Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Tom Rinaldo

(22,912 posts)
Wed Nov 7, 2018, 02:44 AM Nov 2018

Losing ground in the Senate stings but it doesn't reduce Democratic power.

The Senate was incredibly important to Democrats after Trump became President because all of our hopes to stop the worst abuses of his power lay with that body, where Republicans had a narrow majority and a few "less extreme Republicans" had the power to vote with Democrats and prevent a Trump victory. The obvious example was McCain casting the deciding vote that prevented the repeal of Obamacare. The House was hopeless, Trump could get anything he wanted passed there. There was a shred of hope in the Senate...

But in reality those "less extreme" Republican Senators virtually always fell in line with Trump when the chips were down. Like they did with Kavanaugh. If Democrats lose one to four seats in the Senate this year, when the playing field was sloped heavily against us, it essentially means that Trump can now win votes there by less narrow margins. Democrats still however have enough votes to filibuster so that is unchanged. We risk fewer defections from our caucus now on cloture votes because the Senators who we lost in this election for the most part are the ones who were most likely to break with the majority of Democrats anyway.

But our need to tie up Republican legislation in the Senate just disappeared since we now will control the House. The Senate is no longer the battleground we have to fight on to do so. Nothing can pass through Congress now without the Democratic House signing off on it. Yes a Republican Senate will still do a lot of damage on its own, in particular in regards to the Courts, but no more damage than they were already doing over the last two years. Probably the most significant victory Trump wins by Republicans picking up seats in the Senate during these midterms is that it now becomes even harder to get the two thirds vote of the Senate needed to remove Trump from office should the House impeach him.

Meanwhile the House Republican Freedom Caucus no longer has defacto veto power over what legislation is introduced in the House, the way that it did under Ryan for the last two years. I am saddened and angered by the Senate results, but Democrats regaining control of the House of Representatives, in practical terms, dwarfs the significance of any Republican gains in the Senate.

9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Losing ground in the Senate stings but it doesn't reduce Democratic power. (Original Post) Tom Rinaldo Nov 2018 OP
yes it does rockfordfile Nov 2018 #1
I was talking about the relative significance of losing ground in the Senate. Tom Rinaldo Nov 2018 #4
only benefit repubs have with a senate majority is judges nt msongs Nov 2018 #2
As long as no one else on the SC retires Polybius Nov 2018 #3
Agreed, but if they retained control by the same margin they had before the midterms without adding Tom Rinaldo Nov 2018 #6
Not sure I agree Polybius Nov 2018 #8
Good point, we needed to at least break even to have a hope of blocking a SC Justice... Tom Rinaldo Nov 2018 #9
Kavenaugh backlash? wisteria Nov 2018 #5
Spending originates in the House, meaning the ACA, Medicare, Medicaid and SS are safe. The Velveteen Ocelot Nov 2018 #7

Tom Rinaldo

(22,912 posts)
4. I was talking about the relative significance of losing ground in the Senate.
Wed Nov 7, 2018, 02:47 AM
Nov 2018

Obviously our side would be much stronger had we been able to win a Senate majority. But being in the minority there by a few more seats has little practical impact. That is all I am saying.

Tom Rinaldo

(22,912 posts)
6. Agreed, but if they retained control by the same margin they had before the midterms without adding
Wed Nov 7, 2018, 02:50 AM
Nov 2018

any other seats, we would have been screwed anyway. What we need is a Senate majority, we all wanted that but it always was a long shot this cycle.

Polybius

(15,390 posts)
8. Not sure I agree
Wed Nov 7, 2018, 03:00 AM
Nov 2018

With 51 seats and Kav, he had to dodge the Roe vs. Wade question. If they get to 54 or 55 seats, they can even get Amy Coney Barrett in.

Tom Rinaldo

(22,912 posts)
9. Good point, we needed to at least break even to have a hope of blocking a SC Justice...
Wed Nov 7, 2018, 10:47 AM
Nov 2018

A nominee explicitly hostile to Roe V. Wade might have been blocked by Collins and Murkowski. But as soon as we lost one other Senate seat their votes became more or less moot. With a Republican pick up of one Senate seat both those female Senators could have defected the Republican team and Pence still would have held the tie breaking vote. So in this regard I amend my statement. Once we lost one Senate seat the loss of a couple or few more has little additional impact, even in regards to SC nominations.

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,681 posts)
7. Spending originates in the House, meaning the ACA, Medicare, Medicaid and SS are safe.
Wed Nov 7, 2018, 02:52 AM
Nov 2018

We weren't going to fix the whole mess Trump and the GOP made with one election, but this is a really good start.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Losing ground in the Sena...