perhaps he can spearhead a Protest Resignation Movement??
Posted on 09/09/2014 7:58:02 AM PDT by cotton1706
For most of 2013 and 2014, Democrats thought the politics of immigration were in their favor. Every single Senate Democrat — even conservatives from deep red states like Joe Manchin of West Virginia — voted for comprehensive reform just 15 months ago. The GOP appeared to be in disarray, with elites and business interests arguing the party had to moderate on the issue to have any hopes of retaking the White House, but conservatives holding firm to their opposition.
When several senators start acting skittish like this, it's usually because they're getting an earful from their constituents
When Speaker John Boehner officially abandoned his repeated promises of House action this year, Democratic leaders believed the GOP's paralysis on the issue would provide a political opening for Obama to act on his own. "The sooner the better. I hope he does it soon," Majority Whip Dick Durbin said in July. Obama invited leaders of immigrant advocacy groups to the White House and told them he was moving ahead with executive action by the end of the summer. "He didn't seem to give a shit" about the politics, Frank Sharry of America's Voice told Major Garrett.
But over the summer, as the child migrant crisis dominated headlines, Democrats began to grow more and more wary on the issue. Opposition from red state Democrats up for reelection, like Mark Pryor of Arkansas and Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, was expected. But, little by little, even Democrats from states Obama won started sounding very reluctant about executive action. Mark Warner of Virginia said he's "troubled," Al Franken of Minnesota said he has "concerns," and independent Angus King reportedly called the White House to argue against any executive action.
(Excerpt) Read more at vox.com ...
They wanted to dupe the republicans into passing it, and they almost succeeded but we forced them to hold the line. Now they're getting their comeuppance and the republican traitors (McConnell, Rubio, Ayotte, etc.) have been exposed. Oh, and the Majority Leader of the House has been kicked out of office!
they are going to lie for now
If the Obamadork actually tries mass amnesty following the elections, democrats will be in a physical retreat that will require armor.
No tamales and tortillas for the DemocRATS this Christmas.
That's because they are in states with few voting Hispanics, states that Obama lost.
They figure an amnesty order will just rile up GOP voters in those states to get out the vote in those states without helping Dems.
Obama’s motivation for delaying the amnesty order probably isn't to save them, but to keep amnesty from being tainted by a beating in this years election.
Next year will be different story because in 2016 a different set of Senate seats are up. Those libs frustrated with Obama now will forget it in three or four months when he does the order.
My unhappy prediction is that the next two years the GOP fights itself with Obama dropping bombs on them. I still remember the wishful euphoria by Republicans in 2010 like, 'heck Obama might not even run again...'
The Dems will never give up on their goal of obtaining a permanent majority - the House, the Senate, the Presidency and the Supreme Court - by importing new Dem voters into this country.
Democrats must clamor for his immediate action on immigration amnesty. There is no time to lose. They must beseech Him to boldly use His mighty Pen and Phone.
This is a great piece of His Fundamental Change.
They can not weaken now, so close to a such a watermark moment of His Legacy.
No, they are not “in retreat” on Amnesty.
Congress is just biding its time until after the election.
The Democrats know that the LIVs they depend on will have forgotten their betrayal by the time 2016 rolls around.
They also know that that Conservatives will remember the betrayal and it will cost compliant ‘Pubbies dearly. They are counting on this.
Obama will do as he is told by his handlers. That will surely include "Executive Orders" to implement some form of amnesty.
The Democrats do not fear the voters, or elections or the "opposition party" and Democrats do not believe they are in any danger of physical resistance. They do fear other Democrats however.
The same crowd that would have voted against the Dems if amnesty passed before the election will vote against the Dems now that they have all but promised to pass it AFTER the election. Dem’s pooch=screwed.
Yep. Once Lame Duck Season gets here all bets are off.
Just like Massachusetts democrats needed a republican governor to get gay marriage, Obama and the democrats needed to get republicans to pass amnesty. Both situations were about govt. strong arming American citizens to accept what they did not want. The dems knew there would be severe blowback so they found a willing republican (democrat plant) like Romney to get gay marriage and tried to force a weak, dem-controlled republican leader like Boehner to carry out their immigration plans.
The force of the threat of blowback was worse than the dems imagined and the republicans refused to commit suicide in the House. Obama, who really doesn’t care, probably would have issued the executive order at the end of the summer, but the dems saw the giant tsunami wave blowback and ran begging Obama to spare their lives.
So we have a temporary break. This is no guarantee that the House won’t pass amnesty after the election, during the lame duck session of Congress. Nor does it mean Obama won’t go ahead and executive order amnesty in November after the voting ends. But if the republicans were smart, they would be reminding people right now that this is just a brief reprieve and when the fear of election reprisal is gone, the amnesty lovers will be back.
Do your duty America, if you’re serious about no special deals for illegals, get rid of as many amnesty loving politicians as you can now. Make it clear to them you won’t forget.
IMHO, the folks that would vote against the Democrats over Amnesty, would vote against them anyway. I am not seeing that this costs them any votes.
I sure hope it does, though.
Truman won after getting spanked in 1946, Clinton won, and Obama. Disturbing trend. The GOP controlled House proved to be an effective foil for each of those scumbags.
But you forget their subpar opponents (Dewey, too overconfident; Dole, too unmotivating, too restrained and probably too old; Willard, ringer).
I believe Romney desperately wanted to be President to vindicate his daddy, so I don’t buy “ringer”. No one would put themselves through a campaign twice if he wanted to lose.
But yeah, neither Dewey, Dole, nor Mitt, ran good campaigns.
I wish I could agree with that, but having watched Willard for 20 years, I realized what his agenda and goals were had nothing to do with ours. If he REALLY wanted to win the office, he very well could’ve done it. He didn’t. Same goes for McCain. They were there to lose.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.