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

[hadit]

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?

Why not? If the stuff the GOP Congress sends him is crap not supported by the Democratic Party, the center/left of America,

how does it hurt his so-called 'legacy' to veto it?

A lot of the bills Reid was sitting on had bipartisan support. Most of the country wants illegal immigration REDUCED, not increased. Most of the country doesn't like obamadon'tcare and the way it was implemented. These are things the Republicans can make Obama either bend on and support or force him to justify his going against the will of the people.

Boehner didn't allow a vote on the immigration bill.

He should have. What's your point?

 

[JakeStarkey]

The medical device tax and the keystone project had and still have bipartisan support.

 

[hadit]

A lot of the bills Reid was sitting on had bipartisan support.

Here's one. Top 10 Bipartisan Jobs Bills Blocked by Senate Democrats - AMAC Inc. AMAC Inc.

 

[Avorysuds]

Retard Law invoked: Avory loses.

Listen to the TPM and follow their, Dem victory in 2016.

You're an old man... in the bad old man way. A political dinosaur without the ability to get under peoples skin. You're a joke on these boards, no one, not a single person cares when you fumblingly try and insult them.

You gave yourself the nickname of Mr. Mainstream. And it stuck because you call yourself a Republican yet no Republican or even just a conservative would guess you are one. Hell, your voting Democrat consistently says enough about your affiliation but I guess most "Mainstream" Republicans vote Democrat too. I guess...

 

[rightwinger]

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

Wishful thinking. The Repubs are guaranteed to flood his desk with bills, some intended to undo what he has done since 2008. They can (and will) force him to choose between signing those bills or destroying Dem's 2016 - including presidential - hopes. They have no incentive to make nice-nice. Hang onto your hat.

So what you are saying is that McConnell will nuke the filibuster (and destroy the GOP after 2016) in order to dump meaningless bills on Obama's desk?

That is a very short sighted approach and will end up doing the GOP more harm than good.

Doesn't mean that won't happen but of all the options out there it has to be one of the worst possible choices.

He doesn't have to do anything to the filibuster, just force the democrats to obstruct things if that's what they want to do and then make it publicly obvious who is the party of "no".

Filibuster is painless

It happens behind the scenes with no fanfare. Bills just disappear. There is no political repercussion.....ask the Republicans

 

[hadit]

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

Wishful thinking. The Repubs are guaranteed to flood his desk with bills, some intended to undo what he has done since 2008. They can (and will) force him to choose between signing those bills or destroying Dem's 2016 - including presidential - hopes. They have no incentive to make nice-nice. Hang onto your hat.

So what you are saying is that McConnell will nuke the filibuster (and destroy the GOP after 2016) in order to dump meaningless bills on Obama's desk?

That is a very short sighted approach and will end up doing the GOP more harm than good.

Doesn't mean that won't happen but of all the options out there it has to be one of the worst possible choices.

He doesn't have to do anything to the filibuster, just force the democrats to obstruct things if that's what they want to do and then make it publicly obvious who is the party of "no".

Filibuster is painless

It happens behind the scenes with no fanfare. Bills just disappear. There is no political repercussion.....ask the Republicans

Not if the party in power forces the minority to do an ACTUAL filibuster, which I think they should.

 

[SAYIT]

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

Wishful thinking. The Repubs are guaranteed to flood his desk with bills, some intended to undo what he has done since 2008. They can (and will) force him to choose between signing those bills or destroying Dem's 2016 - including presidential - hopes. They have no incentive to make nice-nice. Hang onto your hat.

So what you are saying is that McConnell will nuke the filibuster (and destroy the GOP after 2016) in order to dump meaningless bills on Obama's desk?

That is a very short sighted approach and will end up doing the GOP more harm than good.

Doesn't mean that won't happen but of all the options out there it has to be one of the worst possible choices.

He doesn't have to do anything to the filibuster, just force the democrats to obstruct things if that's what they want to do and then make it publicly obvious who is the party of "no".

Filibuster is painless

It happens behind the scenes with no fanfare. Bills just disappear. There is no political repercussion.....ask the Republicans

That is, when it happens occasionally. With the flood of Repubs bills headed their way, the Dems will have to filibuster the entirety of the next 2 years or allow the Prez to do his own dirty work. Either way, Dem chances will be dead by '16. Sorry.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Avory, America does not care what the Far Right and the TPM want: not Mitch, not John, not me, not the mainstream GOP. You guys don't realize you are the joke, but you will

 

[SAYIT]

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

Wishful thinking. The Repubs are guaranteed to flood his desk with bills, some intended to undo what he has done since 2008. They can (and will) force him to choose between signing those bills or destroying Dem's 2016 - including presidential - hopes. They have no incentive to make nice-nice. Hang onto your hat.

So what you are saying is that McConnell will nuke the filibuster (and destroy the GOP after 2016) in order to dump meaningless bills on Obama's desk?

That is a very short sighted approach and will end up doing the GOP more harm than good.

Doesn't mean that won't happen but of all the options out there it has to be one of the worst possible choices.

He doesn't have to do anything to the filibuster, just force the democrats to obstruct things if that's what they want to do and then make it publicly obvious who is the party of "no".

Filibuster is painless

It happens behind the scenes with no fanfare. Bills just disappear. There is no political repercussion.....ask the Republicans

Not if the party in power forces the minority to do an ACTUAL filibuster, which I think they should.

And will. The Repubs have no reason to take their foot off the pedal now. In fact, they have every reason to hit the nitro button.

 

[hadit]

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

Wishful thinking. The Repubs are guaranteed to flood his desk with bills, some intended to undo what he has done since 2008. They can (and will) force him to choose between signing those bills or destroying Dem's 2016 - including presidential - hopes. They have no incentive to make nice-nice. Hang onto your hat.

So what you are saying is that McConnell will nuke the filibuster (and destroy the GOP after 2016) in order to dump meaningless bills on Obama's desk?

That is a very short sighted approach and will end up doing the GOP more harm than good.

Doesn't mean that won't happen but of all the options out there it has to be one of the worst possible choices.

He doesn't have to do anything to the filibuster, just force the democrats to obstruct things if that's what they want to do and then make it publicly obvious who is the party of "no".

Filibuster is painless

It happens behind the scenes with no fanfare. Bills just disappear. There is no political repercussion.....ask the Republicans

That is, when it happens occasionally. With the flood of Repubs bills headed their way, the Dems will have to filibuster the entirety of the next 2 years or allow the Prez to do his own dirty work. Either way, Dem chances will be dead by '16. Sorry.

I do wish the Republicans would not allow the democrats to do anything quietly. Let them stop Republican initiatives, but make them do it publicly and defend their reasons why.

 

[georgephillip]

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.

Really? "The consumer pays all corporate taxes."
Actually, the actual tax burden is unequally divided between corporate shareholders, the corporation itself, and employees of the corporation rather than consumers.

 

[hadit]

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.

Really? "The consumer pays all corporate taxes."
Actually, the actual tax burden is unequally divided between corporate shareholders, the corporation itself, and employees of the corporation rather than consumers.

The money a corporation has to pay those taxes comes from the people that buy its products.

 

[SAYIT]

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.

Really? "The consumer pays all corporate taxes."
Actually, the actual tax burden is unequally divided between corporate shareholders, the corporation itself, and employees of the corporation rather than consumers.

Silliness. Every company incorporates the C.O.G.S - including ALL taxes and salaries - into the price of goods or services sold and if what's left doesn't satisfy the stakeholders, they can neither attract investors nor creditors. Your "knowledge" of how American biz operates is terribly lame.

 

[Freemason9]

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.

Really? "The consumer pays all corporate taxes."
Actually, the actual tax burden is unequally divided between corporate shareholders, the corporation itself, and employees of the corporation rather than consumers.

Silliness. Every company incorporates the C.O.G.S - including ALL taxes and salaries - into the price of goods or services sold and if what's left doesn't satisfy the stakeholders, they can neither attract investors nor creditors. Your "knowledge" of how American biz operates is terribly lame.

Believe it or not, some businesses operate with the customer as primary focus and not the shareholders.

 

[Derideo_Te]

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

Wishful thinking. The Repubs are guaranteed to flood his desk with bills, some intended to undo what he has done since 2008. They can (and will) force him to choose between signing those bills or destroying Dem's 2016 - including presidential - hopes. They have no incentive to make nice-nice. Hang onto your hat.

So what you are saying is that McConnell will nuke the filibuster (and destroy the GOP after 2016) in order to dump meaningless bills on Obama's desk?

That is a very short sighted approach and will end up doing the GOP more harm than good.

Doesn't mean that won't happen but of all the options out there it has to be one of the worst possible choices.

He'd be a fool to allow a few retiring Dems to jam up the Repub strategy which is to force Obama's hand. They can (and will) force him to choose between signing those bills or destroying Dem's 2016 - including presidential - hopes. They have no incentive to make nice-nice.

McConnell is stuck between a rock and a hard place on the filibuster. He doesn't have any good options. If he leaves it in place he looks incompetent and an appeaser. If he nukes it he harms the GOP minority from 2017 onwards.

Dumping those bills on Obama's desk would be a Pyrrhic victory and very short sighted.

However I fully anticipate that McConnell is going to be forced into doing the bidding of the extremist TP faction in the same manner that Boehner has been.

 

[Derideo_Te]

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

Wishful thinking. The Repubs are guaranteed to flood his desk with bills, some intended to undo what he has done since 2008. They can (and will) force him to choose between signing those bills or destroying Dem's 2016 - including presidential - hopes. They have no incentive to make nice-nice. Hang onto your hat.

So what you are saying is that McConnell will nuke the filibuster (and destroy the GOP after 2016) in order to dump meaningless bills on Obama's desk?

That is a very short sighted approach and will end up doing the GOP more harm than good.

Doesn't mean that won't happen but of all the options out there it has to be one of the worst possible choices.

He doesn't have to do anything to the filibuster, just force the democrats to obstruct things if that's what they want to do and then make it publicly obvious who is the party of "no".

In which case nothing ends up on Obama's desk and therefore he doesn't veto anything.

 

[georgephillip]

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.

Really? "The consumer pays all corporate taxes."
Actually, the actual tax burden is unequally divided between corporate shareholders, the corporation itself, and employees of the corporation rather than consumers.

The money a corporation has to pay those taxes comes from the people that buy its products.

The money a corporation makes comes from the price at which it sells its products. The price is determined by supply and demand. Since prices are determined by suppliers of goods and service that include those which don't pay taxes based on corporate tax rates, corporations can not raise prices to compensate for their taxes because they will be undercut by businesses to which the corporate tax does not apply.

 

[Derideo_Te]

. Those who want to be reelected in '16 will have to make nice with the Repubs.

Only just over 1/3rd of voters turned out yesterday. The majority of them were Republicans. The minority were Dems and the moderates and independents were conspicuous by their absence.

In 2016 there will be a much greater voter turnout who are more aligned with the Dems than the GOP. Your premise that the Dems need to "make nice" with the right is based upon the fallacy that the missing voters won't vote in 2016.

 

[Borillar]

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.

I agree, and Obama will make it impossible for a viable democrat presidential nominee in 2016.

Only if McChinless does away with the filibuster will these so called popular bills ever get to Obama to veto. It'll be 2 more years of gridlock and then the national elections, which have a much higher turnout and more Republican seats are in contention than Democratic seats.

 

[Derideo_Te]

A lot of the bills Reid was sitting on had bipartisan support.

Here's one. Top 10 Bipartisan Jobs Bills Blocked by Senate Democrats - AMAC Inc. AMAC Inc.

Only 10 out of 350?