Posted on 09/28/2014 1:45:05 PM PDT by Olog-hai
How much difference will it make if Republicans win the Senate majority on Nov. 4, joining the GOP-run House against a Democratic White House?
Congress’ persistent gridlock is due largely, but not entirely, to the current power split in the two chambers. But even if Republicans add Senate control to their safe House majority, big legislative roadblocks will remain.
President Barack Obama still can veto legislation.
Should Democrats lose six or more Senate seats, ceding the majority, they can use the power of the filibuster to thwart dozens of GOP initiatives. Republicans have employed this tactic from the minority side. …
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
They still failed to make the tax cuts permanent, even with a majority in both houses.
Go on with the insulting condescension. Being a jackhole makes you so much more convincing.
Once again, I was specifically referring to the Republican Party when they had control of every branch of the Federal Government. This is important because the party had no limitations to accomplishing what they always say they want to do. They demonstrated that all their campaign rhetoric was empty and untrustworthy.
I don’t know what comparison you think I was making. I was just bringing up their sorry-ass track record. And there’s been no reason to believe they’ll do any better this time.
The point you were making can be filed under “N” for NO DUH or maybe “S” for shallow.
It was still a terrible analogy, because control of Congress when you have the Oval Office is totally different than when you don’t. When your party controls the office, THE PREZ sets the agenda for congress de facto. When you are the opposition, it’s a totally different. That’s why 94 is more apt analogy. Period.
And whining about my attitude is another sign of the weakness of your position.
But tax cuts were in operation year after year and had great value contrary to the assertion that nothing the GOP did was conservative and had no value.
BTW...the GOP never bad a fillibuster proof majority. Many of those years they had a majority of one only with Cheney.
I don’t have to read this story.
I’ve lived this story in real life, back when the GOP controlled it all.
In other words, you brag about your ignorance. And you still can't focus on the topic. The topic is that the AP is trying to fool suckers like you, with a bullsh-t headline, and you proved to be the suckiest sucker of all. And even to your point, which is off topic, there was no Ted Cruz and Mike Lee and Rand Paul and Trey Gowdy and Louie Gohmert etc involved back than....so your infantile reaction tells me that you are not intelligent enough to follow my drop dead slam dunk explanation that Congress with the WH and Congress without the WH are two totally different dynamics.
I am sorry for over estimating your logical abilities. I'll never do it again.
The Stupid Party is afraid that if it wins, we will expect it to do something.
The Stupid Party doesn’t care about limited Constitutional government. It doesn’t care about liberty, or private property, or a robust economy, or a morally sound society, or about anything else that constitutionalists and conservatives support.
The Stupid Party cares about being in office, and enjoying the perks thereof.
The AP story has no influence on my decisions.
My decisions are based on what I have observed in the past and
present. I have voted for plenty of RINO’s in the past.
I cast my last RINO vote for Romney in 2012.
I will vote, but I will not vote for any RINO in the future.
are you obtuse? The AP story IS WHAT THE EFFEN THREAD IS ABOUT. THIS ISN”T ABOUT THE ROMNEY CAMPAIGN.
Gosh you’re just an ignorant drive by poster just looking at headlines and spouting off your. Again, I thought you were an adult. I was wrong. Go ahead and vent your meaningless bitterness at every headline and make sure you never read a damned story so you don’t ever get educated. Now back to the children’s table with you - the adults are having a serious conversation above your head.
Ah, name calling all you got?
You said in a previous post that this article was about fooling suckers
like me.
Like I posted before, An article does not fool me.
I’ve seen enough RINO’s actions in the past and present to base my
opinion on.
It is you that is the sucker. You continue to vote for the enabler RINOS,
Expecting something different. The end result is the same every time.
When I call you ignorant, it’s not a name calling, it’s an accurate adjective. You must be a slow reader, which is why you don’t read anything but headlines. Maybe you like a lot of pictures too.
Now let me show you how un-intelligent you are. Listen carefully. This might be complicated for you: There are a hundred threads a day on FR about real problems with the GOPe and RINO’s - about Rove or other idiotic consultants - and so on. That’s everywhere on FR, as it should be - and that’s where you can go an vent all you want to. There are also Romney threads that pop up from time to time, and you can vent there about Romney.
But this article is about ONE THING - the AP trying to get conservatives mad. And it worked on you - you did get suckered by the AP in this one. This hasn’t a damned thing to do with whether or not you’ll vote for a RINO down the road. This is about AP saying that even more conservatives winning, it won’t matter. And you fell for it because of your reading issues.
Once again, I don’t need to read an article from AP to get me mad.
I’ve lived the RINO lies in real life. I’ve seen their enabling of Harry Reid.
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.