GOP Senate would mean more clashes with Obama, little progress

MSN ^ | 10/24/2014 | William Douglas and David Lightman

[South40]

WASHINGTON — It's Nov. 5 and jubilant Republicans have captured the Senate, giving the party control of both chambers of Congress for the last two years of Barack Obama's presidency.

Now what?

The power and agenda in the Senate would shift dramatically. Republicans goals — rolling back the Affordable Care Act, approving the Keystone XL pipeline, lowering tax rates and investigating the Obama administration — would dominate Senate debate and hearings.

However, Republican control would do little to change the recipe for gridlock. The Republican majority in the Senate would almost certainly be small, well short of the 60 votes required to move any controversial legislation over the objections of the Democratic minority. Polls 10 days before Election Day suggest a GOP majority of about 51 seats.

[Blackirish]

Hey..posting this type of good news gets the doom and gloom crowd really grumpy.

[Sooth2222]

"GOP Senate would mean more clashes with Obama, little progress"

They make that sound like it would be a bad thing.

[trebb]

Why even follow politics or bother to vote? There are so many who are unwilling to take and leverage any victory because it isn’t a complete and total rout that I wonder why we even bother discussing it anymore. Let’s just cede the contest now and stop wasting our time....

[kenmcg]

“GOP Senate would mean more clashes with Obama, little progress”

....and that’s just fine with freedom loving Americans, it’s about time the socialist/commie takeover of the USA is stopped.

[sergeantdave]

“And a Republican Senate could prevent judicial nominations of more Marxists.”

And a Republican Senate will give Ted Cruz a national platform to start dicing and slicing Hillary.

[PAR]

Of course it’s lost on the author that “little progress” is significant progress.

[wayoverontheright]

A big GOP win would be a defeat for liberal governance, no small thing in my opinion.

It would be a significant emotional event for liberals, and it must cause them to question their tactics, if not their beliefs.

I’m not as negative as to what might happen as most of us seem to be.

We would be wise to focus on the psychology as much as the politics.

They become losers. And Obama and the media will be the ones that led them to defeat. Defeat is never good, as we have learned. And it won’t be good for them, either.

[9YearLurker]

Exactly.

[DoodleDawg]

The Republican controlled Congress can pass bills and watch Obama veto them.

The Democrats will filibuster everything in sight long before it could ever reach Obama's desk.

[billhilly]

You're on target. If I may state the obvious, one third of the Senate is up for election each election cycle. Let's say the Senate is comprised of 53 Republicans and 47 Democrats. With an administration falling like a rock almost certainly some democrats would vote with republicans,(Joe Manchin, (D W. Va)for instance. Another factor is an upcoming Presidential election. None of them are going to want to identify with the last gasp efforts of Obama, et al, so there are likely to be temporary shifts in alliances, not all along party lines. It should be an interesting two years. We have been through these situations time and time again, yet Chicken Little always believes the sky is falling.

[Ann Archy]

GOOD!!! VOTE REPUBLICAN ALL THE WAY!!!

[Afterguard]

Works for me. We don’t need anymore Progressive progress. Unfortunately the GOP will not have the stones to reverse the progress we already have.

[GeronL]

The Republican majority in the Senate would almost certainly be small, well short of the 60 votes required to move any controversial legislation over the objections of the Democratic minority

funny how it never stops the Democrats

[GeronL]

most Republican Senators are usually rubber stamps for whoever the Presidents nominates

[SoConPubbie]

And a Republican Senate could prevent judicial nominations of more Marxists.

Tell me, when was the last time you saw the Republicans in the Senate vote unanimously to NOT confirm a liberal Jurist?

It will take a unanimous GOP vote against any of Obama's Judge Nominations to stop them.

This is a FALSE benefit you are stating of a Republican controlled senate.

The GOP-E Senators are only too happy to confirm the worst of Obama's Judicial Nominees.

[SoConPubbie]

GOOD!!! VOTE REPUBLICAN ALL THE WAY!!!

You seem to be confused.

South40 said Conservative, not GOP-E.

Now, given your posting history Ann, I know the differentiation between those two terms is completely irrelevant.

However, to those of us that are actually conservatives first, and then Republican, there is a wide gulf right now between the two labels.

[Iron Munro]

I don’t give a crap what liberals think - I want to destroy them (figuratively) and their ideas.

They probably wouldn't even make good fertilizer.

[Teacher317]

GOP Senate would mean more clashes with Obama, little progress

No bias in that headline at all... Only Obama's desires and plans are "progress"... and only Republicans are obstructionists if they block his plans. Obama blocking a GOP Congress of course would not be.

[Iron Munro]

The MSM is laying down the line that Obama’s being a lame duck is all the GOP’s fault.

LAME DUCK LAME DORK

[Blue Collar Christian]

I think preventing progress is a good thing.