"If your fear of a larger, bigger, badder Comcast is that we can't regulate them, now we have regulation. So there's no legal reason to withhold the merger," the equity analyst at Hudson Square Research said in a "Squawk Box" interview.
While one could argue the existence of a regulatory backstop makes it easier for the Justice Department to approve the deal, one could also take the FCC vote as emblematic of a negative environment for cable and broadband provider, said Craig Moffett, partner at research company MoffettNathanson.
"Either of those is as convincing as the other. I tend to come out a little bit more on the side of the latter, and that's why we lowered the probabilities because you can see the political winds are blowing in the face of this deal," Moffett told "Squawk Box."
Moffett puts the chances of the deal going through at 60-40, down from 80-20.
As expected Thursday, the FCC voted 3-2 along party lines to adopt the Obama administration's plan to regulate Internet providers under Title II of the 1934 Communications Act.
Net neutrality is the policy of treating all Internet traffic equally, rather than blocking or imposing "tolls" on access to faster service.
Enshrining net neutrality in FCC rules gives the agency the ability to regulate the providers like telephone line operators. Among other things, the FCC will be able to prevent providers from blocking legal websites, slowing down traffic to specific sites or allowing faster access to other services, such as Netflix or Amazon Instant Video.
After all the debate over net neutrality, the vote to regulate service providers in accordance with the open Internet policy changes very little, according to Ernst
"I don't think anything changes," he said, noting that Comcast agreed to abide by the principles of net neutrality when it purchased CNBC-parent NBCUniversal.