If we don't win BOTH houses, not much is going to change

[still_one]

If we win just the house, but not the Senate, true, it will be the right direction, but without both houses, NOTHING can stop this administration

[Rosemary2205]

1. Even if we do not much is going to change

Bush and Cheney both have already flipped us the bird and said they are going full steam ahead regardless of what America wants and with barely a majority we won't have much power to do anything about it.

Plus, most of the legislation being proposed by the Dems is just going to get vetoed anyway.

[still_one]

5. No I don't agree with that

if we win both, WE CAN SET THE AGENDA

[Rosemary2205]

16. Yes, we can set the agenda.

I hope that means we can actually implement law and policy changes, I do. But I think that will be much more difficult than many people seem to think it is.

[seabeyond]

2. that wont be a bad thing. we are forward moving, gaining, progressin

it willshow two years of garbage on repug.... still, continuing and by 2008 we will be sitting pretty. not a lot is going to change even if we win both, senate will be such a slight lead and we have dems that consistantly vote repug,.... not going to be a cakewalk if we have 51/49

[still_one]

7. No it won't be a bad thing

but we shouldn't delude ourseleves

[seabeyond]

11. what we are saying is the obvious and i would hope people knew this

but i too started becoming concerned seeing people say.... what should we change firstand all the things we want to do and get and yada yada yada and started seeing not a reality based picture of what is too come. an expectation that is not obtainable. then the inevitable attack on the dem andhow they lack....

why i started to post like this too

thanks

[still_one]

14. At least we will take away their momentum

[seabeyond]

15. not only take away their momentum but we have an excellent momentum

that will continue strong in the next two years and things continue to fall apart for the right, right becomes more desperate, the corruption comes out more, investigations ect..... we are doing beautifully, and i dont want to take away from that. my fear is people are going to expect something that isnt going to happen and they will miss all that is happening

[still_one]

18. agreed /nt

[DemocratSinceBirth]

3. What's The Difference Between A 51-49 Democratic Senate And A 51-49 Republican Senate.

I could make a good case that winning the Senate by a razor thin margin brings with it all the responsibilities and none of the perquisites of control...

That being said if the Dems can't regain the House in this environment they should find a new line of work...

[onenote]

6. there is a huge difference

Its control of Committees and agendas. Yes, it brings responsibility. But its also the difference between another Alito getting on the Supreme Court. Alito was approved by the Judiciary Committe on a straight party line vote: 10 repubs for, 8 Democrats against. Flip the majority and ALito's nomination never gets out of Committee.

The protection we get against the risk of chimpy naming another SCOTUS justice is reason enough to pray and work for a Democratic majority in the Senate

[DemocratSinceBirth]

13. If Clarence Thomas Can Get Out Of A Democratic Judiciary Committee Anybody Can

eom

[onenote]

20. different time different situation

You can't judge what a Democratic Senate in 2006 would do by comparing it to the action of the Senate 15 years earlier. Keep in mind that the Judiciary Committee sent the nomination up with no recommendation and Thomas was narrowly confimed 52-48.

Eleven Democrats voted to confirm (Louisiana (2), Georgia (2), SC, AL, VA, OK, AZ, IL, NEB.) Not a single one of those eleven Democrats is still in office and most of the seats that they held are now held by repubs. In contrast, over 20 of the Democrats who voted against Thomas are still in office and most of the others have been replaced by other Democrats with voting records that would suggest that they too would oppose another "Thomas/Scalia/Alito" clone.

[still_one]

8. If we do not win the house, and there is a good turnout

the elections are rigged

[NoodleBoy]

4. if we win only one chamber, we get subpoena power

meaning actual legal power to bring this whole corrupt parade to a screeching halt.

[Gabi Hayes]

9. EXACTLY! can't believe other posters miss this obvious point.

AND...think of the legislation that would NOT have passed, had we had a dem majority in congress:

start witht the hideous medicare drug bill

probably the military commissions act...wait, a bunch dem sycophants voted for that, didn't they?

what other close bills would not have passed under a dem house? lots of them wouldn't even have made the floor under dem leadership. that's the big one. dems have control of WHAT makes it to the floor...no more unbridled Bush wet dreams will be foisted upon us anymore

obstruction of FASCISM is the best thing there is

NOTHING of consequence the dems pass will make it past a ubiquitous Bush veto pen, but it will be GREAT fodder for the 2008 elections

just imagine a dem version of all that crap like flag legislation, defense of marriage act. you won't see any more of that BS, designed to create GOP campaign fodder for the next election cycle

I hope

[still_one]

12. I hope you are right

[still_one]

10. You have a point, if we can open up investigations in the house

maybe it might focus on what has been happening

[seabeyond]

17. this is what i am seeing our real advantage is. investigations n/t

[TankLV]

19. If we win ONE house - we at least PUT THE BREAKS ON THE REPUKE AGENDA...

The Democrats will have the POWER to BLOCK all the bullshit repuke bills like "anti gay this and that", more riches for the rich, etc...

We can finally push a PURE mimimum wage increase, for instance - with NO other BULLSHIT to give the repukes cover for voting against the AVERAGE AMERICAN or the POOR!

And that's just for starters...

If we don't, the past two years that brought us approved TORTURE, gave repukes/bunkerboy DICTATORIAL powers, etc, will be even WORSE...

The past 6 years has seen and EVER INCREASING RACE TO THE BOTTOM - or to the edge of the cliff - that will STOP immediately.

But I suppose because everyone won't become instantly rich and thin and beautiful with roses blooming everywhere and larks singing, we'll be just one dismal disappointment...

right?

[moondust]

21. Can the blank check for Iraq war continue w/o the House?

Just asking.