Page 1 of 86 1231151 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 860

Thread: Senate approves nuclear option

  1. #1
    Sage
    pbrauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-27-15 @ 03:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,394

    Senate approves nuclear option

    Harry Reid finally comes through

    The Senate has voted to change its rules so that a simple majority is required to confirm judicial nominations and executive branch picks — the so-called “nuclear option.”
    The final vote was 52-48. The previous threshold was 60 votes to bring such nominations to a final up-or-down vote.
    “The threshold for cloture on nominations not including the Supreme Court, is now a majority,” Sen Pat Leahy (D-Vt.), the Senate president pro temp, declared after the vote.
    Three Democrats voted with Republicans against the change: Carl Levin (D-Mich.), Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Mark Pryor (D-Ark.). Levin is a longtime senator; Manchin and Pryor come from red states.
    Shortly after the vote, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-Nev.) office sent around a memo noting that the Senate has changed its procedures using a majority vote 18 times since 1977. Republicans, though, note that none of the changes rise to the level of today’s change.

    Senate approves nuclear option


  2. #2
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Levin realizes this move may very well come back to bite them in the butt in the near future.

  3. #3
    Professor

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Ft.Wayne In
    Last Seen
    12-09-17 @ 03:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,305

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Levin realizes this move may very well come back to bite them in the butt in the near future.
    Yep! Paybacks a 'bitch'!!

  4. #4
    Hot Flash Mama
    Summerwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Last Seen
    01-23-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    11,010

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Finally the Senate is a step closer to it's constitutional mandate which reserves super majorities for specific things, not everything.

    He should've done this 3 years ago.
    jallman: "It's all good. At least you have a thick skin and can take being poked fun back at without crying. "

  5. #5
    Sage
    pbrauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-27-15 @ 03:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,394

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Levin realizes this move may very well come back to bite them in the butt in the near future.
    There should be no reason to require 60+ votes for a Presidential nomination. NONE. Finally Harry Reid had the balls to tell the Republicans to stick it where the sun doesn't shine.
    Last edited by pbrauer; 11-21-13 at 02:04 PM. Reason: spelling


  6. #6
    Sage
    Erod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:15 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,036

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    And when you lose both houses and the presidency soon, I don't want to hear a thing from you. Paybacks are hell.

  7. #7
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:37 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,290
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Levin realizes this move may very well come back to bite them in the butt in the near future.
    It will. However, I approve of that. For presidential appointments, I do not think it should take 60 votes and I do not think ideology should be used to block appointments, and both those go either way. It is a game both sides play, and it really does need to stop. Unless there is something major with an appointment, some ethics violations, clearly unqualified, something like that, then the president does get to pick. That is entirely appropriate, and it does not matter who is president. I did not support and disagreed with the blocking of Bush nominations(and it happened, bigtime) either. Maybe if the two parties stopped trying to **** each other over at every turn, things would not be so ****ed up.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Colorado mountains
    Last Seen
    01-03-15 @ 08:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,729

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    It's about time Harry.
    There will never be a payback.
    Even if, by some weird turn of events the republicons regain a senate majority...Democrats don't filibuster presidential appointments.
    That is a republicon thing .
    The party of mass obstruction is losing it's grip.

  9. #9
    Sage
    Fisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    12-06-13 @ 02:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    17,002

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    So Harry Reid proved himself a fraud when he said he would never support removing the filibuster rule. I hope these justices are worth it, because when the GOP retakes the Senate there will be hell to pay. Changing the rules to get what you want is such a pattern for the democrats that they have hastened the day they are removed from control

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Senate approves nuclear option

    I guess balance in power isn't important. Why not just let one party rule? I see nothing wrong with it at all.

    I wonder what they plan to do if they ever lose the Senate? Cry?

Page 1 of 86 1231151 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •