Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,790
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 11:
Line 11: + +
Talk:Predicting ObamaCare Outcome (view source)
Revision as of 18:38, July 1, 2012
, 18:38, July 1, 2012→So the experts were right?: The experts were wrong - they predicted the law would be upheld under the Commerce Clause, and ''Conservapedia'' was right in expecting otherwise. But Conservaped
Maybe we shouldn't completely dismiss the opinion of people with training and experience? --[[User:MatthewQ|MatthewQ]] 01:57, 1 July 2012 (EDT)
Maybe we shouldn't completely dismiss the opinion of people with training and experience? --[[User:MatthewQ|MatthewQ]] 01:57, 1 July 2012 (EDT)
: Now I see in main page predictions that nations that are atheistic and accept same sex marriage will fare badly in the Olympics. Absolutely nothing learned from this. --[[User:MatthewQ|MatthewQ]] 14:20, 1 July 2012 (EDT)
: Now I see in main page predictions that nations that are atheistic and accept same sex marriage will fare badly in the Olympics. Absolutely nothing learned from this. --[[User:MatthewQ|MatthewQ]] 14:20, 1 July 2012 (EDT)
::The experts were wrong - they predicted the law would be upheld under the [[Commerce Clause]], and ''Conservapedia'' was right in expecting otherwise. But Conservapedia does not claim to be right in every one of its predictions.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 14:38, 1 July 2012 (EDT)