Mitch McConnell has done absolutely nothing of value during his time as Senate majority leader, even with a Republican President, and he has joined in on the Trump bashing even though Trump carried his state in the election by a whopping thirty points. He is nothing but a seat-filler who will, at best, occasionally obstruct an agenda but never advance one of his own. When he and his ilk are no longer the torch bearers for the Republican Party, it will be a good thing.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects
Collapse
X
-
I don't expect you to be able to relate. Your party has never had a McCain and when you guys control Congress and the White House, you actually get what you want. You get massive, landmark legislation. You get justices who don't break ranks. You don't know what it looks like for the other side to do the same thing -- what it looks like for the other side to actually advance their agenda. Well, actually, now you do know what it looks like, because that is what Trump is doing, although he's largely doing it by himself.Last edited by Hannibal; September 13, 2018, 11:17 AM.
- Top
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Ha, more crazy shit.
Let me help you out fella, 60 > 52
I'm an independent not a Dem, but not having a McCain figure as a Senator. Holy shit, that's even more crazy. Harry Reid had to deal with a Senator that campaigned with the oppositions Prez candidate. The whole ACA was watered down because of that guy.
- Top
Comment
-
Republicans ran on the platform of "small government" for decades. For six years, W. was in office and he had a Republican in Congress, and the government did nothing but grow. They failed miserably at what they were put in there to do. Republicans were inches away from an amnesty bill, that would have passed had it not been for the Tea Party revolt, which all of the Republican leaders that I named in this thread hate.
- Top
Comment
-
Well I think the question you have to ask yourself is why they are there. They may have failed miserably at what you think they were there to do, but if you look at what they do and not what they say, you get a different answer. Mitch McConnell is not there for you. He is there for his own pocketbook. IMO he's been the most effective DC operators since Cheney. Speaking of Cheney, that was a master class in how to advance an agenda. It wasn't necessarily the agenda people elected Bush/Cheney to implement, but that was only on the table in a fictitious sense anyways. Until there's a massive overhaul of various conflict-of-interest/ethics/transparency laws, we have to stop putting people in power until we know WHY they want that power.
- Top
Comment
-
Originally posted by froot loops View PostHa, more crazy shit.
Let me help you out fella, 60 > 52
I'm an independent not a Dem, but not having a McCain figure as a Senator. Holy shit, that's even more crazy. Harry Reid had to deal with a Senator that campaigned with the oppositions Prez candidate. The whole ACA was watered down because of that guy.
As I said, I don't expect you to be able to relate. The fact that you are complaining about a watered down ACA in the first place proves my point. That legislation was more significant than anything that has been passed in my lifetime with the Republicans in control of both Congress and the White House. And you got to keep it because a George W. Bush appointee on the Supreme Court broke ranks.Last edited by Hannibal; September 13, 2018, 11:30 AM.
- Top
Comment
-
Originally posted by hack View PostWell I think the question you have to ask yourself is why they are there. They may have failed miserably at what you think they were there to do, but if you look at what they do and not what they say, you get a different answer. Mitch McConnell is not there for you. He is there for his own pocketbook. IMO he's been the most effective DC operators since Cheney. Speaking of Cheney, that was a master class in how to advance an agenda. It wasn't necessarily the agenda people elected Bush/Cheney to implement, but that was only on the table in a fictitious sense anyways. Until there's a massive overhaul of various conflict-of-interest/ethics/transparency laws, we have to stop putting people in power until we know WHY they want that power.
One of the reasons why Trump outrages Democrats so much is because they are used to empty promises from Republicans. The Democrat way of doing things is the default. You're not supposed to do Republican stuff even when you win.Last edited by Hannibal; September 13, 2018, 11:37 AM.
- Top
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by froot loops View PostAgain, to cheer on Trump's SC appointments and call McConnell a worthless turd is sidesplitting. Its a howler. We can call common ground on the turd part, but worthless? Its actually laugh out loud funny. Nothing more to be said on this.
he's bad on 100 others
so that must mean were delusional?
- Top
Comment
-
Originally posted by froot loops View PostObama sure did, thats how the ACA was passed under him. The main framework was passed with 60 votes. You have to read up before going half cocked, you are out of your element.
So my point is he did have 60 votes and thats how that agenda got passed.Last edited by Hannibal; September 13, 2018, 11:49 AM.
- Top
Comment
Comment