Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Whats this vote. in laymans terms Thanks

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
madokie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-17-07 02:25 PM
Original message
Whats this vote. in laymans terms Thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-17-07 02:27 PM
Response to Original message
1. vote for cloture, means move to final debate and final vote
60 votes needed yes to go to a final vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-17-07 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Now they talk more?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-17-07 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. No, it failed 57-34. Reid withdrew the resolution.
Edited on Sat Feb-17-07 02:29 PM by NYC Liberal
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-17-07 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. they go home for their holiday
Edited on Sat Feb-17-07 02:30 PM by LSK
and Reid can bring this back up when they return.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-17-07 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. So they were voting on whether or not they should vote on it, right?
There were not enough votes to say "let's vote" so now they go home, and perhaps when they return they might vote on whether or not to vote then. Why don't they just vote directly? If it is a non-binding resolution, they don't need 60 votes to over-ride a veto since it isn't getting sent off to Mr.bush to sign, am I right? I can see the pre-vote vote if it will possibly get vetoed, but do they need it for something like this? (i am assuming they must since they did, but am still confused. Thank you for helping me understand)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Katherine Brengle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-17-07 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. The rethuglicans have their own resolution they want to introduce -
and they supposedly cast their no votes as a vote for "minority rights" lol.

As the world turns...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madokie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-17-07 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. Ok
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karlrschneider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-17-07 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. I thought the previous vote was for cloture...??
This one has to do with something else I -think-
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Katherine Brengle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-17-07 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. I think it's basically a repeat of the first vote.
I missed that one tho so...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-17-07 02:33 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. They voted for cloture again today and it failed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Katherine Brengle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-17-07 02:36 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Can you spell h-y-p-o-c-r-i-s-y boys and girls?
It would make me giggle if it was anything close to a laughing matter...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-17-07 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #10
16. I wonder if they consider THEMSELVES "obstructionist"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GenDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-17-07 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #16
19. If so, they are obstructing the will of 73% of the American people
That does not make a representational form of government.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madokie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-17-07 02:36 PM
Response to Original message
11. Ok, do they go with the non-binding or not
why can't it be simple you vote for it or not. not this shit
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coexist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-17-07 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. they can't vote on the non binding resolution because they
can't get the vote to end discussion on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Katherine Brengle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-17-07 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #11
15. Tread lightly -
when the Dems were the minority, that was the kind of thing said repeatedly by the right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madokie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-17-07 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #15
21. oops
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EST Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-17-07 02:38 PM
Response to Original message
14. Delete
Edited on Sat Feb-17-07 02:39 PM by EST
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-17-07 02:40 PM
Response to Original message
17. filibuster, the word is filibuster
The Republicans just filibustered the escalation of the war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-17-07 02:41 PM
Response to Original message
18. they will go home and get the redass from angry constituents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-17-07 02:42 PM
Response to Original message
20. Why is a cloture vote needed if it is a non-binding resolution, no veto possible?
I understand that it is a vote to end discussion, to break up a fillibuster and be able to vote on the whatever. It also shows whether or not there would be enough votes to over-ride a veto. In cases like this, where there is no veto possible (right?), why is this needed? Is it possible to have this be needed with everything the congress works on? Or do most things both parties just agree to stop talking and vote? Thank you for the info.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madokie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-17-07 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. .
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 12:46 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC