You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #13: Perfect, I suppose, if you're a fan of RW policy. I'm not, so I find it suspect. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
Edweird Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 07:36 AM
Response to Reply #8
13. Perfect, I suppose, if you're a fan of RW policy. I'm not, so I find it suspect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
  -Reid considering rule change to remove 60 vote requirement to proceed on legislation. DCBob  Dec-04-11 07:01 AM   #0 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Dec-04-11 07:07 AM   #1 
  - What if Republicans think they can get the majority in 2013?  DCBob   Dec-04-11 07:10 AM   #3 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Dec-04-11 07:28 AM   #9 
  - 13 is not an election year  Gman   Dec-04-11 07:31 AM   #11 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Dec-04-11 07:35 AM   #12 
  - Then why did you write "every Pub like usual will block it"??  DCBob   Dec-04-11 09:05 AM   #41 
     - Why wouldn't they wait until the new session when their majority alone could carry the day?  TheKentuckian   Dec-04-11 10:46 AM   #78 
  - They'll change the rule, and hopefully we'll get out the vote and blow their minds.  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 07:46 AM   #16 
  - I hope you meant Senator Reid lost his leadership position and not his Senate seat  PuffedMica   Dec-04-11 07:11 AM   #4 
  - Isn't it funny how the Republicans always get Senate Leaders from the reddest of the red states?  stillwaiting   Dec-04-11 07:20 AM   #7 
  - A very illuminating point.  RUMMYisFROSTED   Dec-04-11 07:49 AM   #18 
  - That is somewhat misleading  dsc   Dec-04-11 10:54 AM   #82 
  - That makes no sense  Gman   Dec-04-11 07:29 AM   #10 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Dec-04-11 08:00 AM   #24 
  - Why do you not accuse Republicans of spinelessness too?  treestar   Dec-04-11 09:53 AM   #53 
     - Probably because they don't NEED it - they pass their agenda with tiny majorities.  Edweird   Dec-04-11 11:04 AM   #83 
        - Like when?  treestar   Dec-04-11 11:12 AM   #86 
        - It seems to me that you admire them for their obstructionism and detest Dems for being human.  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 06:25 PM   #98 
  - President Obama should take this straight to the voters  PuffedMica   Dec-04-11 07:09 AM   #2 
  - Yes, I hope that happens.  DCBob   Dec-04-11 07:14 AM   #5 
  - That is true and good, but his 'bully pulpit' talks sound more like concession speeches.  Huey P. Long   Dec-04-11 11:40 AM   #90 
  - The timing of this is very odd.  Edweird   Dec-04-11 07:17 AM   #6 
  - The timing is perfect.  DCBob   Dec-04-11 07:21 AM   #8 
  - Perfect, I suppose, if you're a fan of RW policy. I'm not, so I find it suspect.  Edweird   Dec-04-11 07:36 AM   #13 
  - Calling for the rich to pay their fair share is RW policies?  SkyDaddy7   Dec-04-11 08:24 AM   #29 
  - For 3 years the 'dems' kissed republican ass. Now, at the 11th hour,  Edweird   Dec-04-11 10:20 AM   #61 
     - I vote for the latter - n/t  coalition_unwilling   Dec-04-11 10:24 AM   #66 
     - The Republicans will only have a victory if their trolls are able to convince people...  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 10:41 AM   #77 
        - LOL. 1001 lame, transparent excuses. In case you haven't noticed, people are out in the streets,  Edweird   Dec-04-11 10:46 AM   #79 
  - You think Reid is a "fan of RW policy" ??  DCBob   Dec-04-11 08:37 AM   #31 
     - It only makes sense if they think the GOP will have a victory or something.  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 08:40 AM   #33 
     - Agreed.  DCBob   Dec-04-11 08:41 AM   #34 
        - +1  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 08:44 AM   #36 
     - Really? You believe Reid has been a fighter?  Edweird   Dec-04-11 10:21 AM   #64 
     - At times.. but he certainly isnt a fan RW policy.  DCBob   Dec-04-11 10:52 AM   #81 
        - Actions speak louder than words.  Edweird   Dec-04-11 11:06 AM   #84 
     - You realize that this exposes the alleged "republican obstruction" as the LIE it is.  Edweird   Dec-04-11 10:50 AM   #80 
        - Hahaha, republican obstructionism, completely given a pass by some in the left.  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 06:10 PM   #96 
           - They were able to change the rules but chose not to. That's tacit approval bordering collusion.  Edweird   Dec-04-11 06:53 PM   #99 
              - The rules aren't going to be changed. They mention this every few months because the Republicans...  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 07:28 PM   #102 
  - I agree. A lot of Democrats are going to favor this.  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 07:42 AM   #15 
     - Yes.. this may be the best chance to get this stupid rule changed.  DCBob   Dec-04-11 08:38 AM   #32 
        - It's a good time, but I don't think the GOPers will do it, because we can get 3 pickups...  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 08:42 AM   #35 
           - Yeah, you are probably right. I think the Dems are ready to do it but probably not enough Rs.  DCBob   Dec-04-11 08:44 AM   #37 
              - McCain, when not addlebrained, is a big rules gamer. Remember the Gang of 14 redux?  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 08:52 AM   #38 
  - I'm not sure how this can only be ammo used against Reid or the Democrats.  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 07:41 AM   #14 
     - No, if they were going to change it, it should have happened in 2008. But then they wouldn't  Edweird   Dec-04-11 10:26 AM   #68 
  - more theater.  piratefish08   Dec-04-11 07:47 AM   #17 
  - I think this is mostly posturing, I'd like to be wrong, but yeah.  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 07:50 AM   #19 
  - harry, you're about 3 years late.  spanone   Dec-04-11 07:52 AM   #20 
  - My thoughts exacxtly.  bvar22   Dec-04-11 10:25 AM   #67 
  - Imho, the biggest mistake Reid and other Senate Dems made was not doing this in '09.  RUMMYisFROSTED   Dec-04-11 07:52 AM   #21 
  - I want to know why it wasn't done in '09 or '10. I want to sit down and ask them why.  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 07:55 AM   #22 
  - They won't change it this year, either.  Frank Jameson   Dec-04-11 08:04 AM   #26 
  - Oh, I agree with you. I think it's posturing as I said.  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 08:06 AM   #27 
  - Me too. There were some Democrats against the change, I think.  northoftheborder   Dec-04-11 09:04 AM   #40 
  - They need 2/3 to make a permanent rule change. They would never got that in 09.  DCBob   Dec-04-11 09:19 AM   #43 
     - The "nuclear option" has never happened, it's always been threatened, or used minimially.  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 09:48 AM   #50 
     - these arcane complex Senate rules are really hard to understand.,  DCBob   Dec-04-11 10:17 AM   #60 
     - On the first day of a new senate, it takes only 51 votes to  Recovered Repug   Dec-04-11 11:11 AM   #85 
     - Yes, I stand corrected. I wasnt aware of that possibility.  DCBob   Dec-04-11 11:21 AM   #88 
     - Muddy the waters much?  RUMMYisFROSTED   Dec-04-11 03:36 PM   #91 
     - New rules at the beginning of the term can be changed with 51 votes.  grantcart   Dec-04-11 05:07 PM   #93 
  - Be careful what you wish for.. you just might get it...  Cid_B   Dec-04-11 07:59 AM   #23 
  - We can get FL, Mass. and AZ.  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 08:00 AM   #25 
     - I agree... but I don't think they'd want it even if they could  Cid_B   Dec-04-11 08:29 AM   #30 
  - How is this any different from the 'Nuke Option' from the Early Bush years?  apnu   Dec-04-11 08:10 AM   #28 
  - I think the "nuclear option" can only be used on a case by case basis...  DCBob   Dec-04-11 08:56 AM   #39 
     - Nah, it can be used anywhere, no one wants to make it go to the Supreme Court.  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 10:03 AM   #57 
        - but I think it would require a new vote every time a new motion or bill is brought forward.  DCBob   Dec-04-11 10:13 AM   #58 
           - No, here's how you use it to do a full rule change with 51 votes:  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 10:20 AM   #63 
              - Interesting, I didnt know that. However, one caveat from your article..  DCBob   Dec-04-11 10:23 AM   #65 
                 - Indeed, that's why the nuclear option is very iffy, it can be arbitrary.  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 10:29 AM   #71 
                    - Messy stuff. Thats why I dont agree with those who think invoking the N.O. is the simple solution.  DCBob   Dec-04-11 10:33 AM   #73 
                       - Agree. If Bush did it, then we certainly shouldn't, Bush didn't care about rule of law.  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 10:37 AM   #75 
                          - yes, I wish that would thappen.  DCBob   Dec-04-11 10:41 AM   #76 
  - Ah yes, rather than doing the hard work of fighting for legislation, let's hamstring the Democrats  MadHound   Dec-04-11 09:17 AM   #42 
  - The alternative is a hopelessly deadlocked congress.  DCBob   Dec-04-11 09:21 AM   #44 
  - President still has veto. This basically says "we pass laws that the President can't veto."  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 09:51 AM   #52 
  - That is a lie: " requirement that legislation get 60 Senate votes to pass." 51 votes are needed  Better Believe It   Dec-04-11 09:27 AM   #45 
  - Are you talking about the nuclear option?  DCBob   Dec-04-11 09:30 AM   #46 
  - no, he doesn't understand that fillibusters don't work like in the movies.  dionysus   Dec-04-11 09:51 AM   #51 
  - No. All Senator Reid needs to do is withdraw his "two-track Senate debate" rule.  Better Believe It   Dec-04-11 05:14 PM   #94 
     - It's not "his" rule. It's been around for awhile.  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 06:08 PM   #95 
        - The "dual tracking" is what gives Republicans the power to stop progressive legislation .....  Better Believe It   Dec-04-11 07:07 PM   #100 
           - *yawn* You know, I'll give you this one. I fully advocate this.  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 07:25 PM   #101 
              - The Democratic Senate response to Republican obstructionism just hasn't worked out very well.  Better Believe It   Dec-04-11 07:40 PM   #103 
                 - So, a question on filibusters turns into a question on eliminating the dual track.  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 08:02 PM   #104 
                    - No. It's eliminating both. No .... a 20 minute filibuster would last 20 minutes, not hours.  Better Believe It   Dec-05-11 04:35 PM   #105 
  - Reid actually did invoke the nuclear option recently..  DCBob   Dec-04-11 09:37 AM   #49 
  - Ahh, I didn't see your post.  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 09:53 AM   #54 
  - Wow, you have done a complete 180 on this, it's clear to me that your opinion does not go further...  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 09:58 AM   #55 
  - Reid's timing is certainly suspect..  Fumesucker   Dec-04-11 10:27 AM   #70 
     - It comes up every 6 months!  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 10:35 AM   #74 
  - It is not a lie. 60 votes for cloture is required before they can vote on the bill..  emulatorloo   Dec-04-11 04:58 PM   #92 
  - Going nowhere fast  SoCalDem   Dec-04-11 09:34 AM   #47 
  - a day late and a dollar short  boston bean   Dec-04-11 09:36 AM   #48 
  - Disingenuous. NOTHING IN THE CONSTITUTION prevents a simple Senate majority of 51 votes  Zorra   Dec-04-11 10:03 AM   #56 
  - The Constitution endows the Standing Rules of the United States Senate with all the power.  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 10:13 AM   #59 
  - however...  Zorra   Dec-04-11 10:26 AM   #69 
     - Yeah, and Bush did it 100s of times during his Presidency. Do we want a Bush-eqsue Presidency...  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 10:32 AM   #72 
        - I'm sure you know that, as pResident, Bush could not  Zorra   Dec-04-11 11:21 AM   #87 
  - Are you sure if involked, the nuclear option would be permanent?  DCBob   Dec-04-11 10:20 AM   #62 
     - How To End the Filibuster Forever  Zorra   Dec-04-11 11:29 AM   #89 
  - Here's why Republican Obstructionism needs to fucking end:  joshcryer   Dec-04-11 06:18 PM   #97 

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC