HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Places » U.S. » Missouri (Group) » McCaskill votes with Obam...

Thu Aug 16, 2012, 08:48 AM

McCaskill votes with Obama 98% of the time

So says the latest ad from Akin.

I knew ads like this were gonna come, as I wrote back in June

June 6 - Jenkins once again teams up with Pelosi (and the rest of Congress) to name a border patrol station after Brian A. Terry, to name a Post Office after Master Sergeant Daniel L. Fedder, and another one after Trooper Joshua D. Miller. Congrats to those so honored, who probably gave their lives in service, but the thing is, when you see an ad that says "Clair McCaskill voted with Obama 90% of the time" that 90% includes a lot of bills that are pretty uncontroversial, like naming a Post Office, or the Border Tunnel Prevention Act which passed the House 416-4 and passed the Senate by unanimous consent.


I gave other example too

Apr. 25 - Congress has passed a few more bills, the Stock act to prohibit insider trading by members of Congress. Jenkins and Pelosi voted for that. Jenkins also voted with Pelosi on the Jobs Act, the HALE Scouts Act and a law to name a US Courthouse in Anchorage after James M. Fitzgerald. Not that Jenkins has suddenly become a progressive. She still voted for the Ryan budget which deals with the national debt by proposing very large tax cuts for rich people. But considering how Ike Skelton was attacked for voting with Pelosi so much, it is funny and interesting to note how often even Jenkins votes with Pelosi. Now 23 days later though, the House still has not managed to pass a resolution congratulating Kentucky for winning the NCAA championship.

Feb. 27 - Congress still has not done much. Passed another extension of the payroll tax cut. They also renamed a wildlife refuge after the late Sam D Hamilton, former head of the National Fish and Wildlife Service. Both Pelosi and Jenkins voted for that. Congress also gave some land to the Quileute Indians of Washington state. Again, Jenkins and Pelosi both voted for that. The Senate passed a resolution congratulating the New York Giants for winning the Superbowl, but true to the Do-Nothing Congress, the House version H.Res. 544 has been stuck in Committee since Feb. 8th.

Usually there would be resolutions congratulating the Giants and Kentucky and the Olympic medal winners, that everybody would vote for (except Rand Paul maybe) but I am not sure if Obama signs those.

5 replies, 2488 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 5 replies Author Time Post
Reply McCaskill votes with Obama 98% of the time (Original post)
hfojvt Aug 2012 OP
Cracklin Charlie Aug 2012 #1
hfojvt Aug 2012 #2
xmas74 Aug 2012 #3
hfojvt Aug 2012 #4
xmas74 Aug 2012 #5

Response to hfojvt (Original post)

Thu Aug 16, 2012, 10:38 AM

1. That's who I want her to vote with.

That Todd Akin is about the creepiest looking creature I have ever seen.

I had a thought the other day that I believe the McCaskill campaign could use to counter the effect of those endless teevee commercials talking about Claire's job killing policies. They use the phrase so much that my daughter and I have started calling Claire "JKP".

To summarize: I am a small business owner. If I didn't have to pay so much for all the various kinds of overpriced insurance that I am required to purchase every month, I could probably afford to hire additional employees. Heck, I could probably afford to take a vacation, AND hire additional employees.

If we had a national, affordable health care system in place, I could afford to purchase health care for my employees, AND hire additional employees.

My point...the policies that are really killing jobs are not coming from the President, and Senator McCaskill, but from the private sector.

Any opinions about this?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Cracklin Charlie (Reply #1)

Thu Aug 16, 2012, 11:22 AM

2. for me it depends on the bill

Take the so-called tax "compromise" of 2010 (please). Both Akin and McCaskill (and Jenkins and Pelosi) voted for it, and Obama signed it. I would have voted against it, and if I was in the Senate, I would have fillibustered against it.

But that makes another example. Suppose I was in the Senate and fought against that "compromise" and suppose further, that I won, and Congress passed a better bill and Obama signed it. Even though I actiually opposed Obama's horrible "compromise", Akin would throw that in as another time I "voted with" Obama.

The other part is that, Obama is very likely going to lose Missouri, so most of Missouri does not approve of Obama. But a bogus measure of saying McCaskill votes with Obama is not an honest debate, not an honest measure. Because Akin himself probably votes with Obama 70% of the time doing things like naming Post Offices and congratulating national champions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to hfojvt (Original post)

Thu Aug 16, 2012, 07:10 PM

3. someone at a recent local Dem meeting

said the actual figure was that Claire votes around 85% in line with the party. I'm not quite sure where Akin's figures came from.

At next month's meeting I'll find out how much info they have about what exactly the votes were for. The person who gave this figure really knew what they were talking about and seemed to know exactly what they were for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to xmas74 (Reply #3)

Fri Aug 17, 2012, 10:27 AM

4. the 85% is a nonsense figure too though

it is padded by fluff in that "the party" votes to name post offices and congratulate the NY Giants and McCaskill votes with them.

And it also assumes the party is always right. Sometimes the party decides to support a bi-partisan piece of crap - like the Bush tax cut extension, or the Iraq War Resolution (although a majority of the House Democrats voted against that, a majority in the Senate voted for it.

So by that measure, McCaskill would get credit for voting (with Republicans and a slight majority of Democrats) for the Bush tax cut extension and Wisconsin's Tammy Baldwin would get dinged for voting against it. Which, in my mind, is giving McCaskill credit for being on the wrong side.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to hfojvt (Reply #4)

Fri Aug 17, 2012, 11:13 AM

5. Exactly

but they used the figure as an example of how anyone can read anything into statistics. They said the best thing would be to go down the list, vote by vote, to decide exactly what the votes were for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread