Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 12-07-2010, 12:08 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,108,083 times
Reputation: 9383

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255 View Post
Not exactly. The GOP can filibuster a bill if the Dems have a majority of both. If Nelson voted for it and Collins and Snowe did not, it would be a what? Oh yeah same thing a filibuster....

Other than for four months the Democrats have needed at least one Republican vote to get passed a filibuster. Even if Ben Nelson voted with the Dems on every single bill, they would have still needed at least one GOP vote.
Wrong again.. The minute they "voted" for it, its no longer a filibuster. A filibuster is if a VOTE NOT TAKING PLACE..

You are calling failed bills "filibusters" but thats not what they are..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-07-2010, 12:33 AM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
22,190 posts, read 19,462,661 times
Reputation: 5305
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Wrong again.. The minute they "voted" for it, its no longer a filibuster. A filibuster is if a VOTE NOT TAKING PLACE..

You are calling failed bills "filibusters" but thats not what they are..
Wrong. A filibuster is blocking an up or down vote from taking place by not invoking cloture. That is EXACTLY what happened.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2010, 12:38 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,108,083 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255 View Post
Wrong. A filibuster is blocking an up or down vote from taking place by not invoking cloture. That is EXACTLY what happened.
Lets review your statement shall we?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255 View Post
Not exactly. The GOP can filibuster a bill if the Dems have a majority of both. If Nelson voted for it and Collins and Snowe did not, it would be a what? Oh yeah same thing a filibuster....

Other than for four months the Democrats have needed at least one Republican vote to get passed a filibuster. Even if Ben Nelson voted with the Dems on every single bill, they would have still needed at least one GOP vote.
Thats not a filibuster. They didnt BLOCK the vote, they just voted NO...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2010, 12:39 AM
 
Location: Dublin, CA
3,807 posts, read 4,275,649 times
Reputation: 3984
Listening to KGO, in the SF Bay Area. It has very liberal slant to it and obviously most of the people in this are are liberal/democrats. Not a single caller has stood up for Obama. Every one has said they will not vote for him again (they will) and all have said he, "Needs to a grow a pair."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2010, 12:41 AM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
22,190 posts, read 19,462,661 times
Reputation: 5305
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Lets review your statement shall we?

Thats not a filibuster. They didnt BLOCK the vote, they just voted NO...
Voting no on invoking cloture is a filibuster. It is blocking an up or down vote.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2010, 12:43 AM
 
26,680 posts, read 28,670,280 times
Reputation: 7943
No revolt from me. I understand that the country leans to the right, and I believe Obama understands this too. The compromise was pragmatic and shrewd.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2010, 12:45 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,108,083 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255 View Post
Voting no on invoking cloture is a filibuster. It is blocking an up or down vote.
Voting no on cloture
U.S. Senate: Reference Home > Glossary > cloture
cloture - The only procedure by which the Senate can vote to place a time limit on consideration of a bill or other matter, and thereby overcome a filibuster. Under the cloture rule (Rule XXII), the Senate may limit consideration of a pending matter to 30 additional hours, but only by vote of three-fifths of the full Senate, normally 60 votes.

Is a Limit of THIRTY HOURS ADDITIONAL hours.. It doesnt stop the bill from moving forward.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2010, 12:48 AM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
22,190 posts, read 19,462,661 times
Reputation: 5305
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale View Post
No revolt from me. I understand that the country leans to the right, and I believe Obama understands this too. The compromise was pragmatic and shrewd.
I do think Obama caved, but I agree it was a pragmatic move. The Republicans were willing to let the tax cuts expire for the bottom 98% if they didn't get what they wanted. Obama wasn't willing to let the tax cuts expire for the bottom 98% if he didn't get what he wanted. That really is what this boils down to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2010, 12:50 AM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
22,190 posts, read 19,462,661 times
Reputation: 5305
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Voting no on cloture
U.S. Senate: Reference Home > Glossary > cloture
cloture - The only procedure by which the Senate can vote to place a time limit on consideration of a bill or other matter, and thereby overcome a filibuster. Under the cloture rule (Rule XXII), the Senate may limit consideration of a pending matter to 30 additional hours, but only by vote of three-fifths of the full Senate, normally 60 votes.

Is a Limit of THIRTY HOURS ADDITIONAL hours.. It doesnt stop the bill from moving forward.


Did you even read the part at the end (I bolded it for you)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2010, 12:53 AM
 
Location: La lune et les étoiles
18,258 posts, read 22,532,193 times
Reputation: 19593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255 View Post
I do think Obama caved, but I agree it was a pragmatic move. The Republicans were willing to let the tax cuts expire for the bottom 98% if they didn't get what they wanted. Obama wasn't willing to let the tax cuts expire for the bottom 98% if he didn't get what he wanted. That really is what this boils down to.
The Republicans are the ones who look greedy in this battle. President Obama did what he needed to do for the sake of the many Americans who are NOT in the top 2% of income earners.

Republican greed is once again on full display.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:32 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top