Will Obama make Mitch McConnell a "One term Senate Majority Leader"?

[Derideo_Te]

No. Obama is through. Wad spent. He even looks defeated. McConnell and the GOP controlled Congress will send popular proposal after popular proposal to Obama's desk and force the Ideologue-in Chief to veto them.

Obama still has that pen that McConnell needs

2016 is going to be tough for Republicans in the Senate. They have to defend 24 seats they won in 2010, Democrats only need to defend 10. Many of those 24 seats Republicans must recapture are in blue states.

What will those Senators run on in 2016? Gridlock?

For McConnell to save his job, he will have to have something those Senators can run on

If there is one thing these elections have proved, it's that the Republicans are NOT the ones getting the blame for gridlock in Washington.

All the Republicans have to do is to make Obama the choke point at which popular legislation dies.

That's what happened to the Senate.

Democrats think that American's are idiots, that if they can get the liberal media to blame Republicans for gridlock, they can make the dumbasses citizens believe that.

But Americans saw through that crap. They saw the truth...that Reid and the Democrat controlled Senate was the choke point....and they moved to eliminate it.

Now it's Obama's turn. He will be forced to do his own obstructing.

How do they make Obama the choke point if they can't even get bills out of the Senate? Reid couldn't beat filibuster with 55 votes, how can McConnell do it with 54? McConnell needs to get Obama to agree to his legislation to even make it through the Senate.......How can he do that when his own party considers ANY compromise with Obama to be unacceptable?

Unless, of course, McConnell completely does away with the filibuster entirely.

I doubt that he would or even could do that, and I would not be surprised if Harry Reid didn't reverse the filibuster rule during the lame duck session.

The rules are decided at the beginning of each new Congress so it would be meaningless.

 

[Statistikhengst]

No. Obama is through. Wad spent. He even looks defeated. McConnell and the GOP controlled Congress will send popular proposal after popular proposal to Obama's desk and force the Ideologue-in Chief to veto them.

Obama still has that pen that McConnell needs

2016 is going to be tough for Republicans in the Senate. They have to defend 24 seats they won in 2010, Democrats only need to defend 10. Many of those 24 seats Republicans must recapture are in blue states.

What will those Senators run on in 2016? Gridlock?

For McConnell to save his job, he will have to have something those Senators can run on

If there is one thing these elections have proved, it's that the Republicans are NOT the ones getting the blame for gridlock in Washington.

All the Republicans have to do is to make Obama the choke point at which popular legislation dies.

That's what happened to the Senate.

Democrats think that American's are idiots, that if they can get the liberal media to blame Republicans for gridlock, they can make the dumbasses citizens believe that.

But Americans saw through that crap. They saw the truth...that Reid and the Democrat controlled Senate was the choke point....and they moved to eliminate it.

Now it's Obama's turn. He will be forced to do his own obstructing.

How do they make Obama the choke point if they can't even get bills out of the Senate? Reid couldn't beat filibuster with 55 votes, how can McConnell do it with 54? McConnell needs to get Obama to agree to his legislation to even make it through the Senate.......How can he do that when his own party considers ANY compromise with Obama to be unacceptable?

Unless, of course, McConnell completely does away with the filibuster entirely.

I doubt that he would or even could do that, and I would not be surprised if Harry Reid didn't reverse the filibuster rule during the lame duck session.

Double negative = status quo.

Are you a statist??

 

[rightwinger]

Low information lefties actually thought that the republican majority in congress caused gridlock even though Harry Reid's senate stalled about 3,000 bills originating from congress. The floodgates will be open in January and Reid will no longer be able to run interference for do-nothing incompetent Barry Hussein. Barry will have to stick around D.C. and work for a living even if he uses the veto pen.

Most bills require 60 Senate votes to get to the floor. How many seats are GOP now?

52 was the last count I saw. That helps keep bills from the floor but doesn't help a damn when you have to actually pass them.

So far, all I hear at the top of the GOP to do list is the Keystone pipeline, as if that's the be-all end-all of domestic economic policy.

The President has them by the balls on that because he can let go through or stop it based on public opinion. Wherever public opinion is, the President can either get credit for blocking or steal credit from the GOP by signing it.

80% of the public supported requiring healthcare workers returning from West Africa to get quarantined for 21 days. What was Obama's position?

And apparently you weren't paying attention since there were 3 or 4 more items on the list that the Republicans plan to put forward.

What percent of medical professionals supported that?

 

[TooTall]

If there is one thing these elections have proved, it's that the Republicans are NOT the ones getting the blame for gridlock in Washington.

All the Republicans have to do is to make Obama the choke point at which popular legislation dies.

That's what happened to the Senate.

Democrats think that American's are idiots, that if they can get the liberal media to blame Republicans for gridlock, they can make the dumbasses citizens believe that.

But Americans saw through that crap. They saw the truth...that Reid and the Democrat controlled Senate was the choke point....and they moved to eliminate it.

Now it's Obama's turn. He will be forced to do his own obstructing.

How do they make Obama the choke point if they can't even get bills out of the Senate? Reid couldn't beat filibuster with 55 votes, how can McConnell do it with 54? McConnell needs to get Obama to agree to his legislation to even make it through the Senate.......How can he do that when his own party considers ANY compromise with Obama to be unacceptable?

Unless, of course, McConnell completely does away with the filibuster entirely.

I would love to see him do it

But I think he knows better because Obama will veto anyway and he has a limited chance of holding his position past 2016

Of course, the Prez has his legacy to consider and has absolutely no chance of holding his position past 2016. Does he want to be forever known as the Veto Prez?

He has only issued 2 in the last six years. He has a long way to go to get that title

Obama didn't have to veto anything because he had Harry Reid stop the bills from being voted on. It is that simple

 

[TooTall]

Low information lefties actually thought that the republican majority in congress caused gridlock even though Harry Reid's senate stalled about 3,000 bills originating from congress. The floodgates will be open in January and Reid will no longer be able to run interference for do-nothing incompetent Barry Hussein. Barry will have to stick around D.C. and work for a living even if he uses the veto pen.

Most bills require 60 Senate votes to get to the floor. How many seats are GOP now?

52 was the last count I saw. That helps keep bills from the floor but doesn't help a damn when you have to actually pass them.

So far, all I hear at the top of the GOP to do list is the Keystone pipeline, as if that's the be-all end-all of domestic economic policy.

The President has them by the balls on that because he can let go through or stop it based on public opinion. Wherever public opinion is, the President can either get credit for blocking or steal credit from the GOP by signing it.

80% of the public supported requiring healthcare workers returning from West Africa to get quarantined for 21 days. What was Obama's position?

And apparently you weren't paying attention since there were 3 or 4 more items on the list that the Republicans plan to put forward.

What percent of medical professionals supported that?

The President has them by the balls on that because he can let go through or stop it based on public opinion.

 

[TooTall]

McConnell saw no need to do anything that would encourage anyone to vote for an Obama second term. Now McConnell has finally gotten his wish to be Senate majority leader

Will Obama return the favor?

Why would you think the 1% care about which corporate whore serves them?
"WASHINGTON -- Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Wednesday that he and President Barack Obama are already discussing plans to cut corporate tax rates and pass free trade agreements, following the GOP's major gains in Tuesday's elections..."
TPP???
"'Trade pacts,' McConnell said at a press conference Wednesday. 'The president and I were just talking about that, right before I came over here. Most of his party is unenthusiastic about international trade. We think it's good for America, and so I've got a lot of members who believe that international trade agreements are a winner for America.'"
Big winners for 1% of America...
McConnell And Obama Are Already Planning To Undercut Liberal Democrats In Congress

Hang on to your hats, kids. If corporate tax rates are cut, be assured you will pay higher taxes somewhere to make up for it.

Tax rates are convoluted to such an extent the US effective corporate tax rate varies between ~13% - 27%, depending on your source:
"The most recent estimate comes from the World Bank and International Finance Commision, which put the United States’ effective rate for 2014 at 27.9 percent. That’s second-highest behind New Zealand among OECD countries and 15th-highest among the 189 countries measured.

"In 2011, the Tax Foundation published a survey of 13 prior estimates of the United States’ effective tax rate from 2005 to 2011.

"All 13 studies pegged the U.S.’s rate as above average, but none had the U.S. rate first overall.

Another 2011 study by the Congressional Research Service put the U.S. effective rate at 27.1 percent, slightly lower than the OECD average of 27.7 percent."

Mitch and Barry are probably looking for ways to sell a 0% corporate tax rate as a "job creator", and many cons and bots will goose-step accordingly.

Does the U.S. have the highest corporate tax rate in the free world PunditFact

The consumer pays all corporate taxes. That's not even controversial.

Correct, and it would make no difference if the corporate tax was 0%.

 

[TooTall]

Obama still has that pen that McConnell needs

2016 is going to be tough for Republicans in the Senate. They have to defend 24 seats they won in 2010, Democrats only need to defend 10. Many of those 24 seats Republicans must recapture are in blue states.

What will those Senators run on in 2016? Gridlock?

For McConnell to save his job, he will have to have something those Senators can run on

If there is one thing these elections have proved, it's that the Republicans are NOT the ones getting the blame for gridlock in Washington.

All the Republicans have to do is to make Obama the choke point at which popular legislation dies.

That's what happened to the Senate.

Democrats think that American's are idiots, that if they can get the liberal media to blame Republicans for gridlock, they can make the dumbasses citizens believe that.

But Americans saw through that crap. They saw the truth...that Reid and the Democrat controlled Senate was the choke point....and they moved to eliminate it.

Now it's Obama's turn. He will be forced to do his own obstructing.

How do they make Obama the choke point if they can't even get bills out of the Senate? Reid couldn't beat filibuster with 55 votes, how can McConnell do it with 54? McConnell needs to get Obama to agree to his legislation to even make it through the Senate.......How can he do that when his own party considers ANY compromise with Obama to be unacceptable?

Unless, of course, McConnell completely does away with the filibuster entirely.

I doubt that he would or even could do that, and I would not be surprised if Harry Reid didn't reverse the filibuster rule during the lame duck session.

The rules are decided at the beginning of each new Congress so it would be meaningless.

The 113 Congress convened on January 3, 2013 Harry Reid changed the filibuster rule on Nov 21, 2013. Try again!

 

[georgephillip]

If Obama wanted to privatize Social Security

That never worked for Bush jr so why would Obama even go there?

You claim:
"That never worked for Bush jr so why would Obama even go there?"
Democrats AND Progressives opposed Bush on the privatization of Social Security;

however, as we've seen over the past six years, many Democrats are willing to support Obama policies that are even worse than Bush's. (Like immigration "reform" and war in Iraq, Syria, and Libya)

The illegal invasion of Iraq that cost trillions of taxpayer dollars was something that Obama started even though he wasn't even elected as a Senator when it was started by Bush jr?

"The illegal invasion of Iraq that cost trillions of taxpayer dollars was something that Obama started even though he wasn't even elected as a Senator when it was started by Bush jr?"
Have you heard about IS?
Obama has.
But I may have spoken too soon about Social Security?

Obama 8217 s Less Trusted Than Bush On Social Security

 

[TooTall]

Obama still has that pen that McConnell needs

2016 is going to be tough for Republicans in the Senate. They have to defend 24 seats they won in 2010, Democrats only need to defend 10. Many of those 24 seats Republicans must recapture are in blue states.

What will those Senators run on in 2016? Gridlock?

For McConnell to save his job, he will have to have something those Senators can run on

If there is one thing these elections have proved, it's that the Republicans are NOT the ones getting the blame for gridlock in Washington.

All the Republicans have to do is to make Obama the choke point at which popular legislation dies.

That's what happened to the Senate.

Democrats think that American's are idiots, that if they can get the liberal media to blame Republicans for gridlock, they can make the dumbasses citizens believe that.

But Americans saw through that crap. They saw the truth...that Reid and the Democrat controlled Senate was the choke point....and they moved to eliminate it.

Now it's Obama's turn. He will be forced to do his own obstructing.

How do they make Obama the choke point if they can't even get bills out of the Senate? Reid couldn't beat filibuster with 55 votes, how can McConnell do it with 54? McConnell needs to get Obama to agree to his legislation to even make it through the Senate.......How can he do that when his own party considers ANY compromise with Obama to be unacceptable?

Unless, of course, McConnell completely does away with the filibuster entirely.

I doubt that he would or even could do that, and I would not be surprised if Harry Reid reversed the filibuster rule during the lame duck session.

Double negative = status quo.

Are you a statist??

No, I am an Electrical Engineer and English was not on my priority list at Tech. I fixed it for you bedwetters.

 

[BULLDOG]

So now you admit that this election isn't a true representation of what the country as a whole believes. I knew you would come around.

I think you are replying to the wrong poster.

You try to minimize the validity of the exit polls on the basis of a low turnout, but not hold the validity of the election to the same standard? Typical teabagger logic.

Please provide links and quotes where I did anything of the sort. You are fallaciously attributing things to me that I never posted.

You are not doing yourself any favors by making false accusations. I made a single factual statement.

Those exit polls only represent about 1/3rd of all voters given the low turnouts

I drew no conclusions nor did I attempt to "minimize the validity of the exit polls" and neither did I make any reference to the "validity of the election". I was simply pointing out that the exit polling was based upon a low voter turnout.

Furthermore if I was a "teabagger" why would I be attempting to "minimize the validity of the exit polls" if they were against Obama?

Your "logic" is faulty.

In the context of the conversation, my claim is valid.

Your allegation that I am a teabagger was totally erroneous and your allegation that I made an attempt to "minimize the validity of the exit polls" was completely invalid.

Perhaps I misread your post. If so, I appologize

 

[JakeStarkey]

We have a majority because enough of the women and minorities gave it to us. They don't love us but will give us a chance to govern. Piss them off, and they will go back to the Dems, who will be offering them the refrigerator, the freezer, the family car on the weekends, and a year free of Netflix.

Think this through, guys.

 

[deltex1]

McConnell saw no need to do anything that would encourage anyone to vote for an Obama second term. Now McConnell has finally gotten his wish to be Senate majority leader

Will Obama return the favor?

Obabble could not make a bear shit in the woods.

 

[Zander]

It's a waste of time time prognosticating results of elections s that will not take place for 2 years,

Nobody knows what will happen...only jerkoffs worry about this shit...................

get a life!!!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Democrats took a beating in the 2002 Midterms. Four years later they win back the House and Senate.

One would think that those participating in a political discussion forum would indeed possess the political acumen to understand the mercurial, capricious, and cyclical nature of American politics.

The democrats will control Congress again at some point in the near future – perhaps as soon as 2017.

And after that republicans will control Congress...

And after that democrats will control Congress...

 

[Borillar]

Democrats took a beating in the 2002 Midterms. Four years later they win back the House and Senate.

One would think that those participating in a political discussion forum would indeed possess the political acumen to understand the mercurial, capricious, and cyclical nature of American politics.

The democrats will control Congress again at some point in the near future – perhaps as soon as 2017.

And after that republicans will control Congress...

And after that democrats will control Congress...

Yep. The pendulum has swung to the right. About as far right as it can go. In a couple years, it will start to swing left again.

 

[hadit]

The same exit poll that showed fifty-nine per cent of respondents were dissatisfied or angry with the Obama Administration found that sixty-one per cent of respondents were angry or disappointed with Republican leaders in Congress. It found that fifty-three per cent of Americans have an unfavorable opinion of the Democratic Party and that fifty-six per cent have an unfavorable opinion of the Republican Party. Not exactly a “wave” election.

Those exit polls only represent about 1/3rd of all voters given the low turnouts.

So now you admit that this election isn't a true representation of what the country as a whole believes. I knew you would come around.

It is a true representation of what the VOTERS believe, and that's what matters. If you didn't vote, your wishes don't count.

I'm not contesting the outcome of the election. The republicans obviously made some gains. I'm just saying that the small group of republicans who won this little election doesn't represent the beliefs of the entire country.

That is unquestionably true, there is no controversy to that. Since the rest of the country didn't vote, however, the elected leaders can only go by who DID vote. The others didn't express an opinion. It's kind of like winning a national BBQ championship. Literally, a handful of people decide that yours is the best in the country. The vast majority of the people in the country either don't care about BBQ, didn't attend the competition at all, or if they attended did not taste yours. You can't say that your prize represents the view of the nation, but you still can say yours is the best.

Maybe what we're all trying to say is the elected leaders have a mandate from the voters, and those who didn't vote should not complain about what happens.

 

[rightwinger]

How do they make Obama the choke point if they can't even get bills out of the Senate? Reid couldn't beat filibuster with 55 votes, how can McConnell do it with 54? McConnell needs to get Obama to agree to his legislation to even make it through the Senate.......How can he do that when his own party considers ANY compromise with Obama to be unacceptable?

Unless, of course, McConnell completely does away with the filibuster entirely.

I would love to see him do it

But I think he knows better because Obama will veto anyway and he has a limited chance of holding his position past 2016

Of course, the Prez has his legacy to consider and has absolutely no chance of holding his position past 2016. Does he want to be forever known as the Veto Prez?

He has only issued 2 in the last six years. He has a long way to go to get that title

Obama didn't have to veto anything because he had Harry Reid stop the bills from being voted on. It is that simple

Well, lets look at the numbers then.....

What does Obama have to do to become the "Veto Prez"?

Reagan 78 vetoes
Bush sr 44 vetoes
Clinton 37 vetoes
Bush jr 12 vetoes
Obama 2 vetoes

Obama has a long way to go. In fact, very few pieces of legislation will reach his desk that will be vetoed. Most will die long before they reach that point

 

[paulitician]

It's not about Obama. He's not calling all the shots anymore. That's what these massive historic Republican wins were all about. He's been reduced to Lame-Duck status. He'll either get on board or be an Obstructionist. It's his call. But he's not calling all the shots anymore. Obamabots are gonna have to come to grips with that reality.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It's not about Obama. He's not calling all the shots anymore. That's what these massive historic Republican wins were all about. He's been reduced to Lame-Duck status. He'll either get on board or be an Obstructionist. It's his call. But he's not calling all the shots anymore. Obamabots are gonna have to come to grips with that reality.

It's solely about Obama.

 

[TooTall]

It's not about Obama. He's not calling all the shots anymore. That's what these massive historic Republican wins were all about. He's been reduced to Lame-Duck status. He'll either get on board or be an Obstructionist. It's his call. But he's not calling all the shots anymore. Obamabots are gonna have to come to grips with that reality.

It's solely about Obama.

How dare you disagree with Al Sharpton. Are you really a racist? (just kidding)

"Al Sharpton attempted to defend President Barack Obama from criticism that he was a major factor in the Republican’s sweeping victory in the midterm elections by blaming the Clintons on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” Thursday.

Cokie Roberts pointed out how Obama “went to states and campaigned for candidates and they lost.”

“Very late,” Sharpton responded. “Cokie, he went out two weeks ago, while Clinton went all over the place. Is this a Clinton defeat? Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton…the cavalry is coming in. Well, the cavalry got beat. Is this a Clinton defeat? I think we’re Obama obsessed.”

Sharpton Election A Defeat For Bill And Hillary Clinton The Daily Caller