What does HC ruling mean for Obama in November?

JimH52

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2007
46,723
24,694
2,645
US
What does the High Court rulng on the Health Care law mean to Obama's re-election plans? A 5-4 loss would have sunk him, but will this help him in November?
 
It likely means he will lose.

Had Obamacare been ruled unconstitutional, I would have voted third party.

Now the election is a clear choice between obamacare and no obamacare.

I can no longer in good conscience vote for anything but 'no obamacare'...that means Romney.
 
Obama will gain big time. The GOP thugs have been throwing a pissy fit over the healthcare plan for years, it was the #1 thing they were going after and it blew up in their faces, giving a crushing defeat for the R's.
 
So if the court had ruled against the law, he would lose. But since they upheld it, he will lose....:badgrin:

Thank you all for your very Objective Opinions!! NOT!

Face it, the GOP lost with a High Court that leans to the GOP. :clap2::clap2: But don't feel so down. I have heard that many on the Far Right are lining up to throw kids on ventilators into the street. That should make you PROUD!
 
Obama has defeated America's two greatest enemies....Al Qaeda and the Republican Party.
 
Obama will gain big time. The GOP thugs have been throwing a pissy fit over the healthcare plan for years, it was the #1 thing they were going after and it blew up in their faces, giving a crushing defeat for the R's.

Spoken like a true partisan HACK with NO CLUE to individual responsiblity...individual property...Liberty.:eusa_hand:

This coming from someone that idolizes a nutcase like mel gibson, and looks at a woman beating, jew hating lunatic as an american patriot :lmao:
 
This is Obama's worst nightmare. His signature accomplishment in 3.5 years has been ruled a tax. It was a bad piece of legislation to start with and now the spotlight will be on how much this thing will cost when fully implemented. Those dancing with glee either don't understand health policy or believe that we do not.
 
Itd been more likely had the court decided the otherway because he could have said "well I tried but..." and then Republican's couldn't really run against it anymore. Now there are sound bytes of Obama saying it's not a tax when it really is. It's not popular with the country and especially in Swing States. I think it makes it even less likely Obama gets elected now. Either way it was a loss for him because people don't want it.
 
On balance, I think this ruling hurts Obama's chances.

I previously believed his re-election was a shoe-in, but I also believed the SC would overturn the mandate, thus firing up the democratic base to get Obama re-elected so he could implement a public option solution. So now it seems less certain to me as this ruling is instead more likely to fire up the republican base. Will it be enough to put Romney over the top? hard to say.
 
I can't tell it is too soon but he did help the unemployment issue with this ruling, he will have to expand government worker to collect the tax. If he doesn't lose we are in big trouble.
 
This is Obama's worst nightmare. His signature accomplishment in 3.5 years has been ruled a tax. It was a bad piece of legislation to start with and now the spotlight will be on how much this thing will cost when fully implemented. Those dancing with glee either don't understand health policy or believe that we do not.

I would prefer a public option, but a mandate is ok too.

The Swiss have had one for 20 years and it works fine.
 
This is Obama's worst nightmare. His signature accomplishment in 3.5 years has been ruled a tax. It was a bad piece of legislation to start with and now the spotlight will be on how much this thing will cost when fully implemented. Those dancing with glee either don't understand health policy or believe that we do not.

Not an 'OR' situation...this is an 'AND' situation. ;)
 
This is Obama's worst nightmare. His signature accomplishment in 3.5 years has been ruled a tax. It was a bad piece of legislation to start with and now the spotlight will be on how much this thing will cost when fully implemented. Those dancing with glee either don't understand health policy or believe that we do not.

I would prefer a public option, but a mandate is ok too.

The Swiss have had one for 20 years and it works fine.

The question is always who will pay for it.

Comparing health care in this country with HC in other countries is like comparing education. It does not work.
 
This is Obama's worst nightmare. His signature accomplishment in 3.5 years has been ruled a tax. It was a bad piece of legislation to start with and now the spotlight will be on how much this thing will cost when fully implemented. Those dancing with glee either don't understand health policy or believe that we do not.

Not an 'OR' situation...this is an 'AND' situation. ;)

Good point.
 

Forum List

Back
Top