Posted on 03/14/2010 10:10:44 AM PDT by pabianice
35 Dem firm/leaning nos; Pelosi needs 37 "yes" of 72 undecided. The battle continues.
I’m praying the blue dogs hold firm on no.
I’ve got a feeling we’re going to see a lot more DemocRATs accused of being homosexuals this week.
Yes. Let the blackmail commence.
“Yes. Let the blackmail commence”
“The culture of corruption” taken to new heights.
Any dem who has ANYTHING hiding in the closet can expect to do some real soul searching this week.
Looking at their count, if those numbers stay as they are, she’ll have the votes. The 35 firm/leaning ‘no’ votes would leave her with the 37 they say she needs from the “undecideds”.
Looks like the fix is in, and it’s going to take decades of work to undo this madness, if it doesn’t destroy the country as we know it first. It’s truly a shame.
That means there are 213 no votes by The Hill count. Only need 3 more. 13 more would to be safe.
BINGO! Dictatorial regimes readily tolerate the queers who vote with then or follow their orders, but otherwise it’s used to smear them.
I'm glad you're praying and not holding your breath, as the latter might be fatal if betting on the so-called "blue dogs" not voting for this. They're going to cave, just like they caved when the original House bill passed.
Then, Pelosi will introduce all kinds of wildly left-wing legislation that has absolutely no chance of passing. It will fire up the Dems demoralized base, and allow the blue dogs to vote against it and run campaign ads saying how they stood up to the left wing of their party. Just watch.
I would never hold my breath when it comes to the blue dogs...But if they are getting the phone calls to their offices they should be then they have to be scared what’s waiting for them at home on Easter break...
if any dim who doesn’t vote for this AND also sits on his arse and doesn’t stop it....he/she is just as guilty as the Pelousi cabal..
Ain’t no commencin’ going on.
These b’tard are and have been hot and heavy getting their under-the-table deals. They’re on FOX waffling and angling for every little bit they can get. Cong. Engel D-NY (my ol’home state) is nothing but a whore - on TV - with national exposure. Little POS
If a dem really wanted to be a hero in all of this, they would pretend to go along with the program and vote no when it comes to the floor.
Eh ??! Youre not even close. She needs 70 of 72 . Sheesh.
The 37 in the article refers to the maximum number of defections Pelosi can afford. The article claims she is currently at 35 (giving 213 No votes). If she goes to 38 DEMS at NO, she loses. So we only need 3 more. Off the list of 72.
But I, too, do not consider The Hill to be reliable. Interesting list, unreliable.
That's not correct. Pelosi need 69, not 37, of 72 "undecided" members (the way The Hill is counting things). The large majority of those 72 "undecided" are really YES votes, but they haven't officially said so.
Still, it's a steep hill for Pelosi. If those 72 undecideds really were on Pelosi's side, they'd be announcing their YES votes to the media to help build momentum for passage. As it is, almost nobody is eager to support HCR, and it's almost impossible to find previous NO votes which are switching to YES. Whereas it's very easy to find previous YES votes who are either switching to NO or expressing their grave doubts.
It's not just a matter of strong-arming individual fence-sitting Democrats into voting for HCR. Even if a Congress Member is susceptible to pressure or bribes or blackmail, it's pointless for that member to give in to Pelosi if the bill is going to fail anyway. Then the member has the worst of both worlds: a career-ending vote which accomplishes nothing.
So Pelosi has to strong arm enough votes AND convince all of her caucus that she will SUCCEED in getting enough votes. That's why the White House and House Democrat leadership are putting on such a brave front that the bill will pass, and why the whole thing could so easily collapse if just a few more members announce their NO votes.
What difference will this make if they employ the Slaughter Rule?
Oh really? If you accept the Hill's premise, she can only lose 2 of those 72.Dahlkemper, Altmire, Ellsworth, Costello, Berkley, and more are all questionable, and theres more...
At the end of the day they will have to defend the Senate bill. Good, good luck with that.
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.