Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

U.S. Congress Part 116


thebluefood

Recommended Posts

I can't get articles that were shared from twitter to open on my computer at work.  Can someone give me the 30 second version of what this whole procedural vote thing is about?

 

The 140 characters I've gotten on it seems like the Left is reminding their people about voting with the party over the conscience.  I'm not a fan of that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

I can't get articles that were shared from twitter to open on my computer at work.  Can someone give me the 30 second version of what this whole procedural vote thing is about?

 

The 140 characters I've gotten on it seems like the Left is reminding their people about voting with the party over the conscience.  I'm not a fan of that.

 

I am not 100% sure but in the case of what I am reading in this thread it sort of seems like there is a legislation that all the Dems initially support, then by some kind of "procedural vote" the GOP manages to get something added to the bill that splits the Dem support of the bill, thus tanking the original bill entirely?

 

Pelosi is basically making the argument that if the Dems want a bill passed, they should vote on it and get it passed, and not vote with the GOP to get something else added to it which will split the Dem support?

 

I am probably off somehow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

I can't get articles that were shared from twitter to open on my computer at work.  Can someone give me the 30 second version of what this whole procedural vote thing is about?

 

The 140 characters I've gotten on it seems like the Left is reminding their people about voting with the party over the conscience.  I'm not a fan of that.

 

Like adding amendment to the Dem gun bill that require states to notify feds when illegals attempt gun purchases. 

or the addition of requiring medical care to a child born alive.

 

some consider such poison pills, others consider them adding clarity to politicians positions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, twa said:

some consider such poison pills, others consider them adding clarity to politicians positions

 

Everyone considers them poison pills. 

 

Some approve of it, and lie about it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

I can't get articles that were shared from twitter to open on my computer at work.  Can someone give me the 30 second version of what this whole procedural vote thing is about?

 

The 140 characters I've gotten on it seems like the Left is reminding their people about voting with the party over the conscience.  I'm not a fan of that.

Quote

The latest defeat came on Wednesday, as the House debated legislation requiring background checks on all gun sales — a position overwhelmingly favored by Democrats. When Republicans moved to amend the bill to require Immigration and Customs Enforcement be told of any undocumented immigrant who tries to buy a gun, 26 Democrats voted with the GOP. The language was added to the gun bill, spoiling an important Democratic legislative achievement.

 

An earlier GOP motion condemning anti-Semitism was successfully attached to a House resolution barring U.S. involvement in the Yemeni civil war. That maneuver, which was backed by every Democrat, later caused parliamentary problems in the Senate and upended Democratic attempts to challenge President Donald Trump's foreign policy.

 

During the closed-door meeting on Thursday, Pelosi said Democrats who vote for the Republicans’ motions are putting pressure on other vulnerable colleagues who would prefer to stick with the party.

Republicans just baiting Dems with these motions. They not trying to pass any bills just put a turd in a punch bowl.

  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

Sooooooo.......it looks to me a bit like give and take negotiating to get bipartisan support.  But instead it's team politics as normal.

It's supposed to look that way. Republicans never going to back these bills anyways so might as well throw some chaos into it.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Cooked Crack said:

It's supposed to look that way. Republicans never going to back these bills anyways so might as well throw some chaos into it.

 

So why don't the Dems just vote against these 'turds' like Nancy wishes them to?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cooked Crack said:

Republicans just baiting Dems with these motions. They not trying to pass any bills just put a turd in a punch bowl.

 

Moderate Democrats fall for it consistently tho. All so they can return to their districts to make claims of bipartisanship. Which results in even less work being done in both the House n Senate. Or worse Republicans actually passing legislation when they have the majority. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Cooked Crack said:

Republicans just baiting Dems with these motions. They not trying to pass any bills just put a turd in a punch bowl.

 

Let's be honest here.  The Dems aren't exactly trying to pass these bills, either.  They know they're going nowhere.  (Skippy won't even allow the Senate to vote on them, so they won't even be able to attack GOP senators for voting against them.)  

Edited by Larry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Larry said:

 

Let's be honest here.  The Dems aren't exactly trying to pass these bills, either.  They know they're going nowhere.  (Skippy won't even allow the Senate to vote on them, so they won;t even be able to attack GOP senators for voting against them.)  

I'll give you that but they need to get their **** together now rather than later. Best to nip this in the bud now than when you actually have a trifecta.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another vote the Democrats lost a procedural vote!

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-climate-change-hearing-adjourns-after-not-enough-democrats-show-up

 

House climate-change hearing adjourns after not enough Democrats show up

 

House Republicans on Tuesday claimed a small victory over the Democrats' climate change agenda by holding a rare successful vote as the minority to end an oversight hearing, saying that the subject of global warming was outside the committee's jurisdiction.

The Republicans in the Natural Resources Committee's oversight panel won in a 4-2 vote to end the hearing, simply because there weren't more than two Democrats present.

 

Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas, the top Republican on the Oversight and Investigations subcommittee, called for the vote after laying out the case that climate change was not within the jurisdiction of the committee, based on its charter and bylaws.

Gohmert called for a vote to adjourn following his opening remarks, and a roll call vote was held. Witnesses at the hearing were not introduced before the Republicans left the hearing room.

Edited by Gallen5862
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Cooked Crack said:

I'm positive no one will be reprimanding Gym Jordan for that tweet or following him down the halls of Congress. Just goes to show that Ilhan news cycle was overblown.

She’s still getting hammered by Republicans and being called a terrorist in ads.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, visionary said:

 

 

Lead paragraph from the article:

 

Quote

House Democratic leaders will bring to the floor Wednesday a resolution condemning anti-Semitism, a senior Democratic aide tells CNN, following outrage over comments made by Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar last week that insinuated pro-Israel groups are pushing "allegiance to a foreign country."

 

I think there's a valid point in there. Pretty sure I've read articles here recently that something like 33 US states have passed laws requiring all employees of companies who do business with the government to sign away their constitutional right to engage in political protest against Israel?

 

I think that ought to be news. Big news. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, visionary said:

 

I like how they have proven her point about AIPAC influence. The democrats will lose a lot of voters for even bringing this on the floor.

 

How can they fix their mouths to do this meanwhile Republican members are allowed to put up Islamaphobic images of her? How can they do this yet let Gym Jordan made an anti-Jewish tweet 

and no one says a word.

Edited by BenningRoadSkin
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...