Something isn't making sense here.....

Why, in the middle of a pandemic, when people are in need of medical healthcare, is this administration working to eliminate medical coverage?  

The thought crossed my mind a couple of weeks ago...... Is Trump going to quit the election?  Is he trying to lose on purpose?

If you were going to piss off everyone except your rabid base, this is surely the way to do it.

It is a stupid thing to do, but it will satisfy his base it seems.

He sure isn't working for the majority of Americans, that's for sure.

Any thoughts that he's intentionally trying to lose at this point?  It is well know that Trump is more scared of losing or looking bad than anything else.

I guess last night on Hannity he said something along the lines of:  (Biden) “is going to be president because some people don’t love me.”  What the hell is that???? 

'I guess last night on Hannity he said something along the lines of:  (Biden) “is going to be president because some people don’t love me.”  What the hell is that????'

I posted a seed on that.  Check it out.  One troll already commented.

Any thoughts that he's intentionally trying to lose at this point?  It is well know that Trump is more scared of losing or looking bad than anything else.

My answer to that question would be, Bigly Covfefe which makes as much sense as his verbal diarrhea.

Any thoughts that he's intentionally trying to lose at this point? 

I don't think so. Being a bully is all he knows. It's what got him here and no matter what his handlers try to do every time he gets in front of mic this is his MO.

So.... knowing that he can't draw from independents, he is trying to maximize the turn out of his base to win?  There's not enough of em. (thank god)

He won the electoral college by a total of 78,000 votes divided by three states in 2016. Mi, Pa, and Wi. with all the independent support he received.  He's not going to get them again by killing the ACA in the middle of a pandemic. 

knowing that he can't draw from independents

His staff knows that, but does Trump really know that? The reports (if you can believe them) show his staff and Republicans looking down ticket in panic mode for the last 2 weeks. 

He's not going to get them again by killing the ACA in the middle of a pandemic. 

I don't think the question is Trump now. I think it's how long will it take for some of the down ticket Republicans to break ranks? Sure as shit it will happen if the numbers don't significantly improve soon. 

I think we are already seeing the cracks in the dam EG..... The Lincoln Project ads have been brutal... Carly Fiorina came out yesterday saying she's voting for Biden.

I think you are clearly correct though.  Lets watch what happens in the senate.  When the first one breaks, there will be a stampede.  It's just going to take one.

It's just going to take one.

I'm wondering if Ernst might not be the first one (Collins and Murkowski already have and were expected to).

Collins is road kill in this cycle and within her party she is considered an unreliable "Never Trumper" 

Think Moscow Mitch won't break ranks under fire?  He's powerful enough to provide cover for the others....

Think Moscow Mitch won't break ranks under fire?

McConnell will do what he thinks it will take to hold the Senate. IF numbers hold or worsen, I'd give 'em 2 months before the cracks show on the evening news.

A classic case of extreme narcissism.

bwah ha ha, trump's going to drag the entire GOP over the cliff with him on his way out the door. gee, what a bummer...

It makes no difference to me how many want to destroy the constitution. If the court finds it unconstitutional it has to go. Politicians can't override the constitution that's why we have the checks and balances system. 

If the court finds it unconstitutional it has to go.

Didn't Roberts already rule it Constitutional once? What makes you think he will change his mind this time?

Libertarians wish those without insurance would just shut the fuck up and die already.  

The courts have already ruled the individual mandate unconstitutional and it now opens to door for a ruling to scrap the entire Obamacare as unconstitutional. The court has not rejected the challenge and is expected to hear the case this fall. 

The courts have already ruled the individual mandate unconstitutional

No, the SCOUTUS has ruled the individual mandate was Constitutional. The Republicans killed the penalty in Congress. The argument now is that is the whole PPACA Unconstitutional now that the mandate is moot? Roberts ruling with the liberals again would be in line with his mandate majority ruling.

They did, but US Appeals Court Stuck it down last year as there was a major change the Republicans did to the mandate in 2017 that made it completely worthless; thus everything attached to the mandate worthless. 

cnbc

A federal appeals court ruled Wednesday that the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate provision is unconstitutional but punted on deciding whether the rest of the landmark health-care law should be tossed out.

The court, in a 2 to 1 decision, is also ordering a lower court judge to reconsider whether ACA, more commonly known as Obamacare, should remain intact.

“The individual mandate is unconstitutional because it can no longer be read as a tax, and there is no other constitutional provision that justifies this exercise of congressional power,” the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling said. “On the severability question, we remand to the district court to provide additional analysis of the provisions of the ACA as they currently exist.”

“It may still be that none of the ACA is severable from the individual mandate, even after this inquiry is concluded,” the majority said. “It may be that all of the ACA is severable from the individual mandate. It may also be that some of the ACA is severable from the individual mandate, and some is not.”

nbcnews

The appeals court directed the judge "to employ a finer-toothed comb on remand and conduct a more searching inquiry into which provisions of the ACA Congress intended to be inseverable from the individual mandate." Wednesday's ruling will have no immediate effect. For now, the Obamacare program continues.

The Supreme Court did rule that the fee/penalty for not having health insurance was Constitutional- it was considered a tax. Something the Democrats fought tooth and nail against- as it wrecked Obama's claim the PPACA wouldn't increase anyone's taxes. Now that argument has been made worthless.

nafcclinics

or whether it is a tax in the end, five Justices agreed that the penalty that someone must pay if he refuses to buy insurance is a kind of tax that Congress can impose using its taxing power.  

That was back in 2012. The Republicans were a touch smarter than the Democrats and found a way to make that ruling work against the PPACA.

The Supreme Court will take up the new case it has already stated.

nbcnews

The Supreme Court said Monday that it will take up a legal challenge to Obamacare, agreeing to hear the case in its new term that begins in October. That means the program will continue for at least another year.

It also means the justices won't be handing down a ruling on the contentious issue of health care in June, just as the presidential campaign heats up. That may be good news for Republicans, who would prefer to avoid the issue in an election year.

A federal appeals court ruled in December that the individual mandate in Obamacare, officially known as the Affordable Care Act, is unconstitutional. But it sent the case back to the trial judge for another look at whether the entire law is invalid or some parts can survive.

But in 2017, the Republican-led Congress set the tax penalty at zero. That led Texas and a group of red states to rule that the revised law is unconstitutional. A federal judge in Texas agreed, ruling that because the tax was eliminated, the law could no no longer be saved as a use of the taxing power. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans upheld that ruling by a 2-1 vote in mid-December.

The mandate is completely interwoven into the PPACA. Can't have a law without the mandate; and the mandate was made worthless in 2017. 

Regardless of what you or I think of the PPACA and the mandate, it's what Justice Roberts thinks that will make the difference. My question was what makes you thinks Roberts will rule against the PPACA this time? 

'and want others to subsidize your health care be it a insurance company or the rich.'

Excuse me?

I pay for my health care.

You do not pay for my health care.

So my insurance company isn't supposed to pay for part of my insurance???????????????????????????????

That's what's known as a benefit from my employer.

Last I checked, the 'rich' aren't paying my insurance either.  

What I think?

There is no individual mandate. When Republicans set the rate for it to 0 it ended it, period. Without the mandate there is no PPACA!  You can't pull the mandate out w/o the law completely become unworkable.

Roberts has a brain. He tried to be the nice guy and use the most lenient definition he could, that the mandate was a tax. (not that the leftist idiots thanked him for it.) There is no tax now. Roberts, nor any judge, has the power to reinstate a tax- that is purely Congress' job.

Roberts could have said the Court had already ruled in 2012 and would not revisit the decision; that would have ended it once and for all. He didn't do that did he?

So where is the replacement program from this administration that was touted to be better and less expensive?  It's been 3-1/2 years now, and nothing out of the WH as far as a replacement for the now popular ACA.

7-29-15: Donald Trump on Wednesday offered a glimpse into his presidential platform on healthcare, saying he would replace ObamaCare with “something terrific.”

thehill

3 years in, no sign of Trump’s replacement for Obamacare

pbs

3 years in, no sign of Trump’s replacement for Obamacare

we have not forgotten mcstain

nytimes