• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Democrats help block Obama’s DOJ pick[W:29]

Did you read the OP's link?

And as a huge supporter of Heitkamp and Donnelly, who voted NO,
GOPs/Cons other than you stand out in their attempts to divide DEMs .

Yes I did. It clearly states that this was a post-filibuster nominee vote. It wasn't a filibuster.
 
Then you're offr-topic and derailing the thread.
In the link, the yes/no vote was 47-52 .


Thank you for that advice.'


If I am in violation of any rules please notify admin.

Clearly you have no intent in engaging in reasoned debate.

Do not be offended that I am adding you to my ignore list

Enjoy your rage
 
I'll stop here because you refuse to acknowledge that this was a filibuster.
When you're serious, you know where I am, CanadaJohn .

As someone who was a parliamentarian as a profession, it is my view that a simple majority vote is not a filibuster. A filibuster is a procedural tool that requires greater than majority plus one in order to pass. Now, the Senate may have had a procedural vote to, in effect, take the committee report from the table and debate it and that vote failed, and Harry Reid refused to bring it up for an up or down vote, without debate. But that's not a filibuster. You claim the author of the OP is wrong and yet you provide no actual evidence, other than your opinion, to counter his position.

I won't suggest you're not serious, since I don't like to impune motive when someone I'm discussing something with simply disagrees. We'll just have to wait and see what the actual vote was on. Until then, you can speculate and I can speculate and neither one of us knows the answer.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Cool it off. It is possible to discuss this topic without heated nonsense and attacks. It would be wise to acquire this skill.
 
what was the basis of the opposition (other than the strange name)?
 
The filibuster prevented further discussion and an up-and-down vote, which the GOP constantly presses for when they are in the majority.
With the new 'nuclear' rules, would the GOP have rejected their own President's choice for anything ?


Would have happened with Harriet Myers but she withdrew her nomination. What usually happens when a Presidential nominee doesn't have majority support. Which is exactly what Obama should do with this nominee.

And this wans't a filibuster, it was a vote to invoke cloture or move the bill forward.
 
Back
Top Bottom