It is inevitable given the current trajectory. Many so called safe seats are now in play.
Message Board Archives
60 US Senate Seats for Democrats After November
2020-06-17 13:50:11
2020-06-17 14:14:31
In reply to Walco
I sure hope so, we need to roll back some of the Trump policies.
2020-06-17 14:36:55
In reply to Walco
I been thinking it, but didn’t want to say it out loud – but god – how I wish – that would be veto proof
2020-06-17 14:38:34
In reply to birdseye
Still not enough for a super majority.
A lot can get done with a majority vote but super majority cannot be touched, don't see Dems getting that.
2020-06-17 15:20:32
another fantasy
2020-06-17 15:34:18
In reply to black
Still not enough for a super majority.
Sixty votes gets you everything you want, with a united caucus.
2020-06-17 15:37:32
In reply to Walco
You had a sweet dream?
2020-06-17 15:40:23
In reply to Fantom
Sixty votes will not get you anymore than 51 votes can.
2020-06-17 15:43:26
The backroom's murca predictions have been very consistent over the last few years!
All wrong, but consistently so!
2020-06-17 15:45:34
In reply to VIX
MB glutton for punishment ...
lots of premature orgasms in here
2020-06-17 17:48:33
In reply to birdseye
23 Republicans will be up for reelection in November, while the Dems will only be contesting 12 seats. If Mitch McConnell and Lindsay Graham are in virtual dead heats with their Democratic challengers, you know a landslide is in the works come November. Republican can easily lose those two senate seats, plus seats in Maine, Colorado, Georgia (2), Iowa, Texas, Montana and Arizona. Add to that the fact that Alexander (Tennessee) is retiring and Tom Cotton is seeing a major erosion of support in Arkansas.
More seats will be in play as we get closer to November and the incompetent one has more disinfectant injection moments.
2020-06-17 17:50:50
In reply to black
I know Biden will choose a female running mate, but I hope he finds a place for Cuomo in his administration. Maybe AG
2020-06-17 17:55:11
In reply to Walco
Coumo can wait until 2024.
2020-06-18 06:12:53
In reply to black
Cuomo is in his 60s, but why do you assume that Biden will step aside in 4 years?
2020-06-18 10:29:16
In reply to Walco
60 more likely outcome than a defeat of Trump! said that a long time ago.
2020-06-18 12:09:23
In reply to Walco
Cuomo is in his 60s, but why do you assume that Biden will step aside in 4 years?
Biden is lucky to get the nomination now. More people dislike Trump more than they like him.
Besides, four years is a long time when you're in your seventies.
2020-06-18 12:26:36
In reply to black
Sixty votes will not get you anymore than 51 votes can.
You need to educate yourself more on US politics in order to avoid such inaccurate statements.
2020-06-18 12:36:08
In reply to Dukes
Tell me how it's inaccurate, Sir?
Mitch McConnell threw that 60 vote shit out the window, a simple majority vote (51) is how things get done in Washington.
The only other option is a super majority (67) which is damn near impossible, unless it's bipartisan.
You're not talking to a novice, Dukes.
2020-06-18 12:41:11
In reply to black
there are issues that need 60 votes, think spending may be one area that comes to mind.
2020-06-18 12:45:04
In reply to camos
Dude, that 60 vote was just an agreed upon gesture, it was never constitutionally binding.
Harry Reid got rid of it and McConnell has kept the 51 vote threshold ever since.
2020-06-18 12:46:53
In reply to Dukes
How dare you!!??
Black is the resident murca constitutional expert!!!
2020-06-18 12:48:17
In reply to VIX
Don't laugh because I'm right, it only highlights your ignorance.
2020-06-18 12:49:42
In reply to black
Dude, that 60 vote was just an agreed upon gesture, it was never constitutionally binding.
Harry Reid got rid of it and McConnell has kept the 51 vote threshold ever since.
Harry Reid got rid of it and McConnell has kept the 51 vote threshold ever since.
that is only for judges confirmation and maybe one other issue.
Why does Trump need Democrat support on an infrastructure bill?
2020-06-18 13:06:31
In reply to camos
I don't think 60 votes will be possible without a Biden landslide win. Americans don't split their ballots like they used to. It's usually a party-line vote.
2020-06-18 13:09:26
In reply to camos
Nuclear option
2020-06-18 13:22:29
God, I hope so. There is a lot that 60 votes can do - like change rules. After that the sky is the limit.
What Dem wouldn't do with 60? To hell with all other norms. What a golden opportunity that would be in these times. For one, I would start packing the Supreme Court and other higher Federal Courts and let Republicans scream blue murder. Then they would know what's it's like with the shoe on the other foot - a bigger shoe.
2020-06-18 13:27:28
In reply to Casper
blue murder
Bajan phrase dat
2020-06-18 13:32:05
In reply to black
There is a reason the thread title says 60 instead of 51. Obamacare would not have been possible without 60 votes.
2020-06-18 13:32:25
In reply to camos
Why does Trump need Democrat support on an infrastructure bill?
If Trump needs Democratic support it's because the bill require a super majority vote.
That's the only thing I can think of.
2020-06-18 13:43:34
In reply to Walco
just hope all the stars lineup
2020-06-18 13:44:58
In reply to Walco
There is a reason the thread title says 60 instead of 51. Obamacare would not have been possible without 60 votes
Nuclear option.
2020-06-18 16:37:45
In reply to black
As of June 2020, a three-fifths majority vote is still required to end debates on legislation.
2020-06-18 16:50:39
In reply to Maispwi
Did you read the link I posted on Nuclear option?
Can you post a link of the quote you are referencing?
2020-06-18 16:59:09
In reply to Maispwi
This is how the Nuke option work.
.
The option is invoked when the majority leader raises a point of order that contravenes a standing rule, such as that only a simple majority is needed to close debate on certain matters. The presiding officer denies the point of order based on Senate rules, but the ruling of the chair is then appealed and overturned by majority vote, establishing new precedent.
This procedure uses Rule XX to allow the Senate to decide any issue by simple majority vote, regardless of Rule XXII which requires the consent of 60 senators (out of 100) to end a filibuster for legislation and 67 for amending a Senate rule. The term "nuclear option" is an analogy to nuclear weapons being the most extreme option in warfare
This procedure uses Rule XX to allow the Senate to decide any issue by simple majority vote, regardless of Rule XXII which requires the consent of 60 senators (out of 100) to end a filibuster for legislation and 67 for amending a Senate rule. The term "nuclear option" is an analogy to nuclear weapons being the most extreme option in warfare
2020-06-19 13:11:25
In reply to black
Are you saying that the nuclear option has been, will be, or should be revoked with respect to all issues voted on by the Senate? Otherwise I do not understand your point about 51 votes.
2020-06-19 13:27:39
In reply to Walco
Are you saying that the nuclear option has been, will be, or should be revoked with respect to all issues voted on by the Senate? Otherwise I do not understand your point about 51 votes
No. What I'm saying is, why should and why would the Democrats worry about a 60 vote threshold when Republicans are Not?
Obviously, the more Democrats in the Senate the better but anything above 51 votes are just numbers if the Nuclear option is used.
What's good for Repubs is good for Dems, keep using the Nuke option.
2020-06-19 14:17:40
In reply to black
What I am saying is, why should should and why would the Democrats worry about the 60 vote threshold when the Republicans are Not?
Do some more research boss. The Dems under Harry Reid were first to exercise the nuclear option with respect to federal judges below the Supreme Court, and the Republicans later extended it to Supreme Court judges. Also, I am not aware of the Republicans using the nuclear option in other areas besides judges.
2020-06-19 14:25:04
In reply to Walco
Do some more research boss. The Dems under Harry Reid were first to exercise the nuclear option with respect to federal judges below the Supreme Court, and the Republicans later extended it to Supreme Court judges
.
You must have missed that part.
Why didn't you state that, previously?
2020-06-19 14:50:56
In reply to black
Why didn't I state what? I figured that most people would understand why I said 60 votes instead of 51. You don't need the nuclear option if you have 60 votes. It took 60 votes to pass Obamacare
2020-06-19 14:58:05
In reply to Walco
Democrats are NOT going to get 60 seats and even with 60 seats, they are not going to agree in everything.
My point is, Repubs are getting a lot done without 60 votes, using the Nuke option.
2020-06-19 15:31:48
In reply to black
Don't laugh because I'm right, it only highlights your ignorance.
That’s Vix again, hooting on the sidelines. That roving little pest of an avatar, round and round he goes, where he stops, nobody knows. A perfect representation of the author?
2020-06-19 15:37:43
In reply to Casper
Yep. Not a damn thing to contribute but sarcasm.
2020-06-19 17:33:48
In reply to Walco
Also in excess of 300 electoral votes for Biden.......and he is not the best of candidates.
2020-06-19 17:34:05
In reply to black
Ok let me try it this way. Do you agree that the Dems will be able to get more done with 60 votes and Biden in the Whitehouse than with fewer than 60 votes?
2020-06-19 17:58:22
In reply to Walco
Dude, why are you worried about 60 votes when Repubs are accomplishing the same with 51 votes.
It seems to me that you didn't know about the Nuclear option or you wouldn't have brought up the 60 vote option.
Did you research the Harry Reid piece last night and now acting like you knew?
2020-06-19 17:58:24
In reply to Walco
Dude, why are you worried about 60 votes when Repubs are accomplishing the same with 51 votes.
It seems to me that you didn't know about the Nuclear option or you wouldn't have brought up the 60 vote option.
Did you research the Harry Reid piece last night and now acting like you knew?
2020-06-19 18:44:41
In reply to black
Some on here refer to you as an ignoranmus who covers his ignorance with arrogance I am starting to believe them. I don't need to research what I studied in university and law school and later lived through and observed first hand. I did not even waste time reading your link because I don't need to read about a topic with which I am already familiar.
I suggest that you re-read you first post on this thread before responding to me again. You are getting into some deep water here and may well drown in your own sea of ... [see above].
2020-06-19 19:02:43
In reply to Walco
I can spot bullshitters from a mile away, not saying that you are one, though.
2020-06-19 19:38:36
In reply to black
Ok Mr. Shifting Goal Posts ... or is it Mr. Nuclear Option?
2020-06-19 20:05:11
In reply to black
I did. This is what your link said so you either didn't read all of it or whomever read it to you skipped de last para
The nuclear option is a parliamentary procedure that allows the United States Senate to override a standing rule of the Senate, such as the 60-vote rule to close debate, by a simple majority of 51 votes, rather than the two-thirds supermajority normally required to amend the rules. The option is invoked when the majority leader raises a point of order that contravenes a standing rule, such as that only a simple majority is needed to close debate on certain matters. The presiding officer denies the point of order based on Senate rules, but the ruling of the chair is then appealed and overturned by majority vote, establishing new precedent.
This procedure uses Rule XX to allow the Senate to decide any issue by simple majority vote, regardless of Rule XXII which requires the consent of 60 senators (out of 100) to end a filibuster for legislation and 67 for amending a Senate rule. The term "nuclear option" is an analogy to nuclear weapons being the most extreme option in warfare.
In November 2013, Senate Democrats led by Harry Reid used the nuclear option to eliminate the 60-vote rule on executive branch nominations and federal judicial appointments, but not for the Supreme Court.[1] In April 2017, Senate Republicans led by Mitch McConnell extended the nuclear option to Supreme Court nominations in order to end debate on the nomination of Neil Gorsuch.[2][3][4]
As of June 2020, a three-fifths majority vote is still required to end debates on legislation.
This procedure uses Rule XX to allow the Senate to decide any issue by simple majority vote, regardless of Rule XXII which requires the consent of 60 senators (out of 100) to end a filibuster for legislation and 67 for amending a Senate rule. The term "nuclear option" is an analogy to nuclear weapons being the most extreme option in warfare.
In November 2013, Senate Democrats led by Harry Reid used the nuclear option to eliminate the 60-vote rule on executive branch nominations and federal judicial appointments, but not for the Supreme Court.[1] In April 2017, Senate Republicans led by Mitch McConnell extended the nuclear option to Supreme Court nominations in order to end debate on the nomination of Neil Gorsuch.[2][3][4]
As of June 2020, a three-fifths majority vote is still required to end debates on legislation.
2020-06-19 22:01:10
In reply to Maispwi
As of June 2020, a three-fifths majority vote is still required to end debates on legislation.
Dude, the information that both of us posted, explains how the 60 vote rules can be circumvented, what makes you think that has changed?
2020-06-20 13:14:59
In reply to black
Sir don't you understand dat for legislation a simple majority will not work?
Whats ur understanding of still required?
2020-06-20 13:23:05
In reply to Maispwi
I know that there are some legislations that require a super majority and said so but if it is a 60 vote requirement, I don't see why
the same parliamentary procedures cannot be used to circumvent it.
This procedure uses Rule XX to allow the Senate to decide any issue by simple majority vote, regardless of Rule XXII which requires the consent of 60 senators (out of 100) to end a filibuster for legislation and 67 for amending a Senate rule. The term "nuclear option" is an analogy to nuclear weapons being the most extreme option in warfare
2020-06-20 17:09:40
In reply to Maispwi
After observing me waste time engaging black you decided to do the same?? Dukes had the right approach.
2020-06-20 17:40:15
In reply to Walco
And Dukes was wrong wasn't he?
Why do you guys hate to be wrong about anything?
2020-06-21 00:13:05
In reply to black
OK I will humor you. What was Dukes wrong about? And of course, what was I wrong about?
Heavenly father hear my prayer. I don’t know why I am making this post and wasting more time.
2020-06-21 00:19:02
In reply to Walco
My quote
Sixty votes will not get you anymore than 51 votes can.
Dukes quote
You need to educate yourself more on US politics in order to avoid such inaccurate statements
It's clear that he didn't know or was not thinking about the Nuclear Option.
2020-06-21 00:59:01
In reply to black
It is clear you are not aware that that most Democratic senators do not support use of the nuclear option in the way you envision. Hence the need for 60 votes. Perhaps you can identity those Democratic senators who have announced that they would support using the nuclear option to fix Obamacare or forgive student loan debt or enact other progressive legislative initiatives.
2020-06-21 01:01:06
In reply to Walco
It is clear you are not aware that that most Democratic senators do not support use of the nuclear option in the way you envision. Hence the need for 60 votes
Well, they are stupid.
2020-06-25 13:48:35
In reply to black
Did you notice that the Democrats were able to blocked passage of the Republicans Police reform bill yesterday because of the 60 vote requirement?
2020-06-25 15:04:46
In reply to Walco
Why you wasting your time?
2020-06-25 15:29:34
In reply to Maispwi
Touche. But based on his last post he finally saw the light
2020-06-25 15:57:49
In reply to Walco
The man posted a link on the nuclear option at the bottom of which states dat as of June 2020 a three fifth majority is still needed for legislative matters, but still argues dat de option can be used for anyting.
At dat point ah gave up and allowed him his nuclear option
2020-06-25 17:32:51
In reply to Walco
Did you notice that the Democrats were able to blocked passage of the Republicans Police reform bill yesterday because of the 60 vote requirement?
Common sense dude, why would Republicans want to ram that bill through?
Do you think Repubs really care or they just want to look like they are doing something?
2020-06-25 18:06:55
In reply to Walco
...an ignoramus who covers his ignorance with arrogance
Let me help:
An Agnoramus!
//
2020-06-25 18:25:07
In reply to Walco
Touche. But based on his last post he finally saw the light
You don't know what you are talking about, did Dems stop Harry Reid from using it?
2020-06-25 18:29:24
In reply to Maispwi
The man posted a link on the nuclear option at the bottom of which states dat as of June 2020 a three fifth majority is still needed for legislative matters, but still argues dat de option can be used for anyting.
At dat point ah gave up and allowed him his nuclear option
At dat point ah gave up and allowed him his nuclear option
It's still the rule, the Nuclear Option circumvents that rule. If Nuke options is not used, then 60 votes are needed.
Common sense man, Repubs don't have 60 votes, what option do you think they are going to use?
Search
Live Scores
- no matches