Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

LiberalFighter

(50,865 posts)

32. I'm sorry but why would Boxer and others going to vote Nay?

Reply to gateley (Original post)

Fri Jan 25, 2013, 11:58 AM

Jan 2013

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

36 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Reid caved -- AGAIN?? [View all] gateley Jan 2013 OP

Do you mean Reid? Mass Jan 2013 #1

Gee, I don't know, what do you think? gateley Jan 2013 #2

Reid did NOT cave. He got the majority of what HE wanted. Tx4obama Jan 2013 #3

Actually, Reid said he had the votes for a 41-vote filibuster yesterday jeff47 Jan 2013 #4

We as activists need to make it very difficult for them to retake the majority. LiberalFighter Jan 2013 #15

Not going to be easy with Reid tying our hands. (nt) jeff47 Jan 2013 #16

OK, Tx4obama -- I'll hunker down and find out whether my knee-jerk reaction needs to gateley Jan 2013 #5

Okay -- read them all and I'll change "caved" to really dropping the ball, really gateley Jan 2013 #10

Unless there is something I haven't read I think the change will work. LiberalFighter Jan 2013 #17

Not difficult enough. Republicans are liars and Reid is a spineless fool if he thinks catbyte Jan 2013 #28

Did Reid have the 50 or 51 votes needed to get it passed? LiberalFighter Jan 2013 #31

it'll never be clear now whether he had the 51 votes or not bigtree Jan 2013 #33

Who were the likely Senators against or on the fence for the Merley-Udall-Harkin rule? LiberalFighter Jan 2013 #35

I had heard before that Reid didn't reallly want to end fillibustering, or reform it much, because Honeycombe8 Jan 2013 #6

I don't understand that -- do you? gateley Jan 2013 #7

think of a different majority bigtree Jan 2013 #20

Ah.... I see, good point. It's never as cut and dried as we out here think it is, is it? Thanks! gateley Jan 2013 #22

There are 100 different minds in the Senate and 435(8) in the House. LiberalFighter Jan 2013 #36

The minority party has been doing that for years. Just not this much, is the issue. Honeycombe8 Jan 2013 #26

I think the filibuster should remain. LiberalFighter Jan 2013 #34

In case you missed some of the coverage...here from "Think Progress." KoKo Jan 2013 #8

ALSO: KoKo Jan 2013 #9

I'm not as familiar with the others, but with Boxer I would assume it's because she's gateley Jan 2013 #13

Thanks - I'll check it out. gateley Jan 2013 #11

The gerrymandered House speaker will not pass shit anyway. RedCloud Jan 2013 #12

These guys can NOT be trusted. I don't understand how many times we have to gateley Jan 2013 #14

I feel the SAME as you, M.E.! jillan Jan 2013 #18

I've really tried to see it from both sides as presented in the gateley Jan 2013 #19

After watching Rachel and Ed Union Scribe Jan 2013 #21

Exactly. gateley Jan 2013 #23

I really have never been a Harry Reid fan, and I never understood jillan Jan 2013 #27

I'm disgusted, disappointed and down right sick over it dem4ward Jan 2013 #24

Yes there SHOULD be, but it'll never happen gateley Jan 2013 #25

The no pay crap is unconstitutional. aquart Jan 2013 #29

It's unconstitutional that dem4ward Jan 2013 #30

I'm sorry but why would Boxer and others going to vote Nay? LiberalFighter Jan 2013 #32