Pushed To The Left
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-23-06 02:04 AM
Original message |
| Poll question: Which would be more satisfying? |
|
| Poll result (25 votes) | | Democrats take the Senate | (12 votes, 48%) | Vote | | Democrats take the House | (13 votes, 52%) | Vote |
|
krispos42
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-23-06 02:12 AM
Response to Original message |
|
The Congressional Districts are so jerrymandered that that would be a REAL slap in the face. Plus, once we're in charge, we can redistrict in '07 just like Tom DeLay did. And surely the Repub's wouldn't complain if we just follow their lead and example, right? Right? Right?
Besides, the House issues articles of impeachment. And the Speaker becomes the President just in case the pResident and Vice pResident... um.... er.... are UNABLE to complete their terms, due to some unfortunate circumstance such as (ARTICLE 2 SECTION 4!) illness.
|
AndyTiedye
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-23-06 02:16 AM
Response to Original message |
| 2. If We Don't Take The Senate, We'll Get 5 Bushbots on the Supreme Court! |
krispos42
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-23-06 02:24 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
| 3. Then I guess we'd better compromise and take both. |
|
Dibs on the Senate! I could use the job security.
|
greeneyedboy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-23-06 02:34 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
elocs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-23-06 02:27 AM
Response to Original message |
| 4. Tough choice, but I had to go with the Senate. |
|
Unless there is conviction in the Senate, impeachment is just a moral victory. Real life is not an episode of the West Wing, so I would not anticipate the Speaker of the House becoming President. The Senate can block treaties and nominations, particularly those ones to the Supreme Court which haunt you for years.
|
longship
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-23-06 02:56 AM
Response to Original message |
| 6. Easy call--the House--Objections to the question. |
|
No where is the power structure of Congress so glaringly one-sided than in the House of Representatives where the majority party even has the power to deny the minority party the use of traditional house rooms for hearings. In the House, the power of the majority is absolute. This is not even close to being true in the Senate.
If you really want to change the way that our government works, you *have* to take back the House.
But I really have to object to the entire premise of the question that this is an either/or thing. Certainly, if we take the Senate, we'll get the House, too. The Senate is the tough nut. We're close, and I think we'll take it. But we have to work hard on making sure that we *do* take the House of Representatives, because there can't be any impeachment investigations until we do.
|
eviltwin2525
(269 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-23-06 03:16 AM
Response to Original message |
| 7. Easy call - I voted Senate, because.... |
|
Dems are GOING to take the House. Getting the Senate TOO would mean we could actually start dismantling the BushCheneyRumsfeld despotism.
|
tavalon
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-23-06 05:34 AM
Response to Original message |
|
These are two tastes that taste great together!
|
Demeter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-23-06 06:20 AM
Response to Original message |
| 9. Senate Controls Appointments |
|
and that would really put a stick in Bush's craw.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Tue May 21st 2013, 09:59 AM
Response to Original message |