• 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!

If the Repubs Take the Senate . . . . (1 Viewer)

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,342
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The Economist is usually pretty astute about these things.

After the mid-term elections

If the Republicans win the Senate...

MOST polls suggest that Republicans will capture a narrow majority in the Senate in November’s mid-term elections, while holding on to the House of Representatives. So America faces two more years of divided government, but with a shift in the balance of power.


Until now, Barack Obama has always had a Democratic Senate to block proposals passed by the House. If that buffer disappears, he will have to sign or veto every bill that a Republican Congress sends him. The result may be political paralysis, accelerating the greying of the president’s hair and alarming allies worldwide. Or it may be that the two sides find common ground and pass some sensible measures.
In this section

Pessimists sigh that the parties are too polarised to agree on anything. Plenty of Republicans think Mr Obama is a menace whom patriots must thwart and resist. Many Democrats believe there is no point in trying to cut deals with Republicans. Instead, they want Mr Obama to spend his last two years in office ignoring Congress and using executive orders and federal regulations to pursue progressive goals, such as curbing greenhouse-gas emissions, shielding illegal migrants from deportation (and even closing the Guantánamo Bay prison for terrorist suspects, if press reports are true: see Lexington). Under this scenario, no significant laws will be passed until after the presidential election in 2016.


Optimists retort that once Republicans control both arms of Congress, they cannot just snarl from the sidelines. Unless they show they have a positive agenda, they risk a drubbing in 2016. And if Mr Obama wants a legacy, he will have to work with them. Some of the bigwigs interviewed for this article believe that several constructive, growth-friendly policies already enjoy enough bipartisan support to pass in the Senate. . . .
 
If????

I think history shows that the dems are too lazy to get of the couch for mid-term elections. But I could be wrong.

Now, I'm not saying there aren't enough people to secure the senate for the dems. I'm just saying they are lazy and don't want it bad enough.

My money's on the GOP. Just my gut feeling.
 
Apparently the Economist has not heard of filibusters and cloture votes...
 
If the Repubs Take the Senate . . . .



Nothing will change. I have lost all faith in either party to do the right thing.
 
Apparently the Economist has not heard of filibusters and cloture votes...

Actually, a lot can be done with reconciliation. Considering the use of it for Obamacare, kind of set a "anything goes" precedence.
 
Apparently the Economist has not heard of filibusters and cloture votes...

is the senate not able to amend those rules?
 
... And if Mr Obama wants a legacy, he will have to work with them. ...
don't agree with this excerpt
he has a legacy
and fighting for the right against the reich wing - via the veto - could add to his legacy
 
I am hoping the Republicans win just enough races in November to take control of the Senate by a vote or two margin. It is the key component to nationwide Democratic victories in November of 2016 and will do for the modern era what the Goldwater disaster did in 1964.

Sometimes you have to hit bottom to truly rise again to the top.
 
Real long shot.

i believe it is almost a certainty
especially after the senate voted to amend the chamber's rules so that presidential nominees for judicial and executive branch positions could no longer be blocked by filibuster as recently as 2013

live by the sword. die by the sword. expect a LOT of handwringing and wailing by the democratic party when this happens to them
 
Didn't Sen. Reid push to get the Senate's rules changed to make those things harder to do?

AS I understand it, that is for appointments, and was really stupid to do.
 
AS I understand it, that is for appointments, and was really stupid to do.

yes, VERY stupid
they will have NO basis to object when the republicans amend the rules in their favor when they control the senate
VERY short-sighted of the demos
 
I am hoping the Republicans win just enough races in November to take control of the Senate by a vote or two margin. It is the key component to nationwide Democratic victories in November of 2016 and will do for the modern era what the Goldwater disaster did in 1964.

Sometimes you have to hit bottom to truly rise again to the top.

i get your point
once we hit bottom with the LBJ election we had nowhere to go but up
even if 'up' was nixon
 
Apparently the Economist has not heard of filibusters and cloture votes...

President Obama to Say Democrats Will Use Reconciliation to Pass Senate Health Care Reform Fix, If Not Given Up or Down Vote

Reid, Democrats trigger ‘nuclear’ option; eliminate most filibusters on nominees


Remember the past few years when I have been pointing out that Democrat abuses in the Senate and Obama's "Pen and Phone" expansions of Executive Actions were all creating precedents that could be used against them in the future? :)


Republicans will have an opportunity to spend the next few years finding the policies that a majority of Americans agree on (securing the southern border comes to mind), and forcing Obama to either veto it, or depress his base.... and also forcing Democrat candidates to either define themselves in opposition to the President (if he vetoes it), or demonstrate that they are beholden to that base.

Now. That is not to say that they will do that. Republicans have demonstrated time and again an amazing gift for making incredibly stupid deicisions. No one snatches defeat from the jaws of victory quite like the GOP. But it is the option that will be open to them, should they win the Senate, and having spent the last few years riding roughshod over the Minority, Democrats shouldn't expect that they will be allowed much leeway to interfere.
 
Last edited:
The article mentioned Obama working with Republicans to save his legacy, but I think he will also need to consider the Democrat's legacy. Unbridled vetoes could very well damage the Democrats and affect the 2016 Presidential election. We already see Democrat Congressmen distancing themselves from Obama now...he could find continued distancing during the next two years.

One thing I didn't see mentioned...and, since Obama cares so much about political perceptions...I think it will be very important and that is the role the media takes. Will they generally support Obama or the Congressional Republicans.
 
I am hoping the Republicans win just enough races in November to take control of the Senate by a vote or two margin. It is the key component to nationwide Democratic victories in November of 2016 and will do for the modern era what the Goldwater disaster did in 1964.

Sometimes you have to hit bottom to truly rise again to the top.


We've already hit bottom.

Nov. 2008
 
If the Repubs Take the Senate . . . .

the monthly job reports fistfight thread will be a bit different, at least.
 
Didn't Sen. Reid push to get the Senate's rules changed to make those things harder to do?

No push necessary but he was scared to do it and for good reason.
Recocilliation as we have seen can be used effectively.
BOs legacy can be impacted but in different directions. And it can have longer term impacts for dems again in different directions.

If BO is smart (and he is not) he will do what Bubba did and let the gop do what it needs to do to turn the economy around. That would unsully the.dem brand if at his expense. But he is too fond of himself for that.

Im looking more at clashing battles of exec order. Its well past time to address that constitutional crisis.
 
Optimists retort that once Republicans control both arms of Congress, they cannot just snarl from the sidelines. Unless they show they have a positive agenda, they risk a drubbing in 2016. And if Mr Obama wants a legacy, he will have to work with them. Some of the bigwigs interviewed for this article believe that several constructive, growth-friendly policies already enjoy enough bipartisan support to pass in the Senate. . . .

We shall see if they do have a positive agenda. I haven't seen much to suggest that's the case, but I hope they do.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom