Were you surprised by today's Supreme court ruling on health care

[Liberal_in_LA]

was the outcome a surprise to you?

32 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Time expired
	Yes
	21 (66%)
	No
	11 (34%)
	Other
	0 (0%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[NRaleighLiberal]

1. Absolutely gobsmacked. And delighted to be so.

And to those of you who weren't - can you pick some lottery numbers for me?

[DevonRex]

2. Not at all. Nt

[sabrina 1]

3. No, the SC will never take money away from Corporate America. I think I already predicted they would

uphold. They were in a tough place, their wealthy corporate buddies v democrats. Money always wins out.

[gateley]

10. If this is what the Industry wanted, why wasn't it unanimous?

I figure the Industry wins either way, so that this was more political than anything. But the Republicans sure dumped a lot of money and effort into defeating it. The whole thing confuses me.

[sabrina 1]

32. It doesn't ever need to be unanimous. It has to look like

we are still a democracy. See how many times horrible bills pass with just enough Dem Votes to get them through. And we cheer for those who voted against it, regardless of the fact that we lose anyhow. Then for the next horrible bill put forward by Republicans, still gets just enough Dem votes to get it passed, but often it will be a different set of Dems.

I never thought this would be overturned. The Ins Corps spent way, way too much money getting the mandate into this bill.

We will have to wait for some future time when we have a government that works for the people in order to get bills that benefit Corps to the detriment of the people, rescinded.

I wondered how they do it while keeping the Conservative's justices covered by the right. Looks like it worked just fine. As it always does for the Corporations.

[gateley]

4. Yes! Almost shocked! nt

[livetohike]

5. Yes. Because until last night, I did not see anyone on TV say that this would be upheld

and give reasons why they thought that way.

[Go Vols]

13. I don't trust my TV.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

6. the only surprise was Kennedy voting no, with Roberts supporting it.

I thought the act would stay intact.

I wonder, could Roberts be growing a conscience? Seeing the rampant neoconism, followed by the Tea Partiers, causing such damage to the nation has to be noticeable, even within the Supremes.

[TheKentuckian]

38. Believe that at your peril. He is a corporatist and went with his base ideology.

At some point folks will wrap their heads around the idea that the only way the insurance cartel has anything beyond medium length, at best, viability is a captured customer base and lots of subsidies.

The fantasy that the insurance cartel would be free to chug along until it consumed the entire economy is insane.
People are always hollering about twenty and 60 years and it has mad zero sense how such a thing would be possible, much less profitable without subsidies and a mandate.

Believing in magic makes more sense, it would seem like folks would get an inkling from the CBO projections of cost and coverage before this effort that were used to justify it but that shit went into the circular file as soon as that phase was over.

Anyway...

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

The criminal cartel has been preserved for another generation and they have been given a key to the treasury.

[Drunken Irishman]

7. Yes...but I started feeling better about it yesterday.

I'll be honest, I bought all the news stories out there the past couple months suggesting the court was about to strike down the mandate. I saw the Intrade numbers and quivered. Then the SCOTUSBlog made a prediction that the court would keep the mandate, with Roberts writing the majority opinion. It was a bold one, and one I trusted. Then, Robert Reich said essentially the same thing and I started becoming hopeful. Not to say I felt it would happen, but I felt a lot better than I had 24 hours before.

I'll tell you, though, I don't know if I've ever been that nervous before waiting for something on TV. I sat there, early here (8:00 my time) waiting for that verdict and boy was it a good one. My heart was pounding.

[HappyMe]

8. Yes, I am.

Surprised, amazed and glad.

[GarroHorus]

9. The only thing that surprised me was Kennedy was not in the majority n/t

[TBF]

20. Exactly - expected it to be Kennedy rather than Roberts. nt

[GarroHorus]

29. Oh I expected Roberts, but I expected a 6-3 ruling. n/t

[pampango]

12. Wasn't surprised by Thomas, Scalia and Alito. They were obviously going to vote against ACA, but

was surprised that Roberts joined the 4 liberal justices in upholding it. I bet when Thomas, Scalia and Alito knew they had Kennedy on their side, they thought they had ACA defeated.

[Spazito]

14. Surprised but a bit less surprised than I would have been had I not read...

Robert Reich's perspective on what the outcome could well be posted yesterday.

I am delighted with the surprise, absolutely delighted.

[Uncle Joe]

15. No, I expected it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=855707

Thanks for the thread, Liberal_in_LA.

[rufus dog]

16. No after seeing the Scalia meltdown I felt it was coming

Remember the bigger the asshole the more they act like a petulant four year old.

I got to Intrade for the first time on Tuesday, didn't take the bet though.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

25. I can only imagine his behavior behind closed doors

No wonder several justices were hinting at some troubles with tribbles.

[MrSlayer]

17. I thought it would be 7-2 to uphold.

That was obviously expecting too much. But I'm not surprised it was upheld.

[rufus dog]

26. I thought 6 - 3, Kennedy

Did you think Alito would join? (Man you are an optimist.)

[MrSlayer]

33. Yeah, I sometimes expect them to actually follow the law.

I knew Scalia's two votes would go against but I did think the others would have to do the right thing. I was wrong.

[Paladin]

43. You've Got More Faith In Them Than I Have. (nt)

[ZombieHorde]

18. No, because I had no clue as to which way they would go. nt

[Starry Messenger]

19. Not really a surprise, but I'm still relieved.

Striking it down would have killed the election and a lot of progressive momentum for years.

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. No, I expected it to be the usual suspects

with Kennedy and Roberts... aka a 6-3... that was the only thing that sort of surprised me. But during oral arguments Roberts was the most receptive on the conservative side. Kennedy asked very sharp questions, but he's known to do that.

[lunatica]

22. Yes. If it benefits the people I'm surprised by this Supreme Court

They've done so many really horrendous and even criminal things that to see them do something that is actually constitutional is a big surprise.

[aaaaaa5a]

23. I'm shocked beyond belief! nt

[hifiguy]

24. Surprised, but only slightly.

Roberts is not a stupid man, say whatever else you will about him. He has talked about the court's "self-inflicted wounds" at length, Dred Scott in particular.

He's a Chief Justice and Chiefs are judged historically by different criteria than regular old Justices. He has enough sense of history and the need to preserve the court's legitimacy not to add insult to the injury of Citizen's United. His chiefship would not survive historical scrutiny were he to be a part of overturning the ACA and he would be remembered as the 21st century version of C.J. Roger Taney, the author of Dred Scott. The stink around Taney's name will never clear and Roberts doesn't want to be in that company.

This was a "legacy" vote by Roberts.

[Uncle Joe]

34. The way I see it the mandate and Citizens United are as a hand and glove.

The mega-corporations; that support Citizens United would love nothing more than having a mandate for their own industries in effect forcing the American People to lobby for them.

[LiberalArkie]

27. No, because our Supremes are the most intelligent and impartial and tolerant people on Earth

[Liberal_in_LA]

44. lol

[MadHound]

28. No, it is a corporately controlled court,

Who were bound to protect their corporate masters.

[xchrom]

30. no. but i did think kennedy would join roberts. nt

[randome]

31. I thought Scalia's earlier rant was a clue.

He would not have been so wound up if the ruling for this was going his way. I think he knew it then.

[Raffi Ella]

35. Very!

I still can't believe it, really.

[Liberal_in_LA]

37. me too! I turned on the radio and couldn't believe my ears. I had braced myself to hear

talk of Obama's big defeat.

[ecstatic]

36. the other day I said to my mom, "Obama is a constitutional scholar,"

"he knows what he's doing."

So I can't say that I'm surprised. I'm glad Roberts did the right thing.

[ibegurpard]

39. No...I predicted the mandate would stand when this thing was making it's way through congress.

[EFerrari]

40. No. The right wing often gets into a bind between

its anti-government rhetoric and its corporate owners but they always find a way out.

[eridani]

41. Jim McDermott (WA-07) called it right

He thought that the court was sufficiently afraid of single payer that they would let ACA stand as an alternative.

[NYC Liberal]

42. I was expecting a 5-4 against, until the last few days.

For whatever reason, in the past few days I got a feeling they would uphold it. I don't know why but I just felt it.

[bigwillq]

45. Yes. I thought the mandate would be struck down (nt)