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

To: AB AB AB

The RATS held the filibuster when we started with just 51 votes, because there would have been tremendous retaliation from Daschle if they had not stayed in line. But fundamentally, they did not want to filibuster -- they knew it ran against Senate tradition and similarly felt it was risky politics.

That list of Senators who will no longer filibuster includes Democratic moderates such as Lieberman, Nelson of Nebraska, Pryor of Arkansas, Lincoln of Arkansas, Johnson of South Dakota, Bingaman of New Mexico, Bayh of Indiana, Baucus of Montana.

Next, look at the freshmen RATS facing re-election in 2006. Do you think they want to suffer the same fate as Daschle, and being seen as obstructionists? Therefore, at minimum, you'll see Nelson of Florida, Carper of Delaware and perhaps others fall into line.

That gives us nearly a dozen RATS to pick off. As I said, getting to 60 from a base of 55 is a lot easier than getting there from 51.


78 posted on 11/05/2004 7:44:04 AM PST by mwl1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies ]


To: mwl1
The power dynamics of the Senate have been dramatically altered with two events. Daschle losing, and the the Republicans gaining a 55 seat majority. Frist's power is greatly enhanced now. The power wielded by a single Senator is diminished, even that of a committee chair.

All those red states are going to make red state dems think twice before just going along with judicial filibusters. Daschle was counting on winning back the Senate to hold the filibuster. We all know how that worked out :)
80 posted on 11/05/2004 7:48:54 AM PST by snooker (To defeat the MSM and the Democrats, change your tactics, not your goals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | 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