It's a good thing they are voting no!

[Walt Starr]

It solidifies the issue they were bringing to the forefront, voting rights!

Boxer had to vote yes as she brought the objection. If all other Democrats vote No, it solidifies the base of what the objection was all about.

Again, a brilliant move!

[Sweet Freedom]

1. Agreed /nt

[Karenca]

2. you lost me............ nt

[Not_Giving_Up]

3. I'm at work, help me out here

Huh?????????

[info being]

4. So voting rights without the actual voting rights?

I guess I care more about voting rights now than voting rights in the future.

[tx_dem41]

5. I agree Walt. It makes the issue about electoral reform....

not Bush v. Kerry.

[emulatorloo]

6. you are correct, Walt Starr EOM

[helderheid]

7. I have to agree.

[NYCGirl]

8. Absolutely, Walt.

Because it's not about overturning the election (as the GOP will undoubtedly try to portray it), but about voting rights.

[demo dutch]

9. We have to keep on them to work for reform though otherwise

is was a BS exercise

[Lydia Leftcoast]

10. Okay, I see it as a tactical move, but

I'm still mad at Dayton.

[bones_7672]

11. Oh yeah, with a whopping TWO votes we're really building momentum

for voting reform! WOOOHOOO! (sarcasm off now)

[righteous1]

18. Now it's one n/t

[alexisfree]

12. I dont get it............

[demo dutch]

16. Boxer said from the beginning no intentio to change the

election. That was never the intent It was always about election reform. No the debate has started and we must stay on them so that it continues

[demo dutch]

13. We have to keep on them to work for reform though otherwise

this was a BS exercise

[frictionlessO]

14. I have to concur as well....

we now have a base with which to build on.

[MindPilot]

15. OK, I've about had it with this rope-a-dope crap

every time a democrat alienates their constituancy, someone declares it a brillant political move. Let's call it what it is: They don't represent us, they reprsent the corporations and big money, and they are just saying fuck you to the rank and file dems.

[pacalo]

17. I agree with you on this one.

[AmerDem]

19. what do you know?

Do you always have to speak as if you are the anointed person of clarity. In just about every subject I've watched you raise you have been wrong. I'm holding a sharp pin in my hand to pop the over inflated ego of your's!

[Beth in VT]

20. It's hypocritical to accept the results if they were illegitimate.

[BattyDem]

21. I agree

Even if they voted yes - even if the Ohio Electors were thrown out - * would still be pResident because the vote would go to the House and they would vote for him ... and all the media would talk about would be the "sore loser, conspiracy theorist Democrats". Voting "No" makes the objection about voting rights and it makes the Repugs look bad because they don't want to talk about it.

I liked the fact that Levin voted yes ... I wonder if he did it so that Boxer wouldn't stand alone? If so, it was a classy move!

On edit: I just heard Levin changed his vote. WTF???? :shrug:

[Verve]

22. Hey Walt! Don't you owe us all something because Obama spoke!

:hi:

[forgethell]

23. Huh?

I read that twice and still don't know what you said. Hlp me out, please.