Posted on 10/21/2017 2:31:06 PM PDT by SMGFan
Republicans sit in a majority of the seats but still act as if the Democrats are the majority. That seems to because Republicans believe that Democrats, being the People’s Party are the natural rulers They are uncomfortable in the majority and would like to return to their comfortable minority status where they have no responsibility to pass things.
You been out of the country for a few years?
wish Zinke would run in MT. Could he win?
The only incumbents currently facing viable primary challengers are Flake and Heller, and those seats are already vulnerable with the incumbents in them, due in part to their weakness with the GOP base. Arizona is not a likely gain for them in my opinion.
Potential primary challengers in MS (Chris McDaniel) or NE or UT or WY are irrelevant, those seats are at no risk to a rat baring some extraordinary nonsense.
None of this changes the fact that rats Brown, Nelson, McCrapskull, Donnelly, Manchin, Tester, and Casey all face (or are likely to face in the case of Nelson), top tier challengers and Heitkamp is vulnerable even to the 2nd tier challenger running against her (and she might yet draw someone stronger). Stabmenow and the dyke in Wisconsin are vulnerable too, as may be Melendez in NJ if runs and is renominated and things could yet develop in Maine, VA and MN.
Manchin has a moonbat primary challenger BTW, which everyone is choosing to ignore. If she upsets him (as he was upset in the 1996 gubernatorial primary, similarly by a female moonbat) that seat is as good as ours.
And let’s hope the Republican voting states get the voting corruption under control in their cities.
Charlie is a fat light weight
Most of the Senate needs to be repealed and replaced.
The ones we have are more concerned about citizens of other countries who broke into our country and are robbing us blind.
Alexander, Corker, Flake, Graham, Hatch, Heller, Hoeven, Murkowsky, McCain, Rubio, Gardner, Burr, Tillis, Portman, McConnell, Thune, Cornyn, Cochran, Isackson, Blunt, Johnson, Toomey, Capito, Rounds, Fischer, Collins, Wicker, Sasse, Ernst, Young, Boozman and Shelby are all undocumented Democrats in R jerseys.
Orly? How so?
Only if you like having Senators who are beholden to illegal aliens.
Probably
Yup, and Trump may not even have run again in 3 years if he had major wins on 3-4 avenues (taxes, wall, healthcare, regs).
Bannon is working to drain the swamp.
Yes, yes, I got it. First we needed the House, and if we can just get the Senate, we will really be getting what we always hoped for, and that's to give those Dems the 'ol "what for" but once we retook the Senate that wasn't enough. Sure, for 7 years the Repubs talked a good game but what they REALLY needed was also the White house AND THEN the people's agenda would move forward like priority one one of repeal of Obamacare. Now the 'R's" got someone who will sign just about any piece of legislation we could have ever dreamed of, but now wait... We need to replace current RINOS with even more constitutionalists types. Dang, we only have to wait another year or two as it was to REALLY get what we have always wanted! replcing current "R's" with other "R's" sounds great and all, I'm just having a hard time with it. all. Color me skeptical.
You don’t understand what the term “supermajority” means.
A supermajority is when one party has significantly more than 50% of the vote. Or if a vote requires a number greater than 50%, then it is said to require a supermajority.
Cloture votes, for example, require a supermajority in most cases. They require 3/5 of the senate, or 60 votes.
So, while the GOP has the majority in the Senate and the House, and they have the presidency, they do not have a supermajority in either the house or senate.
The erosion is the anti-Trump scoundrels, like McCain,Corker, Flake et al. who are in peril not because of Trump but because they oppose him.
Oh, and McCain is imperiled by the brain disease that he has, and that he has been, for so many years.
Did you actually read that and think that I was advocating for the need to have 60 votes for cloture?
Or were you just trying to deflect and make it look like I was wrong about something that I was saying.
I was explaining to you what a supermajority is, as you have been using the term incorrectly. The example of needing a supermajority for cloture was just that, an example.
Of course it is an archaic rule. Everyone knows that. And of course it can be changed. That is common knowledge. It already has been for Supreme Court nominations. So we agree on this well known fact.
Though I will point out that the Democrats did not change the rules to pass Obamacare. They actually managed to get the required supermajority of 60 votes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
