AOC warns a Democrat could flip or die and erase Senate majority

[Counselor706]

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez alluded to a morbid reality while arguing against Democratic senators negotiating with Republicans: Democratic senators are old, and Republicans could suddenly take back the Senate majority if one dies.

In a tweet on Wednesday, the New York Democratic representative argued that Democratic senators should put less focus on trying to cut a deal with Republicans on an infrastructure bill or other measures and instead push through those items through the rarely used reconciliation process, which lets Democrats bypass the 60-vote threshold to overcome a filibuster. That process allowed the evenly divided Democratic-controlled Senate to push the American Rescue Plan earlier this year.

“During the Obama admin, folks thought we’d have a 60 Dem majority for a while. It lasted 4 months,” she said, a reference to when Democratic Massachusetts Sen. Ted Kennedy died unexpectedly.

Another possibility is that a Democrat switches parties. That concern has prompted some progressive activists to warn against putting too much pressure on West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, one of the most conservative Democrats in the Senate whose opposition to ending the filibuster peeves many on the Left.

Source

 

[ll74]

Source

Gomert responded by saying that glue tastes like the color orange

 

[CandK_inSE]

Typical of AOC and loons mainly in the D party (there are a few Rs too), who have absolutely no understanding of what the Senate is supposed to be.

Unfortunately, direct election of Senators destroyed the whole intent of the Senate being a more "dignified" legislative body which would give passage to bills coming out of the "people's house" (House of Representatives). The Senate was not intended to be anywhere near as partisan as the House.

The Senate is supposed to be the bulwark against crazy bills that get through the House mostly on party line votes.

Also, direct election of Senators has created a much more partisan Supreme Court.

 

[ll74]

Typical of AOC and loons mainly in the D party (there are a few Rs too), who have absolutely no understanding of what the Senate is supposed to be.

Unfortunately, direct election of Senators destroyed the whole intent of the Senate being a more "dignified" legislative body which would give passage to bills coming out of the "people's house" (House of Representatives). The Senate was not intended to be anywhere near as partisan as the House.

The Senate is supposed to be the bulwark against crazy bills that get through the House mostly on party line votes.

Also, direct election of Senators has created a much more partisan Supreme Court.

I'm completely against getting rid of existing rules to get things done.

If there are barriers inherent in the system, there's a long history of that barrier that needs to be analyzed from a process perspective. People need to chew on how the rule helped and hurt decisions that have been made inside the Senate chamber.

I think it's definitely worth noting that having a super majority needed to guide legislation favors Republicans in how they are elected. But that definitely is not the only discussion point to be made.

 

[CandK_inSE]

I'm completely against getting rid of existing rules to get things done.

If there are barriers inherent in the system, there's a long history of that barrier that needs to be analyzed from a process perspective. People need to chew on how the rule helped and hurt decisions that have been made inside the Senate chamber.

I think it's definitely worth noting that having a super majority needed to guide legislation favors Republicans in how they are elected. But that definitely is not the only discussion point to be made.

For the most part, I agree. We should always learn from the historical record. The Super Majority, again, was brilliantly designed by our Founders as yet another check on silly legislation. Historically, yes, it has favored Republicans.

I really wish at some point, this nation goes back to the simple principle that what your town/city/state government does should affect you a whole lot more than what gets done in DC.

 

[CornusKousa]

I really wish at some point, this nation goes back to the simple principle that what your town/city/state government does should affect you a whole lot more than what gets done in DC.

Local governance? States rights??? Live and let live?

"Progressive" comrades will have NONE of that...you MUST comply with their ideology, or you're a Nazi!!

 

[ll74]

For the most part, I agree. We should always learn from the historical record. The Super Majority, again, was brilliantly designed by our Founders as yet another check on silly legislation. Historically, yes, it has favored Republicans.

I really wish at some point, this nation goes back to the simple principle that what your town/city/state government does should affect you a whole lot more than what gets done in DC.

Currently, the electorate strongly favors R control in the Senate. That's the frustrating part to Democrats. But the answer is to educate the voters on policy issues so that they elect better people. That frustrates Democrats even more when so many Right leaning people seem to work off of belief rather than evidence. Not trying to generalize here - something like 50%+ of Republicans still believe Trump won the election and from my perspective, a scary amount seem to think he's secretly still going to be President this year. (My neighbor actually bet me a bottle of bourbon that Trump would be President by the end of the year...and he's a good and smart guy for the most part)

I think with all the hyper partisan discussion (obviously here it's evident) it's easy to misunderstand federal versus local. And while I may disagree with how much involvement, from a federal level, is needed, I agree that it's more important to get involved locally than federally. A big problem is that funding comes from the top down, in many cases..without resources, many local governments' hands are tied.

 

[pecksniff]

The Senate was not intended to be anywhere near as partisan as the House.

The whole concept of both was created before any American party system existed.

 

[ll74]

The whole concept of both was created before any American party system existed.

Yes..but the point is about where the power lies. The system was created so states maintained their say on matters while still allowing the people to have a say. Both have the power to initiate legislation and both have the power to slow or halt objectionable laws at either level.

I do think removing the filibuster erodes the power at the state level to some degree.

 

[pecksniff]

The system was created so states maintained their say on matters . . .

No, that is how it would have worked if senators had been in effect state ambassadors, not only chosen by their state legislatures, but serving at their pleasure and subject to recall by them, and taking orders from the state capital. As it happened, they instead worked out a system where a senator is politically autonomous for the duration of his six-year term, which is a very different thing.

 

[Rightguide]

I'm hoping the Democrats continue to trash Manchin and force him to change parties. The Senate will flip instantly.

 

[vastiesmith100]

The bitch should be

deported! She hates America.

 

[pecksniff]

deported! She hates America.

Native-born citizens can't be deported.

 

[ll74]

No, that is how it would have worked if senators had been in effect state ambassadors, not only chosen by their state legislatures, but serving at their pleasure and subject to recall by them, and taking orders from the state capital. As it happened, they instead worked out a system where a senator is politically autonomous for the duration of his six-year term, which is a very different thing.

Theoretically, if the majority population of a state picks their Senator, then the state Senator represents the entire state. If the state population is unhappy with positions/legislation of the Senator they must majority elect someone else. Some states have added the ability to recall their elected federal officials, though it's not standard across all.

 

[ll74]

I'm hoping the Democrats continue to trash Manchin and force him to change parties. The Senate will flip instantly.

I doubt Manchin cares enough...he has no political reason to do so and he's demonstrated quite clearly that he's comfortable in his positioning.

 

[Rightguide]

I doubt Manchin cares enough...he has no political reason to do so and he's demonstrated quite clearly that he's comfortable in his positioning.

His state is red, and the dramatic increase in personal attacks from his own party might be enough to make it happen. The fact that his state is red means, the rabid media aside, there will be little political fallout on him if he did make the change.

 

[pecksniff]

His state is red, and the dramatic increase in personal attacks from his own party might be enough to make it happen. The fact that his state is red means, the rabid media aside, there will be little political fallout on him if he did make the change.

Indeed, in the past some Congresscritters have been able to change parties and still keep their seats. It's not a very disciplined system.

 

[ll74]

Indeed, in the past some Congresscritters have been able to change parties and still keep their seats. It's not a very disciplined system.

I'm not saying it can't happen. I just don't think he gives a shit enough about the criticism from anyone, to do so. Yes, he's from a red state,but the seat has been blue since 1956. He would need a lot more than just whiny Democrats to push him that way

 

[Rightguide]

I'm not saying it can't happen. I just don't think he gives a shit enough about the criticism from anyone, to do so. Yes, he's from a red state,but the seat has been blue since 1956. He would need a lot more than just whiny Democrats to push him that way

People get tired of abuse and threats from within.

 

[ll74]

People get tired of abuse and threats from within.

Certainly some people do. There's absolutely nothing in Manchin's statements that have indicated he is one of those people and historically, that would be a risk to his seat.

 

[CornusKousa]

People get tired of abuse and threats from within.

Not the brave crusaders of liberty who know they are being attacked and threatened because THEY are the threat within.

I hope he sticks to his guns and gives these psycho power grabbers the fuckin' finger.

And for fucks sake some (R)'s need to grow some balls and do something other than just stand there saying "No" and pulling their puds while the (D)'s do it anyhow.

Want to buy some pushback!!!

 

[YDB95]

Unfortunately, direct election of Senators destroyed the whole intent of the Senate being a more "dignified" legislative body which would give passage to bills coming out of the "people's house" (House of Representatives). The Senate was not intended to be anywhere near as partisan as the House.

I can only assume you haven't taken a look at some of the absolute nutjobs you'll find in nearly every state legislature lately. If they had control over election of senators, it might well be even worse.