Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
7:36: Now Representative Levin (D-MI) is telling Ed Royce to shove it.
7:38: Now Representative Camp (R-MI) is praising tax cuts and talking about out of control spending.
edited 1st Jan '13 7:40:45 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016This. I mean, I am O.K for many people to apporach the matter in a more conciliatory tone, but (as the funcionalist that I am) I do beleive that the Party should show its teeths when push comes to shove.
I will always cherish the chance of a new beggining.Deviant: What Guru said. Obama merely has to veto every proposal that would try to undo his deal. And that's assuming the Democratic Senate doesn't likewise shut it down. Reid has been willing to let House idiocy die with the House before.
Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.Where can I watch it live online I wonder?? (I dont have a tv with me right now...)
edit:
Found it. You can watch the debate here [1]
edited 1st Jan '13 7:45:32 PM by Baff
I will always cherish the chance of a new beggining.@Baff
EDIT: 118 YEAS, 63 NAYS, 251 UNDECIDED
edited 1st Jan '13 7:47:43 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 201635 Republican votes in (Yeas). That should be enough I think. Lets see how many democrats vote no.
Thank you.
The Republican vote its really split in this one...43 Yea, 65 nay.
Vote is over, it seems like it passed with a bunch of abstensions.
Edit: Actually it didnt have that many abstensions. It wasnt even close.
256 to 166
edited 1st Jan '13 8:00:38 PM by Baff
I will always cherish the chance of a new beggining.![]()
The house is voting.
As to where things get stuck depends on your perspective. For republicans its the senate where there bills go to die and for the democrats its the other way around.
Also voting in the house is slow... even watching the Colombian House (which is worse than the American house let me tell you) is more intersting...
edited 1st Jan '13 8:10:25 PM by Baff
I will always cherish the chance of a new beggining.Senators tend to be more moderate because their districts can't be gerrymandered. Because of this they represent the state's political views more accurately.
EDIT: Kucinich is requesting a recorded vote on the amendment to the bill that "urges our alllies in the European Union to designate Hezbollah as a terrorist organization and to aid Bulgaria in the investigation of its July 18th terrorist attack".
edited 1st Jan '13 8:23:35 PM by Completion
I like the house better.
Its more true to democracy (or at least it would be if Republicans didnt have such overwhealming adventage do to gerrymandering).
Certain states are over represented in the Senate so that gives certain areas of the U.S (and certain special interests) overwhealming added political power.
edited 1st Jan '13 8:25:09 PM by Baff
I will always cherish the chance of a new beggining.
Not really. It has no more gurantee than the house of avoiding electing maniacs. Only that when they do get elected (and they do) they have more power than the ocasional maniac in the House.
And I agree with you about avoding letting the states becoming irrelevant, thats why its good to have 2 chambers. I just happen to beleive that the House its more democratic and thus, in my opinion, more symbologically important (or it would be if it wherent for, as Ive already pointed out, gerrymandering).
edited 1st Jan '13 8:27:19 PM by Baff
I will always cherish the chance of a new beggining.Guys, neither house is really better than the other, and we have two to ensure smaller states aren't drowned out and that bigger states aren't led around by the nose by smaller states. So yeah, they have their functions and they mostly fulfill them. It's not about which is "better" or "more true to democracy", because they fulfill the representational function expected of them.
It's the rigidity of certain political ideologies that is causing the problem right now.
![]()
![]()
![]()
Why not? There have been plenty of fringe and crazy senators.
![]()
O.K, if it wherent for the massive gerrymandering.
As I said, the house, in my opinion would better fufill the ideal of democracy if there wherent gerrymander, but there is, so it doesnt.
But even then its not significatevely worse than the senate, it only means that there are more republicans, or that republicas are over represented.
edited 1st Jan '13 8:31:02 PM by Baff
I will always cherish the chance of a new beggining.

What about making executive orders to stop things or change things?