Washington Examiner’s Stephen G. Smith Lays Out How Obama Could Win If Obamacare Overturned

I have no problem with Mr. Smith. I read his articles here and there and never have really taken issue with his ideas or his thought process, until now. I have linked the article from the Washington Examiner above and suggest you all read it to get the full effect of what Mr. Smith is trying to say. In effect, he is saying that if Obamacare is ruled unconstitutional then the President will not have to talk about it during the campaign and can stick to other issues while getting his base behind him using the court decision to drive more voters. If Obamacare would happen to get through the Supreme Court, however, then he has his prize legislation in tact, and in the words of Stephen Smith, “will be able to argue that the Administration always knew Obamacare was constitutional, and the expedited review will muffle the issue in the general-election campaign.” I am not buying this logic, and let me show you why I believe Mr. Smith got this one wrong.

I do agree that if it is struck down at the Supreme Court, the President will be able to use that to get more people out in his favor, maybe tipping the election into his hands if he can get enough people that are not already soured on him. While that may be the case, and the verdict is still out, it does not mean that it will not be a topic of discussion during the debates or even out on the stump. This is a heated issue, and if Republicans knew better they would make sure that no matter if they win or lose at the Supreme Court the people remember what legislation was pushed through Congress that they did not want. To allow the topic to be put aside would be detrimental to the Republican chances next year to take back the White House.  read more »