Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: sitetest

Unfortunately, drawing conclusions from the last vote doesn’t always work. As soon as Pelosi rounds up a simple majority, others who would face more vulnerability by voting yes are freed up to vote no.

So you have no clue whether those in the Stupak group are true believers or if they will do what they have to do for their party when crunch time comes. My hunch is the latter.

Rather than the so-called pro-lifers killing this bill, it may be those who are true believers in a public option (like Kucinich), which the Senate bill lacks.


20 posted on 03/14/2010 6:51:55 AM PDT by randita (Sarah Palin has the same computer that I have.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]


To: randita
Dear randita,

You're correct.

Nonetheless, the count from The Hill doesn't automatically put those who voted “no” last time into the “no” column this time. They've actually tracked down congresscritters or their spokesmen, or looked at public statements on the current process.

Thus, the 212 number probably isn't all that bad.

And it means that Nazi Pelosi must pick up approximately 70 of 73 currently-undecideds to win the vote. The undecideds include 10 that voted “no” last time (and thus, could very well vote “no” again) and 30 folks who voted “yes” but who voted for the Stupak language also, last time.

From that group of 40, four additional “no” votes prevent the fascist speaker from achieving her demonic goal.

There might be significantly more than four additional “no” votes in that pile.

Time will tell.


sitetest

22 posted on 03/14/2010 7:01:49 AM PDT by sitetest ( If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson