Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why is the media so afraid of the word "filibuster", even MSNBC, except for Dr. Rachel Maddow, God bless her, she made it very clear that it wasn't a vote on the issue itself it was just a vote to let it come up for a vote. 46 Senators, most of them Republican, were too cowardly to do that
Reality check: Bet your bottom dollar that Harry Reid is breathing a sigh of relief. Why? Because Red State Democrats....who also voted against it....are very vulnerable this election. If they lose, Harry Reid loses the gavel. Do you actually think he wants to lose the gavel, all in the name of background checks???
Liberals need to learn to play long ball. It seems you folks don't quite know the meaning of "foresight."
I'll say it again, there was no vote on background checks in the Senate. Anybody who tells you otherwise is either lying or is stupid. There was no vote on background checks. That 54 to 46 vote the Senate had recently was NOT a vote on background checks. There has not been a vote on background checks in the Senate
Quick dancing around it, what are you trying to tell us?
I'll say it again, there was no vote on background checks in the Senate. Anybody who tells you otherwise is either lying or is stupid. There was no vote on background checks. That 54 to 46 vote the Senate had recently was NOT a vote on background checks. There has not been a vote on background checks in the Senate
And the left already starts with the historical revisionism before any ink has dried.
Hmmmm.... then I guess I'm not sure what Obama was crying about yesterday. He seemed pretty upset that background checks were defeated.
well if I heard him right he said the will of the people was not honored, if that wasn't a NO vote what was it? Ok, so it might have been a vote not to go any further, what is the difference? I think I am confused.
The poll surveyed 1,772 registered voters from January 30 to February 4 and had a margin of error of plus or minus 2.3 percentage points, Quinnipiac said.
The screen-cap you provided displays the percentage totals. Wasn't that blindingly obvious from the fact that each column adds up to 100%?
And did it ever occur to you to actually read the latest NRA glurge before rushing to post it?
Good point. The vote was actually a procedural vote to bring the bill to the floor for debate. A harsh denunciation perhaps, but not an actual vote on background checks.
So their was a vote obring it to the floor win was not approved.
Same old same old. Nothing can get done in the Senate anymore unless you can get a super majority of 60 votes to overcome the usual Republican fillibuser, so essentially, nothing gets done.
And some people say that as though it were a BAD thing.
All government can ever do, is restrict us or punish us.
The screen-cap you provided displays the percentage totals. Wasn't that blindingly obvious from the fact that each column adds up to 100%?
And did it ever occur to you to actually read the latest NRA glurge before rushing to post it?
If that was the case, why was the % indicated on the results to the question bellow but not the question about background checks? Because they only asked 100 people.
That or they are complete retards and have no idea how to publish anything.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wasn't that blindingly obvious from the fact that each column adds up to 100%?
