Toots
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-20-07 09:15 AM
Original message |
Between 1994 and 2006 Republicans held Majority in Congress but was it as large |
|
Edited on Sat Oct-20-07 09:15 AM by Toots
as the current Democratic Majority? I have been told that the Democrats hold a larger Majority now than the Republicans did at any time through-out the ninties. Why is it they don't wield the Majority as the Republicans did? Is it unseemly to do so? :shrug:
|
tom_paine
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-20-07 09:18 AM
Response to Original message |
1. That was a whole other country. |
|
In THIS country, formed after Bushler stole it on 12/12/2000, Congress has no real power and our Democrats are the German Social Democrats who "faced off" against Hitler, withthe same principled vehemence and the same apparwent success.
|
Selatius
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-20-07 09:19 AM
Response to Original message |
2. Republicans know how to enforce party discipline, plus... |
|
Edited on Sat Oct-20-07 09:19 AM by Selatius
corporate special interest money tends to have a more unifying effect on Republicans than it does for Democrats. For Democrats, that kind of money causes Dems to peel off and vote with the Republicans on bills in the House/Senate, thus undermining the party from within. Special interest money in the Democratic Party is like Kryptonite to Superman.
|
DuaneBidoux
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-20-07 09:29 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
3. There is a benefit from being authoritarian little soldiers. It is easier to stay unified. |
|
Dems are critical thinkers who tend to expect as much of our own as we do of the others (and tend to critisize our own as much as the others when we see something wrong with our own) whereas 'Pukes don't really care how they act and they are willing to enforce strict standards on the others without critical self examination. This makes it harder for us to steamrole our opponents and stay united against the 'Pukes.
If I understand the Dems majority in the house is larger than the Repukes was but smaller in the Senate. Could have misunderstood.
|
Mayberry Machiavelli
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-20-07 09:31 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
4. Since the Senate "majority" is only by a theoretical ONE, I don't see how it could be any larger |
|
than any the Republicans ever held.
|
Mayberry Machiavelli
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-20-07 09:32 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
5. Do the Democrats even make any real effort to enforce party discipline on votes? |
Sadie4629
(919 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-20-07 12:04 PM
Response to Original message |
6. If I recall correctly-- |
|
after the so-called Republican Revolution in '94, their majorities were huge in both the House and the Senate. In addition to the Republicans who were elected, there were some Dems who jumped the fence. It seems to me that they lost seats in each succeeding election, until finally they lost control of both Houses in '06. It took six election cycles for the Dems to retake control.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 10:37 PM
Response to Original message |