Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

applegrove

(118,723 posts)
Mon Sep 3, 2012, 10:16 PM Sep 2012

What would you say if asked "why Democrats didn't act when they had

a filibuster proof majority in the house and senate for two years". I would say they didn't have it till the Al Franken situation was solved. Then they passed a health care bill that had conservative things in it like a mandate. The GOP would not join in. Obama kept assuming he could work with Republicans to make entitlement programs more viable into the future. He tried for a year to make deals with the GOP after Democrats lost the House. He gave in on taxes on the wealthy. But the GOP would not deal. Again and again they obstructed Obama and the Democrats.

13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

MrSlayer

(22,143 posts)
1. I would say they didn't have a filibusterproof majority ever.
Mon Sep 3, 2012, 10:21 PM
Sep 2012

Not with assholes like Nelson, Lieberman, Landrieu and so on and so forth on your "side". We should have rammed through a slew of great legislation but we have a bunch of sellouts in "our" party as well.

freshwest

(53,661 posts)
2. Correct, but it's discarded in the desire to go with the winning team who finances the GOP myth.
Mon Sep 3, 2012, 10:22 PM
Sep 2012

That way it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, to not go and vote, because 'it's not worth it.' Then the delicious self-satisfaction can continue from those who wouldn't lower themselves to do the work. So they win and we all lose.

Booster

(10,021 posts)
3. And that the only fault of Obama, at least for me. How come I saw Mitch McConnell say into a
Mon Sep 3, 2012, 10:22 PM
Sep 2012

microphone that they weren't going to do anything that would make Obama look good but somehow Mr. Obama missed it. I don't know what else he could have done but to me he looked weak when he tried to work with them after they already said they wouldn't. We need to give him a second term with a Congress that will work with him - then he could move mountains, although I can't really see them going another 4 yrs without at least trying to do something. It won't matter if he looks good or not then.

Booster

(10,021 posts)
8. Oh, grow up. I'm 71 yrs old and EVERY President since I can remember has been referred to by his
Mon Sep 3, 2012, 11:29 PM
Sep 2012

last name. Even OBAMA refers to himself as OBAMA. Get a grip.

elleng

(131,018 posts)
4. 'They didn't actually have a filibuster-proof majority for two years; that premise is incorrect.'
Mon Sep 3, 2012, 10:25 PM
Sep 2012

Then follow with brief explanation, and details about what they DID do as you've enumerated.

EC

(12,287 posts)
7. With Kennedy and Byrd in the hospital or
Mon Sep 3, 2012, 11:23 PM
Sep 2012

sick in bed much of the time and Al Franken not being seated, the super majority wasn't there too often when it was time to vote.

eomer

(3,845 posts)
10. I would point out that they didn't need a filibuster-proof majority for some important changes.
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 07:09 AM
Sep 2012

For example, they could have made important changes to tax rates, like making the tax cut permanent for everyone but the wealthy, raising the marginal rate for income over $1 million, raising the rate on capital gains, and implementing a transaction tax on financial trading.

All the above could have been done through a budget reconciliation bill, which can't be filibustered. They could have done these things with just 50 votes in the Senate.

JHB

(37,161 posts)
11. Remind them that it's only the Republicans that have the Politburo-level conformity...
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 08:04 AM
Sep 2012

...to the Party Line.

 

Liberal_Stalwart71

(20,450 posts)
12. I would add that Obama also faced opposition within his own party. The Conservative
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 10:20 AM
Sep 2012

"Blue Dog" Democrats were just as obstinate as the Republicans.

If people think Joe LIEberman was going to go along with anything that Obama wanted, they're either being naive or willfully ignorant.

We were NEVER going to have a public option as long as the likes of Max Baucus, Claire McCaskill, Blanche Lincoln, Ben Nelson, and other "conservadems" had a voice.

Even many here on DU have a difficult time understanding this.

Arkana

(24,347 posts)
13. Because we didn't ever have a filibuster proof majority?
Tue Sep 4, 2012, 11:12 AM
Sep 2012

What we had was a loose coalition of progressives, center-leftists, and Blue Dog fuckwads who were too busy acting like Republicans.

The GOP refused to negotiate or oppose in good faith.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»What would you say if ask...