Pelosi/Reid should be demanding unanimous Republican YES votes on the bailout

[Dems to Win]

This 700 billion dollar taxpayer bailout of Wall Street was demanded by a Republican President and Republican Treasury Secretary, to clean up the mess caused by lax oversight by the Republican TresSec and SEC.

It is ABSURD that this bailout is expected to be passed with more Democratic votes than Republican.

If more Dems than Reps vote Yes on the bailout, there will be more Dems targeted by furious voters. Pelosi should be demanding 199 Republican (100% of them) yes votes for the bailout requested by the Republican president and Republican Treasury Secretary. As should Reid.

Don't any Democrats in Washington know how to play this game?

[99th_Monkey]

1. I'm not sure she could really do that, but if she could, it would be brilliant.

I'm not sure it would fly what with House Rules and all, but it's exactly the kind of "tough love" those
House ReThugs have been begging for, for years.

She's already got the ReThugs in the House saying on C-Span that she's declared "martial law" in the House.

[Dems to Win]

13. Pelosi's been saying all week she would only bring it up with at 80+ committed Yes R votes.

She should be saying "199 Republican yes votes"

It's not really a matter of the House rules.

[99th_Monkey]

18. I'm with you Sparky. Don't give them anything to work with. ~nt~

[FreakinDJ]

2. If McSame votes No - He'll turn it into a campaign issue

against Obama

I know what McSame said and I know how many times he has "Flip Flopped"

[iceman66]

8. He probably won't vote at all, but will gauge the public reaction

and only then decide what his position is.

If the bailout is successful, he'll take credit for it. Otherwise, he'll say he was against it.

[FreakinDJ]

11. Your Right - but it is a Highly Unpopular Bill

Like 70% of Americans and if not extremely succesful.....

This could turn the whole shootin match around

[Newshues]

3. When she demanded strong Rpeublican

support last Tuesday we had McCain swooping in and fucking everything up.

She'll take 80-100 Republican House votes for cover for our guys. I mean, who are the voters going to believe? Our guy saying "I voted for a bipartisan bailout that no one wanted" or a repub saying anything?

[Abugface]

6. Agreed, and McCain MUST vote yes or NO deal!

The Dems must not get snookered on this one!

[volstork]

4. Pelosi and Reid won't demand

jack shit.

[iceman66]

5. Can they do a voice vote?

[Dems to Win]

10. Wow, what a thought. I guess angry voters would then have to vote against all incumbents.

[iceman66]

12. That's what I would do if I was Pelosi.

[TheKentuckian]

7. She's in no way going to get all of them

In fact, she won't try to get every Democrat's vote either. Both sides will parse it up enough to allow particularly endangered seats to say NAY. The point is to get very solid bipartisan agreement.

[Hippo_Tron]

9. The majority party is expected to govern

And requiring 100% of Republican votes isn't governing, it's playing games. They should demand a certain number of them so that no party can blame the either for it. But 100% is ridiculous.

[Dems to Win]

15. Republicans caused this situation, they SHOULD be blamed!

IF this taxpayer bailout of Wall Street was absolutely critical to keep the economy functioning, The REPUBLICAN Secretary of the Treasury would be able to persuade the REPUBLICAN Senators and Representatives to vote Yes. Unanimously.

The fact that Paulson can't even get half the House Republicans to vote 'yes' tells me that:

This Wall Street bailout is NOT necessary to prevent a depression, and

Bush and Paulson are suckering the Democrats. Rove is chuckling in the background.

[Hippo_Tron]

16. You're using political evidence to make an economic argument

If I tried doing any of that in my economics classes it would get me the same grade that Sarah Palin got.

[leftofcool]

14. Aint gonna happen.

The Dems own this one.

[Dems to Win]

17. And the Dems will pay the price.