• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • 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!

Can the GOP Win the Senate and What Will They Accomplish?

L

Linc

NIMBY
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2013
Messages
68,333
Reaction score
25,349
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/02/2014-senate-republican-takeover-103297.html?hp=t2_3

This will be the first of many links, both by me and others, to the looming takeover of the Senate by the GOP.

I'm wondering what they figure to accomplish with a Presidential veto and a Senate filibuster,
unless they expand the "nuclear option" to legislation.

Chances are the GOP will not do this, since the DEMs have a huge Senate reelection advantage in 2016, but you never know .
 
NIMBY said:
GOP grows confident of Senate takeover - James Hohmann - POLITICO.com

This will be the first of many links, both by me and others, to the looming takeover of the Senate by the GOP.

I'm wondering what they figure to accomplish with a Presidential veto and a Senate filibuster,
unless they expand the "nuclear option" to legislation.

Chances are the GOP will not do this, since the DEMs have a huge Senate reelection advantage in 2016, but you never know .
Click to expand...
I think there is a good chance they will gain control of the Senate, but I don't think it will matter much. Whatever both houses manage to pass will just get vetoed by Obama anyway. But the truth is, the less they do the better. There are enough laws right now. It wont bother me a bit if no other paws get passed for the nest two years.
 
Nothing against the comment, but how can we not have the Farm bill which was just passed after three years of acrimonious negotiations.
I don't get the aversion to legislation in an ever-increasing high technological world.
Another of the Bills left undone last year was Transportation and Infrastructure .
Fletch said:
I think there is a good chance they will gain control of the Senate, but I don't think it will matter much. Whatever both houses manage to pass will just get vetoed by Obama anyway. But the truth is, the less they do the better. There are enough laws right now. It wont bother me a bit if no other paws get passed for the nest two years.
Click to expand...
 
NIMBY said:
Nothing against the comment, but how can we not have the Farm bill which was just passed after three years of acrimonious negotiations.
I don't get the aversion to legislation in an ever-increasing high technological world.
Another of the Bills left undone last year was Transportation and Infrastructure .
Click to expand...
If technological advancement brings with it a necessity for ever more laws, then the ultimate end of an ever-advancing mankind is tyranny. But sure, we need legislation to fund the government, but laws like Obamacare we can do without.
 
Fletch said:
If technological advancement brings with it a necessity for ever more laws, then the ultimate end of an ever-advancing mankind is tyranny. But sure, we need legislation to fund the government, but laws like Obamacare we can do without.
Click to expand...

Just because you don't like a law doesn't mean that mankind is advancing toward tyranny.
And btw, each time the President's hand is forced on ACA, as it was today, he comes back toward the GOP position by XO.
Then, right on cue, the GOP complains this is why the gov't shut down.
No doubt the spinning and posturing on ACA is currently the #1 issue for the Senate .
 
IMHO, Mr. Clinton's apparent all-in for DEM Candidates for the Senate means that
Rand Paul will and has taken off every sleazy glove since Whitewater.

Give both Reince Priebus and MSNBC credit for having the interview today,
where Priebus was all-in on attacking Mr. Clinton's personal life.

Some of you Clinton haters know far more than what I pay attention to.

IMV, Mrs. Clinton is a far worse pariah around DEM heads in RED states, such as her home Arkansas.
After Mrs. Clinton's 1 through 7 hit list came out today, she is more than cooked in my book.
 
NIMBY said:
IMHO, Mr. Clinton's apparent all-in for DEM Candidates for the Senate means that
Rand Paul will and has taken off every sleazy glove since Whitewater.

Give both Reince Priebus and MSNBC credit for having the interview today,
where Priebus was all-in on attacking Mr. Clinton's personal life.

Some of you Clinton haters know far more than what I pay attention to.

IMV, Mrs. Clinton is a far worse pariah around DEM heads in RED states, such as her home Arkansas.
After Mrs. Clinton's 1 through 7 hit list came out today, she is more than cooked in my book.
Click to expand...

True. I usually vote third party, but if Hillary wins the Democratic nomination in 2016, I will be holding my nose and voting for whichever Republican runs against her.
 
Hillary has had her time in the spotlight, as a FLOTUS, a Senator, a POTUS candidate, and a Sec'y of State.
I'm sick of the flip-flops she's already started performing to get to the "fickle" base.

The long knives have been out for her since Mr. Obama was reelected.
I believe she was unelectable in 2008, just as with now.

I prefer a more common-sense DEM. Governor like Nixon from Missouri, even O'Malley from Maryland.
I'm not sold on Gov. Schweitzer from Montana yet, but he and Hillary are at each other's throats already.

I'm still watching Rep. Ryan's every move.
We were "escaping to Wisconsin", the portion he represents,
starting in the late 70's when Mr. Ryan was in grade school.
Surely his Jack Kemp upbringing should come into play, along with his work on Simpson-Bowles.

My wife and I actually stayed in Janesville, his hometown,
the night before he was picked as VP-candidate, visiting old friends in Whitewater and Ft. Atkinson.
The John Muir trails, the Ice Age trails, the Kettles and Moraines--some of the best hiking and cross-country skiing in the midwest .
danarhea said:
True. I usually vote third party, but if Hillary wins the Democratic nomination in 2016, I will be holding my nose and voting for whichever Republican runs against her.
Click to expand...
 
Koch brothers bombard vulnerable Senate Democrat Kay Hagan - Manu Raju and Anna Palmer - POLITICO.com

From the article, americans for Prosperity--a group co-founded by the billionaire Koch brothers--has already dropped $8.2 million on TV, radio and digital ads in an effort to defeat the North Carolina Democratic Sen. Kay Hagan. According to sources tracking media buys, the Koch group has so far spent more in North Carolina than all Democratic outside groups in every Senate race in the country--combined.

My take-aways include that people who think the elections are 8.5 months away and don't worry are not paying attention, both parties.
If you liked Citizens United, you like this waste of millions trying to raqise the negatives from outside groups.
so much for state's rights with the GOP M"within" their borders.

But DEMs get a special condemnation from me.
You dumb mother ****ers are getting Willie-Hortoned as well as tarred-and-feathered in the TarHeel state and not a ****ing whimper of national support with money.
Just like with the New Jersey governor's race, you idiots.
Piss on either Clinton or Obama.
Bring in Governors like Beshear and Nixon as well as Senators like Heitkamp and Manchin .
 
The fact that the Koch-backed group is a "non-profit" group and doesn't pay taxes nor does it have to disclose its donors lies at the very heart of the I.R.S. investigations into these Political groups trying to sway elections outside of the state.
I certaqinly support the I.R.S. for doing this, both ways .
 
Senators Cornyn and McConnell are too worried about their TEA-primaries, voting for the filibuster, along with Sen. Johanns (R-NE) who is retiring.
McConnell read the tea leaves, changing his position on demanding White House concessions since Dem. opponent Lundergan-Grimes has taken a lead .
 
NIMBY said:
IMHO, Mr. Clinton's apparent all-in for DEM Candidates for the Senate means that
Rand Paul will and has taken off every sleazy glove since Whitewater.

Give both Reince Priebus and MSNBC credit for having the interview today,
where Priebus was all-in on attacking Mr. Clinton's personal life.

Some of you Clinton haters know far more than what I pay attention to.

IMV, Mrs. Clinton is a far worse pariah around DEM heads in RED states, such as her home Arkansas.
After Mrs. Clinton's 1 through 7 hit list came out today, she is more than cooked in my book.
Click to expand...

We can only hope. From what I've heard, she's the far more vindictive and far more punitive of the Clintons.
Qualities a good leader doesn't make.
The nation can't go through another administration of an incompetent leader in the White House.
 
I'll put up with Mr. Clinton working for DEMs but she can go to Hell with her "hit" list.
I look at Red-state DEM governors like Nixon of Missouri and Beshear of Kentucky as a quantum leap over Mr. Carter.
Just today, retiring House Blue-dog Matheson from Utah made noises about going after Sen. Lee, which I would dearly love .
eohrnberger said:
We can only hope. From what I've heard, she's the far more vindictive and far more punitive of the Clintons.
Qualities a good leader doesn't make.
The nation can't go through another administration of an incompetent leader in the White House.
Click to expand...
 
With DEMs getting whacked with tens of millions of ACA hit ads, it's time for the non-teflon party to hit back.
If they are to listen to Mr. Clinton, they need to face this onslaught head-on.
Begin with a barrage of millions of their ownh ads in the 20 RED states who refuse Medicaid Extension, due to politics.
Point out the RED and PURPLE states that have extended Medicaid.
Show how 63% of South Dakotans favor Medicaid extension, yet the SD legislature has prevented an ME amendment in fall to go to the ballot .
 
Last edited:
If Arkansas and Iowa are using Medicaid funds to pay private insurers,
both SEN. Pryor in Arkansas and candidate Rep. Braley in Iowa need to get in the news each day as Rand Paul does.
Use Sen. Heikamp (D-ND) and her story and support for ACA .
 
NIMBY said:
GOP grows confident of Senate takeover - James Hohmann - POLITICO.com

This will be the first of many links, both by me and others, to the looming takeover of the Senate by the GOP.

I'm wondering what they figure to accomplish with a Presidential veto and a Senate filibuster,
unless they expand the "nuclear option" to legislation.

Chances are the GOP will not do this, since the DEMs have a huge Senate reelection advantage in 2016, but you never know .
Click to expand...

Your thread title poses two questions...Can the GOP win the Senate and What will they accomplish.

The article you linked answers the first question. Yes, they can.

For the second question, the answer is not so clear but I think they can do a lot.

1. They can end the current blockage of Republican attempts to pass legislation to reduce the size, scope and power of the government. That doesn't mean they will suddenly be able to get such legislation passed by Congress, but they will at least have such legislation considered and voted on. Reid is not allowing much of that right now.

2. Democrats will have to finally take a stand. Up till now, they've had the cover of not having to cast a vote on legislation they don't like. That will end. There will be a voting record for people to look at.

3. If Republican proposals actually do pass Congress, then Obama will have to take a stand. If he wants to veto things, so be it...but he's going to have to explain why.

I think these reasons are enough to make the idea of Republican control of the Senate sound like a good thing.
 
Mycroft said:
I think these reasons are enough to make the idea of Republican control of the Senate sound like a good thing.
Click to expand...

Just know that I am working on your three statements.
This current hour of FOX special report is so fast-moving, I have to take notes.
Right now,

R. Paul is suing the POTUS on FOX .
 
Mycroft said:
The article you linked answers the first question. Yes, they can.
Click to expand...
The first question is coming from an election junkie and all the cool politics in the 50 states.

For the second question, the answer is not so clear but I think they can do a lot.
Click to expand...
You are correct.
For instance, let me mention what Paul Ryan went through today.
Paul Ryan?s military pay gambit backfires - POLITICO.com


1. They can end the current blockage of Republican attempts to pass legislation to reduce the size, scope and power of the government.
That doesn't mean they will suddenly be able to get such legislation passed by Congress, but they will at least have such legislation considered and voted on.
Reid is not allowing much of that right now.
Click to expand...
The previous link proved that the GOP in both chambers sold Ryan out after lobbying pressure.
Nothing big will ever be accomplished with the strength of ALL lobbying groups, both parties.
Public pension exposure is THE economic disaster waiting to happen, from fed to state to municipal .
 
NIMBY said:
The first question is coming from an election junkie and all the cool politics in the 50 states.


You are correct.
For instance, let me mention what Paul Ryan went through today.
Paul Ryan?s military pay gambit backfires - POLITICO.com



The previous link proved that the GOP in both chambers sold Ryan out after lobbying pressure.
Nothing big will ever be accomplished with the strength of ALL lobbying groups, both parties.
Public pension exposure is THE economic disaster waiting to happen, from fed to state to municipal .
Click to expand...

This Ryan issue you mention just illustrates my point.

Sure, the Democrats are dealing with this military pension issue with the Republicans. People from all sides are taking a stand. That's the way it should be...with all issues.

I'd like to see the Republicans at least be able to get issues on the table to be worked out instead of being shoved into one of Reid's drawers...never to be considered.
 
Mycroft said:
This Ryan issue you mention just illustrates my point.
Click to expand...

As for P. Ryan, he sure fell on the sword for all the debt-cowards in the GOP who whine 18 trillion.
They've now kicked the can of sequestration until after the election.
Anyone who thinks we can get out of this debt crisis without pension reform across-the-board in this Nation should be removed from politics.
Did you notice how bent out-of-shape B. Sanders got at the President when he brought up chained-CPI?
 
Mycroft said:
Sure, the Democrats are dealing with this military pension issue with the Republicans. People from all sides are taking a stand. That's the way it should be...with all issues.
Click to expand...
Neither party is dealing with the military pension issue.
If you have a better idea than "means testing", I'm all ears.

The stand that was taken was in December.
The two parties backed off of their stand today and P. Ryan is the fall guy .
 
Mycroft said:
I'd like to see the Republicans at least be able to get issues on the table to be worked out instead of being shoved into one of Reid's drawers...never to be considered.
Click to expand...

From my POV, the GOP refused to go to Joint committee all last year.
If the Senate turns over, the DEMs will simply filibuster as the GOP has.
OR, they may work together .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom