57 > 56

[PBS Poll-435]

If AK? 58>57

If MN? 59>58

If GA? 60>59

:shrug:

[Debi]

1. Heh...math

:party:

good all around.

[spanone]

2. it doesn't really matter, the dems almost never vote in lockstep

[Gman]

3. Sorry, that's a concept beyond the grasp of the purists

[BootinUp]

4. I'm trying to figure out how to write that, lol.

What would the symbols be and in what sequence...

[Gman]

10. Like this...

If AK? ∄ 58

If MN? ∄ 59

If GA? ∄ 60

That is, does not exist.

[JJ]

5. We'd need 103 Democrats in the Senate...

to guarantee 60 votes.

[DefenseLawyer]

6. If Reid can't even punish Lieberman

what makes you think he will ever have enough power to demand a straight partyline vote to end a Republican filibuster of a controversial "conservative issue" even if, on paper, he has his supposed 60 votes? You think Bill Nelson will go along for the ride? Fat chance. Same with every other "conservative democrat". Ewww what are you gonna do Harry, take away his chairmanship of the Subcommittee on Sugarfree Gum? 60 Democrats is meaningless if you can't guarantee their votes.

[PBS Poll-435]

7. First of all

LOL :rofl: at the "Subcommittee on Sugarfree Gum" quip!

Second, I don't think Reid ever wanted to punish Lieberman.

[DefenseLawyer]

8. I don't think he did either

But the idea that he wanted to, but just can't because of this 60 vote nonsense is... nonsense.

[Hawkowl]

9. Exactly!

The way a Majority leader gets votes is through party discipline. Reid just sent a signal that he is o.k. if you want to completely ignore him. He's not going to be able to get 60 votes on anything. Weak. Useless. I think I see now why the dems keep electing him majority leader. He'll let you get away with anything.