Skip to comments.How Some Senators Plan to Vote on Roberts (At Least 17 Dems to Vote Yes; Assured 72 votes)
Posted on 09/27/2005 8:31:11 PM PDT by RWR8189
All 55 Senate Republicans are expected to vote to confirm John Roberts as chief justice of the United States. The 44 Senate Democrats are less unified, and independentof Vermont has not announced his position.
Democrats who have announced their support for Roberts (17):
Max Baucus of Montana, Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, Robert Byrd of West Virginia, Kent Conrad of North Dakota, Christopher Dodd of Connecticut, Byron Dorgan of North Dakota, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Tim Johnson of South Dakota, Herb Kohl of Wisconsin, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, Carl Levin of Michigan, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Bill Nelson of Florida, Mark Pryor of Arkansas and Ken Salazar of Colorado.
Democrats who have announced their opposition (19):
Evan Bayh of Indiana, Joe Biden of Delaware, Barbara Boxer of California, Maria Cantwell of Washington,of New York, Jon Corzine of New Jersey, Mark Dayton of Minnesota, Dick Durbin of Illinois, Dianne Feinstein of California, Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, of Massachusetts, Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey, Barbara Mikulski of Maryland, Barack Obama of Illinois, Jack Reed of Rhode Island, Harry Reid of Nevada, Paul Sarbanes of Maryland, Charles Schumer of New York and Debbie Stabenow of Michigan.
Democrats who have not announced how they will vote (8):
Daniel Akaka of Hawaii, Tom Carper of Delaware, Tom Harkin of Iowa, Daniel Inouye of Hawaii, Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, Patty Murray of Washington, Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia and Ron Wyden of Oregon.
Who would da thunk Hillary Rodham Clinton against Roberts... The left fringe pressure must be too much to bear even for her hindness!!!
Why is so much ink, so many electrons, and so much time wasted in pointing out that Jumpin' Jim Jeffords is an "Independent"?
I predict the rat Jeffords will vote no.
Just when I think I've got Carl Levin (D, Michigan) figured out, he comes to his senses and votes the right way.
Stabenow (D, Michigan) is just stuck in her '70's feminist mode.
So there are 19 democrats who won't vote for a Bush SCOTUS nomination - no matter who it is.
Ann Coulter is even saying she is now in support of Roberts. Shows a conservative's mind can be changed and is not stuck in one gear like liberals think they are. Liberals are the ones with one track minds. "It's Bushes Fault". Only need one track for that song.
Lets see we have:
1. Max Baucus of Montana, Red state Dim.
2. Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, semi red state Dim.
3. Robert Byrd of West Virginia, red state dim up for reelection and member of the gang of 14.
4. Kent Conrad of North Dakota, red state Dim.
5. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut, a real surprise to me.
6. Byron Dorgan of North Dakota, red state Dim.
7. Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, red state Dim, yeah I know I know they have stolen it two elections in a row with no IDs and on the spot registration, but clearly the two Senators know it is a red state.
8. Tim Johnson of South Dakota, red state Dim.
9. Herb Kohl of Wisconsin, see Feingold.
10. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, red state Dim in state that is a lot redder today. I wonder if she will switch parties? Gang of 14 member.
11. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, along with Dod the big suprise to me.
12. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, not as much a surprise as Dodd or Leahy since he is a sensible Dim gang of 14 member.
13. Carl Levin of Michigan, another blue state Dim but a very close state.
14. Ben Nelson of Nebraska, red state Dim gang of 14 member.
15. Bill Nelson of Florida, red state Dim.
16. Mark Pryor of Arkansas, red state Dim.
17. Ken Salazar of Colorado, red state Dim gang of 14 member.
Why are there so many red state Dims and are we going to make more progress in getting rid of them in 2006?
I cant believe so many far left wingers are voting yes while the "moderate" Sen Bayh is opposed. What a dope. I hope he meets the same fate as his father.
I was really surprised Dodd said he would vote to confirm. I thought maybe even Lieberman would vote no. I'm sure both will oppose the next nominee though, whoever he/she is.
It is all smoke and mirrors, they are voting to save their senate seats. I never hear them defend President Bush when the most vicious lies are stated, they stand behind all those other RATS on more that more than one occasion.I want them all gone, because after the election they will be just as hateful; and it can be done if the GOP grows some balls, attack and expose them for what they really are.
Very interesting , they must be concerned about thier voting record.
After watching Stabenow for so long, I always wonder how the people of Michigan can make such a mistake. She is simply an empty dress. Zero ideas/brain. Simple ranting and raving of Dem talking points.
Of the 17, Russ Feingold's support surprises me the most. Not only is he 100% pro-choice on abortion, but he is also one of the 14 Senators who voted against the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act.
Of course in the days of Clinton, Wisconson might have seemed a lot bluer than it is now. Why is Dodd of all people not voting with his bud Teddy?
Landreiu switch parties?
Umm, I hope not. If she did, we beat the tar out of her in the Primary. She's every bit as liberal as Hillary.
Frm. Sen John Breaux would have been one thing. His voting record honestly was that of a moderate. But if for some reason she would even consider switching parties, I'd tell her to go piss up a rope.
I said it kiddingly since so much of her base is out of state now. However, keep in mind they have an open primary system in Louisiana so if she did such a think she would not be running in an Republican primary but a mixed primary of all candidates.
True, but doesn't the party have to allow her to use their label?
I certainly wouldn't allow it.
I think one need only go down to the courthouse and switch registration to the GOP and they would have to be listed as a Republican on the ballot. It is moot as I was just kidding and it is very unlikely to happen.