budget deficit overall, even though it will eliminate a LOT of taxes that are in it it will fly.


If not, they will have to invoke the nuclear option which I don't think the Republicans will do.

Posted by: Vic at June 29, 2012 02:53 PM (YdQQY)

129 OT I get angrier at Roberts by the hour.One a tremendous pile of shit he is.I hope is reputation is forever tarnished and it eats him up inside.

Posted by: steevy at June 29, 2012 02:53 PM (Xb3hu)

130 o/t:  Earlier today someone was arguing on two threads defending the law itself and the decision, made solely by Roberts.  The person was so infuriating but I found an excellent answer for all their liberal claptrap:

"As Ludwig von Mises spent his life expounding:

A society that chooses between capitalism and socialism does not choose between two social systems; it chooses between social cooperation and the disintegration of society. Socialism is not an alternative to capitalism; it is an alternative to any system under which men can live as human beings."

http://tinyurl.com/6ugfqje


Posted by: starry at June 29, 2012 02:54 PM (oZfic)

131 OMG!! Breitbart is saying that Obama is planning to give a speech on July 4th... in Paris! Jeebus, Romneys mole in the White House is kicking some serious butt.

Posted by: sherlock at June 29, 2012 02:54 PM (ZuemH)

132

 

I still think it is....stunning....that Roberts would do this.

....And then jet off to the ancient fortress of Veletta, Malta....for the rest of the summer.

 

Did a little searching, and it is a teaching job...."sponsored by The Consortium for Innovative Legal Education".

The particular one in Veletta, Malta...is with the Consortium school, the South Texas College of Law.

 

Well isn't that just....special.

The Dread Justice Roberts takes a dump on us....then goes off to spend the rest of the summer, out of the country....on a Mediterranean island. 

Posted by: wheatie at June 29, 2012 02:55 PM (jPxSq)

133 The Healthcare decision had no impact on my vote, why should it? It doesn't allow me to vote against him twice.

Posted by: Lincolntf at June 29, 2012 02:56 PM (HethX)

134 Pardon the interruption, this is a test, I appear to have been banned on the previous thread, post does not appear and identity info disappears when I click post. If I'm banned I guess that's cool but I would like to know why. If this post appears then screw it, as you were.

Posted by: wierd flunky at June 29, 2012 02:57 PM (tlhtD)

135

I will not dispair

I will not give up hope

I will fight the best I can

I belive we will win

I am po'd

I've had to much to drink

To Amishdude: Lancaster County pines for you

there are to many idiots in this place

 

Posted by: Michael in Pa at June 29, 2012 02:58 PM (QLKkt)

136 Nomittens. How do you get an off party candidate in office. If only 5% of Republicans refused your "better deal" you lose.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at June 29, 2012 02:59 PM (/jmMj)

137 So the dick in my mouth is really not a dick, but a tax?

I feel so much better about that.

Posted by: Clutch Cargo at June 29, 2012 02:59 PM (Qxdfp)

138 It's America, we like to keep it simple AND stupid.

Posted by: Sei Toldjah at June 29, 2012 03:00 PM (0hDIC)

139 it took til 119?! come on guys

Posted by: Kanye at June 29, 2012 03:00 PM (kEOQs)

140 Hey, you forgot Harry "The Constitution is Whatever Five of Us Say It Is" Blackmun./i]

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at June 29, 2012 07:50 PM (C8mVl)

 

Honestly, I forgot how he spelled his name, so I substituted Brennar. 

I also fucked up the punctuation.  There was supposed to be a period after the selfish.

Posted by: garrett at June 29, 2012 03:01 PM (8eGWb)

141 142 OMG!! Breitbart is saying that Obama is planning to give a speech on July 4th... in Paris!

What could possibly be more patriotic than a fundraiser in another country on Independence Day 4th of July?

Posted by: Clutch Cargo at June 29, 2012 03:02 PM (Qxdfp)

142

Brennan...not brennar.  

I need some bourbon.

Posted by: garrett at June 29, 2012 03:02 PM (8eGWb)

143

The partisan breakdown in the poll skews to the left.

 

According to pretty much the last ten years of Gallup's (I think) yearly partisan breakdown poll, the country is  around 40% C / 35% M / 25% L, not 30% C / 46% M / 24% L.

 

 

Posted by: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus at June 29, 2012 03:02 PM (U+vgB)

144 Obama is planning to give a speech on July 4th... in Paris!

Most likely another mea culpa (excluding His Wonderfulness, of course) for our sins.

Posted by: Soap MacTavish at June 29, 2012 03:03 PM (vbh31)

145 So, what's Obongo's excuse for going to Paris?
Doesn't he have to have a fake reason to go besides fundraising with celebrities?

Did I mention I hate him?
No? I hate him. Not "hate" hate, but hate.

Posted by: Clutch Cargo at June 29, 2012 03:05 PM (Qxdfp)

146 I don't think he is going to Paris.. I think it is his campaign

Posted by: The Jackhole at June 29, 2012 03:06 PM (nTgAI)

147 Wild Turkey, Knob Creek, Maker's Mark, Old Grand Dad, Bulliet, 4 Roses?

Why yes! Yes please.

Posted by: Clutch Cargo at June 29, 2012 03:07 PM (Qxdfp)

148 I hear the Chomps Elysee is delicious this time of year.

Posted by: Moochelle at June 29, 2012 03:07 PM (IoNBC)

149 The unanswered question of the century.  Why do almost all of the Republican SCOTUS picks either start out left or drift left over time and yet NONE of the Demo picks ever drift to the right or even the center over time?

Posted by: Vic at June 29, 2012 03:07 PM (YdQQY)

150 I believe a Senate majority is a distinct possibility. It won't really amount to much though. There's a damn lot of self professed 'conservatives' hiding out in John McCain's closet, and they will do their best to be 'bipartisan', by sticking their footsies out to trip up any conservative movements...and when it's the left, they're behind closed doors, negotiating Grand Bargains.

Posted by: Sticky Wicket at June 29, 2012 03:07 PM (L7hol)

151 158 I don't think he is going to Paris.. I think it is his campaign

I believe you are correct. The dick in my ass receded half an inch.

Posted by: Clutch Cargo at June 29, 2012 03:08 PM (Qxdfp)

152 So, what's Obongo's excuse for going to Paris? Seen my sex tape?

Posted by: Paris Hilton at June 29, 2012 03:09 PM (FcR7P)

153 So, what's "dog, medium-rare" in French?

Posted by: Clutch Cargo at June 29, 2012 03:09 PM (Qxdfp)

154 Anna, darling--when one goes to Paris must one wear only French curtains?

Posted by: Moochelle at June 29, 2012 03:09 PM (IoNBC)

155 >>>The unanswered question of the century. Why do almost all of the Republican SCOTUS picks either start out left or drift left over time and yet NONE of the Demo picks ever drift to the right or even the center over time? The being a judge corrupts the mind with elitism. It takes a powerful will combined with a true sense of humility to bear that ring all the way to mordor. A rare combination indeed.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at June 29, 2012 03:11 PM (wSncD)

156

As fluffy mentioned on the other thread....

 

Romney should go to a US town named 'Paris' on the 4th of July.

There are dozens of them to choose from.

Paris, IA

Paris, ND

Paris, MT

Paris, NY

Paris, GA

Paris, OH

Paris, AR

Paris, OR

....to name a few.

Posted by: wheatie at June 29, 2012 03:12 PM (jPxSq)

157

165 So, what's "dog, medium-rare" in French?

 

"chien moyen-rare"

Posted by: wheatie at June 29, 2012 03:15 PM (jPxSq)

158 Roberts did more than screw with our rights.  He also took the coercion of the states on medicaid out.  Which means, ultimately, that he screwed both parties.  The socialized medicine bill is an unfunded mandate.  If the states refuse to comply, the feds cannot withhold their medicaid money.

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at June 29, 2012 03:16 PM (/i3Yt)

159 Actually, the last time I went to my local DMV here in PA to renew my license, it went pretty smoothly. They even retook my picture a couple of times until they got one that didn't make me look like a psycho or pervert. As others have said, the TSA is a much better analogy for government-run health care.

Posted by: rickl at June 29, 2012 03:23 PM (sdi6R)

160 New post up

Posted by: Vic at June 29, 2012 03:23 PM (YdQQY)

161 Actually, the last time I went to my local DMV here in PA to renew my license, it went pretty smoothly.


I found that if I drive over to another county that has a far smaller population than mine there is nobody there and they have just as many open windows with clerks.


State bureaucracies are simply amazing.

Posted by: Vic at June 29, 2012 03:29 PM (YdQQY)

162 Romney's number here looks pretty strong to me. I wonder if they jumped the gun a little. Not sure how quickly the public absorbs the info. Heck, it took five minutes for the lawyers on the news channels to figure out that Roberts had actually upheld it. The weekend polls should be interesting.

Posted by: TooCon at June 29, 2012 03:35 PM (YcTIW)

163 I'd suspect that rather than the Post Office or the DMV we should be comparing it to TSA -- remember that SEIU covers health care workers also.

Posted by: rabidfox at June 29, 2012 03:39 PM (BqQpk)

164 Posted by: Hrothgar at June 29, 2012 07:53 PM (i3+c5) I don't know what I am. Considering I am not a fan of socons, I'm pretty sure I don't fit into that tent. But allowing these assholes to blow money w/ no repercussions (all the solar company bullshit) is totally unacceptable.

Posted by: cajun carrot at June 29, 2012 04:12 PM (mO2XR)

165 We are so fucking fucked. You guys don't even know. What kind of fucking country is this? Land of the free? Bullshit. Bullshit. BULLSHIT.

Posted by: Joffen, fucking sunshine patriot at June 29, 2012 04:13 PM (caAEA)

166 >>>>161 The unanswered question of the century. Why do almost all of the Republican SCOTUS picks either start out left or drift left over time and yet NONE of the Demo picks ever drift to the right or even the center over time?

I asked that yesterday. the most reasonable answer that I got was that the Dems make it so hard for an originalist, or true conservative, to get in...see Bork, Thomas, Alito....that GOP presidents have to nominate unknown quantities like Souter, O'Connor, and now Roberts. Scalia is the exception that proves the rule.

Meanwhile, Dems get to nominate the former head of the ACLU in Ginsburg, Breyer, the wise Latina and a former Democratic law clerk in Kagan and they skate on in. All in the name of GOP comity.

Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at June 29, 2012 04:15 PM (Asr6U)

167 Posted by: Joffen, fucking sunshine patriot at June 29, 2012 09:13 PM (caAEA) Quit being a pussy, this country survived way worse than this. This is just words on a piece of paper and irresponsible people w/ a credit card. Considering most people still invest in a country w/ 15 trill debt means we are still the beacon of hope.

Posted by: cajun carrot at June 29, 2012 04:17 PM (mO2XR)

168 OMG!! Breitbart is saying that Obama is planning to give a speech on July 4th... in Paris!




Hilton? No wait, he's too gay for that

Posted by: TheQuietMan at June 29, 2012 04:17 PM (hAvUy)

169 I was reading earlier today that John Roberts was talking to colleagues laughing and making jokes about his recent decision that he was going to an impregnable fortress for the summer. Such an elitist asshole.

Posted by: NWConservative at June 29, 2012 04:31 PM (9gSMk)

170 The first thought that hit me after I heard about the Supreme Court decision yesterday was "Obama has just won a second term." I posted that last night at Neo-Neocon, and she vehemently disagreed with me. This morning I saw a post from yesterday at PJM suggesting the same thing, and I reposted the relevant part of my earlier comment at #47. So far no one has replied to it. http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/06/28/did-president-obama-just-win-re-election/ As far as I can tell, my view is in the minority. Many people are more galvanized than ever to support Romney and the other Republican candidates. He raised something like $4 million yesterday. But my reasoning runs like this: There are a lot of conservatives and libertarians who don't like Romney one bit, but have been trying to force themselves to vote for him. They have been told that it's vital to have a Republican President because of Supreme Court nominations. Now the Bush nominee Roberts goes and does a thing like this. Many of those voters are thinking, "Oh, really? Why, exactly?" I think we just lost a lot of potential Republican voters. This wouldn't have been the case if, say, Kennedy had been the deciding vote and Roberts was in the minority. That would have been expected and unsurprising.

Posted by: rickl at June 29, 2012 04:38 PM (sdi6R)

171 Because a potential Romney nominee has a shot at being conservative. Bush also appointed Alito. Also, don't forget that the lower courts are appointed by the President as well. Who the hell knows what maniacs are down in the farm right now for Obama?

Yeah, Romney is a crapshoot. We could get bad squishy Mitt or we could get candidate Mitt who is so far talking a good game. I'll take the chance over the certain booby prize of 4 more years of.......this.

Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at June 29, 2012 04:55 PM (Asr6U)

172 Damn Sockpuppet: I know, but my point was that I think this has cost Romney and the Republicans some votes. I don't know how many. It might be a lot. People who were teetering on the edge of supporting him are now going to say, "Screw it, I'm voting Libertarian."

Posted by: rickl at June 29, 2012 05:06 PM (sdi6R)

173 "Legal Experts Were Completely Stunned By John Roberts' Healthcare Opinion"http://tinyurl.com/7rjc46j

If they were stunned, regular folks shouldn't feel so bad.....it was a sucker punch from some one you trusted.



Posted by: stare decisis at June 29, 2012 06:10 PM (oZfic)

174 I don't follow your logic at all, rickl. Roberts unfortunately ruled in this instance with the liberals to uphold ACA (NB Kennedy did not), and because we can't be 100% certain whether a Romney appointee will turn out like Scalia or Alito (or rather like a Roberts or Kennedy), we might as well give up the SC entirely to the left and let a 2nd term Obama appoint justices like Ginsberg and Kagan and Sotomayor, or worse-- that we can be *sure* will *always* judge each and every case beholden to the left/ Dems? That doesn't make any sense at all.

Posted by: lael at June 29, 2012 07:46 PM (kfIw+)

175 "The Schiff Report:  ObamaCare is Unconstitutional"

http://tinyurl.com/yezyrng

Posted by: stare decisis at June 29, 2012 07:51 PM (oZfic)

176 "People who were teetering on the edge of supporting him are now going to say, 'Screw it, I'm voting Libertarian.'"
Umm... why on earth would anyone do that? Because maybe Romney might pick someone who might not be totally conservative as a judge? They know damn well whoever Obama picks will be a 100% rabid extremist to the left.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at June 29, 2012 08:00 PM (r4wIV)

177 Even if we get to 51 senators.....what is the more likely scenario?

They all stick together

One of them pulls a John Roberts and ass fucks them at the last minute

I'm guessing option two. But it's ok gentlemen drink up, if your household makes under 75k someone else's taxes will pay or your new liver......oh I guess that means the drink and the fucking doctor visits are on me. Fuck you

Posted by: Mr Pink at June 29, 2012 07:10 PM (b2myz)



We still win because VP Rubio will break the 50-50 tie.  :p

Posted by: Serious Cat at June 29, 2012 09:42 PM (zrpqj)

178 et tu, Newsweek?

Posted by: kallisto at June 30, 2012 02:24 AM (jm/9g)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
152kb generated in CPU 0.16, elapsed 1.2876 seconds.
62 queries taking 1.1739 seconds, 414 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.