Final results thread

[dubman]

is it just me or am i not particularly enthused to have a filibuster proof democratic majority? i actually do believe in checks and balances, not just when it doesnt swing my way, and there needs to be healthy debates and opposition to make sure that whatever gets through has had a bit of a gauntlet run first instead of shouting down opposing views with an overwhelming majority.

[jOHN rODRIGUEZ]

Originally Posted by dubman

is it just me or am i not particularly enthused to have a filibuster proof democratic majority? i actually do believe in checks and balances, not just when it doesnt swing my way, and there needs to be healthy debates and opposition to make sure that whatever gets through has had a bit of a gauntlet run first instead of shouting down opposing views with an overwhelming majority.

First things first. How's the beard?

[Sean]

Originally Posted by dubman

is it just me or am i not particularly enthused to have a filibuster proof democratic majority? i actually do believe in checks and balances, not just when it doesnt swing my way, and there needs to be healthy debates and opposition to make sure that whatever gets through has had a bit of a gauntlet run first instead of shouting down opposing views with an overwhelming majority.

I'd have to double check and I'm just heading out the door, but I think they would've needed a few more seats to be filibuster-proof. Wasn't it like 60 that they would need for that?

[gambit]

Technically, two of those "Democrats" are Independents, and one of them is Lieberman, and I'd be surprised if he has any legs to stand on in a year. But I don't disagree with dubman about the checks and balances. That being said, even if they don't get the 60 seats, the Democrats should be able to persuade some moderate Republicans on some issues even if they lose the last three seats.

[dubman]

Originally Posted by jOHN rODRIGUEZ

First things first. How's the beard?

gone actually. i needed it for a bernard black costume so out it went

the democrats do need a 60 seat senate to impose their merciless will, and it's doubtful they'll get it. i dont understand the mournful tone of that news though. having that sort of majority is a double edged sword. even if things arent your fault, you could have done anything you wanted to to stop it.

[Strangelet]

Originally Posted by dubman

is it just me or am i not particularly enthused to have a filibuster proof democratic majority? i actually do believe in checks and balances, not just when it doesnt swing my way, and there needs to be healthy debates and opposition to make sure that whatever gets through has had a bit of a gauntlet run first instead of shouting down opposing views with an overwhelming majority.

maybe its the campaign I just witnessed, but it seems like it doesn't matter how many strong you are if all you've got to say is obama hangs with terrorists and brain washes people into being *socialists*

But even before the campaign so much of the republican agenda descended into rovian subterfuge and propaganda to stem off the consequences of really bad policy.

To such a level that I don't know if it would even matter if it ends up being 39 christiano-fascists in power or 41.

the number one strategy of winning an argument is being right. everything else tends to work itself out. the sooner the gop starts to rediscover what they are right about, that's the sooner our country benefits from any meaningful checks and balance. who knows when that will happen, with bible spice being poised and groomed for 2012

[jOHN rODRIGUEZ]

Originally Posted by Strangelet

maybe its the campaign I just witnessed, but it seems like it doesn't matter how many strong you are if all you've got to say is obama hangs with terrorists and brain washes people into being *socialists*

But even before the campaign so much of the republican agenda descended into rovian subterfuge and propaganda to stem off the consequences of really bad policy.

To such a level that I don't know if it would even matter if it ends up being 39 christiano-fascists in power or 41.

the number one strategy of winning an argument is being right. everything else tends to work itself out. the sooner the gop starts to rediscover what they are right about, that's the sooner our country benefits from any meaningful checks and balance. who knows when that will happen, with bible spice being poised and groomed for 2012

Unless, like, a porn tape gets out.

It's a JOKE!!!!

[Sean]

Originally Posted by dubman

gone actually. i needed it for a bernard black costume so out it went

the democrats do need a 60 seat senate to impose their merciless will, and it's doubtful they'll get it. i dont understand the mournful tone of that news though. having that sort of majority is a double edged sword. even if things arent your fault, you could have done anything you wanted to to stop it.

I'm with you. While I'm glad we have a new governmental direction heading our way, I was worried about the Dems getting the 60 seats they'd have needed to have the super-majority. I think having things where they are now with a simple majority will allow for sweeping progress to be made, but hopefully not to the point of spiraling wildly in one direction or the other.

[Strangelet]

Originally Posted by Sean

I'm with you. While I'm glad we have a new governmental direction heading our way, I was worried about the Dems getting the 60 seats they'd have needed to have the super-majority. I think having things where they are now with a simple majority will allow for sweeping progress to be made, but hopefully not to the point of spiraling wildly in one direction or the other.

Obviously by the math on paper you guys are right. I'm just arguing that you have to have a justifiable platform from which to assert dissent, otherwise your dissent, in terms of mollifying our fears of runaway democratic ideology, is pretty much worthless. How do you dissent effectively if you simply refuse to see the problem any other way besides the current platform, summarized by dave berry fairly well...

Barack Obama is our next president, which is very bad because he is a naive untested wealth-spreading terrorist-befriending ultraliberal socialist communist who will suddenly reveal his secret Muslim identity by riding to his inauguration on a camel shouting ''Death to Israel!'' (I mean Obama will be shouting this, not the camel) after which he will wreck the economy by sending Joe the Plumber to Guantánamo and taxing away all the income of anybody who makes over $137.50 per year and giving it to bloated government agencies that will deliberately set it on fire.

your dissent is going to be "WE GOT TO STOP THESE CAMEL JOCKEY LIBRULS FROM MAKING SOSYALISM" meanwhile the democrats are passing dud after dud of a bill because the real type of checks and balances, common sense, we're waiting to land back to earth from its current orbit. the republican party is broken. and I don't say that out of any glee.