To All The Liberals

[saden1]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

In terms of political strategy (who cares about the f***in country, politics is all that counts), the House is a far better win then the Senate. The House initiates all money bills, so if the Republicans are smart (which they aren't), they can lay out grand scheme plans, and incorporate enough to win maybe 2-3 democratic senators. What this does, is allow them to show they have a plan that works (yeah right) and put the President in the blocking/obstructionist position.

For arguments sake, lets say House Republicans put a plan out that 30 Repub vote no on, but 10 Dem vote yes.

It goes to the Senate, where they get 47 Repub votes and 4 Dem votes.

It comes out of conference with "bi-partisan" support of maybe 15 House Dems and 5 Senate Dems.

Now, if Pres Obama signs it, he gives the Republican party a victory, for leading in the country back to the right direction, but if he vetoes it, and the Senate fails to overturn it due to staunch liberal posturing, then the Republicans can claim that the far left is trying to keep the country on the wrong path.

Far better would be to either
a) lose both the senate and house, and Pres Obama can be the defender of the poor from the big evil conservatives.

Or

b) have won the house, and lost the Senate, where the Republicans would again be seen as the obstructionist party.

In the end

it will all be ssdd.

Senate is not important to win but we can hope to pick off Dem senators? Lot's of maybes isn't exactly something to hinge your hopes on. Oh and do remember, Dems in the Senate are more liberal now. You forgot the democrats can also use the filibusterer. It won't see the presidents desk unless it's got all the pork in the world which is always bipartisan.


You will have gridlock until they realize that shit doesn't work and Americans don't like it. It's same game with the same results. You're the puppet and they're the puppet masters.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by saden1

Senate is not important to win but we can hope to pick off Dem senators? Lot's of maybes isn't exactly something to hinge your hopes on. Oh and do remember, Dems in the Senate are more liberal now. You forgot the democrats can also use the filibusterer. It won't see the presidents desk unless it's got all the pork in the world which is always bipartisan.


You will have gridlock until they realize that shit doesn't work and Americans don't like it. It's same game with the same results. You're the puppet and they're the puppet masters.

First, I said if they were smart. They aren't so they will push their agenda forward, regardless. 2nd, there are still middle of the road democratic (or independent) senators like Joe Lieberman who will work with either side if they like the policy. Remember 2/3's of the Senate remained, unlike the House where every member faced re-election, so not all of the dems are more liberal.

And I didn't forget that the Dems can use the filibuster, and how will that look, when the Republicans have a bill that has 45 Republicans and 6 Democrats supporting it. Like I said, in the political game, the Democrats come off looking extreme, and Republicans can say, we set aside our agenda to make the country work.

Yeah it will be gridlock, but having the House (and thus being able to write the money bills) makes the Republicans the do'ers, and the Democrats the blockers. Let the games begin.

I am also curious to see what type of legislation gets slammed through in these next 2 months.

[BringBackJoeT]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

In terms of political strategy (who cares about the f***in country, politics is all that counts), the House is a far better win then the Senate. The House initiates all money bills, so if the Republicans are smart (which they aren't), they can lay out grand scheme plans, and incorporate enough to win maybe 2-3 democratic senators. What this does, is allow them to show they have a plan that works (yeah right) and put the President in the blocking/obstructionist position.

For arguments sake, lets say House Republicans put a plan out that 30 Repub vote no on, but 10 Dem vote yes.

It goes to the Senate, where they get 47 Repub votes and 4 Dem votes.

It comes out of conference with "bi-partisan" support of maybe 15 House Dems and 5 Senate Dems.

Now, if Pres Obama signs it, he gives the Republican party a victory, for leading in the country back to the right direction, but if he vetoes it, and the Senate fails to overturn it due to staunch liberal posturing, then the Republicans can claim that the far left is trying to keep the country on the wrong path.

Far better would be to either
a) lose both the senate and house, and Pres Obama can be the defender of the poor from the big evil conservatives.

Or

b) have won the house, and lost the Senate, where the Republicans would again be seen as the obstructionist party.

In the end

it will all be ssdd.

I'm not sure one is necessarily better than the other. Certainly, the Senate has its unique advantages. It has the exclusive advise-and-consent power over presidential appointments, most notably Supreme Court justicies. Second, while revenue bills must originate in the House, a bill that passes the House is sent to the Senate, which is free to "amend" such a bill by deleting the text entirely and replacing it with its own text--keep in mind that the health care reform law was the Senate's bill (of course, any such bill passed by the Senate must then pass the House). Third, from a historical standpoint, the Senate is the country's great equalizer--California has as many senators as Wyoming. So, again, I'm not sure the House is clearly the superior body to have.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by BringBackJoeT

I'm not sure one is necessarily better than the other. Certainly, the Senate has its unique advantages. It has the exclusive advise-and-consent power over presidential appointments, most notably Supreme Court justicies. Second, while revenue bills must originate in the House, a bill that passes the House is sent to the Senate, which is free to "amend" such a bill by deleting the text entirely and replacing it with its own text--keep in mind that the health care reform law was the Senate's bill (of course, any such bill passed by the Senate must then pass the House). Third, from a historical standpoint, the Senate is the country's great equalizer--California has as many senators as Wyoming. So, again, I'm not sure the House is clearly the superior body to have.

When the economy is the issue, like now, and you have been labelled as having no effective plan, like the Republicans have been, then the House gives you the opportunity to lay out grand schemes, win bipartisan votes at the expense of your extreme side, and show the country what you can offer.

When the economy is good, then the Senate becomes a good place because you can take "principled stands", like blocking judges, or amending legislation.

Yes both bodies have their purpose, I was thinking solely of the current environment and political gamesmanship.

[saden1]

I would also like to thank all the Tea Party candidates that lost today. Big shout-out...much love for saving the day.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by saden1

I would also like to thank all the Tea Party candidates that lost today. Big shout-out...much love for saving the day.

LOL!!!!! So funny how the standards get lowered.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by GMScud

LOL!!!!! So funny how the standards get lowered.

What standard has been lowered? They did save the day for the Dems didn't they? If you guys were half as smart you would have ran better candidates. Harry shouldn't have been re-elected and there is no excuse for having Angle running against him.

[saden1]

What low standards looks like...I believe he also rubber stamped Bush agenda which we all know was liberal and ran up the debt:

[JoeRedskin]

ahhh, the return of the saden links. How I missed them.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

ahhh, the return of the saden links. How I missed them.

Did they ever go away?

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by saden1

Did they ever go away?

Seemed to, or maybe the volume just seemed to decrease. Perhaps I just haven't been paying attention.

[Hog1]

Whether the taste is sweet or not, as in all elections the people......have spoken.

[MTK]

I'm just glad Crazy Carl got trounced here in NY.

Gotta say all the petty bickering in this thread is pretty childish, but it kinda mirrors politics in general today so oh well. Hope the repubs are happy, but now the excuses are over for the right. Let's see some action. Something tells me it will be SSDD though.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

I'm just glad Crazy Carl got trounced here in NY.

Gotta say all the petty bickering in this thread is pretty childish, but it kinda mirrors politics in general today so oh well. Hope the repubs are happy, but now the excuses are over for the right. Let's see some action. Something tells me it will be SSDD though.

The sith shall rule none.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

I'm just glad Crazy Carl got trounced here in NY.

Gotta say all the petty bickering in this thread is pretty childish, but it kinda mirrors politics in general today so oh well. Hope the repubs are happy, but now the excuses are over for the right. Let's see some action. Something tells me it will be SSDD though.

Just like the excuses were over for the left two years ago. Glad that worked out for them.

And around and around we go. American politics has decayed into such a giant mess.