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.
Nope. I said nothing about it being good politics. I'm a moderate-- Not a liberal.
Obviously the Dems couldn't get their message across and govern effectively. They deserve to lose the senate.
So now the Republicans will take a turn-- And they are within their rights to keep the rule. However, the last few times they controlled both houses the overreach was palpable... They don't need the nuclear option to overreach. Historically they'll do it anyway.
I hope they govern well and move the nation forward. However, the talk in here is about retribution-- which is never good politics.
Have a nice day.
I was one of the people who spoke up back when the Dems first floated the idea of changing the rules, and my comment was one of "are you sure you want to do that, you may not always control the Senate" So I'm with you, the Dems deserve to lose control of Congress, and if they aren't careful, they'll be at risk of losing the WH in 2016.
I used to be moderate before the Dems went off the deep end, then the repubs dove off the other end. The middle is quite broad these days, and there really isn't a viable party to support Fiscally conservative, Socially liberal voters. Quite a shame.
"A group of 26 conservative academics, advocates and leaders wrote in a letter that they see “very little upside” to restoring the old rules, which had allowed the minority party to require 60 votes to confirm nominees. They say the rules would help Republicans put “committed constitutionalists” on the bench if the White House changes hands in 2016. “The decision by Senator [Harry] Reid and his Democratic colleagues to deploy the so-called ‘nuclear option’ was transparently designed to facilitate the confirmation of judicial nominees who would insulate ObamaCare and other aspects of President Obama’s agenda from meaningful judicial review,” the letter says."
I can only enhance the overreach that will seal the GOP's fate in 2016.
lol, the repubs just have to tell the people that they are following the rules laid down by the dems when they were in power. people will believe it too.
Actually I am. The filibuster is just a tradition. It's not in the Constitution.
This.
And it's not even that old of a tradition. Rule 22 was first adopted in 1917 and set at 2/3, and in 1975 (not exactly ancient history) it got lowered to 3/5. And Rule 22 establishes rules for cloture, not filibuster.
It appears nowhere in the US Constitution other than the article that says the Senate will establish its own rules and procedures.
Reid is planning to fast track 50 Obama appointees before January... Go for it Harry!
That means that he'll work harder this next 30 days than he has in 30 years!
He's a stone scumbag.
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.
