Opposition Party?

[Ron]

The Republicans are not an opposition party.

Obama has only vetoed 4 bills as president despite having an "opposition" House since 2010 and Republicans holding both houses since the 2014 election.

Obama has issued fewer vetoes than any president in the 20th and 21st centuries.

http://www.senate.gov/reference/Legislation/Vetoes/ObamaBH.htm

[roo_ster]

The Republicans are not an opposition party.

Obama has only vetoed 4 bills as president despite having an "opposition" House since 2010 and Republicans holding both houses since the 2014 election.

Obama has issued fewer vetoes than any president in the 20th and 21st centuries.

http://www.senate.gov/reference/Legislation/Vetoes/ObamaBH.htm

True.

The GOP talks one way during elections and acts another way in Washington. 

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Two words:  Harry Reid.

The Republican House has passed all sorts of opposition bills, the kinds that would force Obama to veto.  They don't get vetoed because they get filibustered first. 

Pop quiz: how many times has the House passed Obamacare repeal bills? And what happened to each of those bills in the Senate?

Current political reality is that there just aren't enough seats on the right to force legislation through congress.  And everyone knows it wouldn't matter even if there was, because our bills would just get vetoed by Obama. 

We can block the left's legislation, and we have.  Things like card check and cap and trade and gun control are all dead thanks to Republican opposition.  The country would look mighty different if not for the Republican opposition starting in 2010. 

[roo_ster]

Two words:  Harry Reid.

The Republican House has passed all sorts of opposition bills, the kinds that would force Obama to veto.  They don't get vetoed because they get filibustered first. 

Pop quiz: how many times has the House passed Obamacare repeal bills? And what happened to each of those bills in the Senate?

Current political reality is that there just aren't enough seats on the right to force legislation through congress.  And everyone knows it wouldn't matter even if there was, because our bills would just get vetoed by Obama. 

We can block the left's legislation, and we have.  Things like card check and cap and trade and gun control are all dead thanks to Republican opposition.  The country would look mighty different if not for the Republican opposition starting in 2010. 

GOP had the House. The House has the ultimate veto of not funding objectionable actions. They did not have the courage to use it or actually agreed with what was occurring.

So, the GOP is either useless as tits on a boar hog or complicit with the marxists in power.

[brimic]

Two words:  Harry Reid.

 

Two words: boehner, mcconnell.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

GOP had the House. The House has the ultimate veto of not funding objectionable actions. They did not have the courage to use it or actually agreed with what was occurring.

So, the GOP is either useless as tits on a boar hog or complicit with the marxists in power.

If only it were that simple.  You know the old saying about theory and practice, right? "In theory, theory and practice are the same.  In practice, they're not."

In theory the House can shut down anything they want by denying funding.  In actual practice there is no such power.  Shutdowns and financial brinksmanship are so wildly unpopular with the electorate that anyone who attempts it will be forced to back down by popular pressure. 

We've tried it a handful of times in recent memory.  It's always failed, and always for the same reason: the electorate won't stand for it.

In this country the people generally get what they want from their politicians.  I know we don't like to admit it, because doing so requires acknowledging that our beliefs might be out of step with the wider populace, but it's true.  The people get the government they want.  And one thing the people want, unequivocally, is politicians who don't shut down the government over partisan disagreements.

[makattak]

If only it were that simple.  You know the old saying about theory and practice, right? "In theory, theory and practice are the same.  In practice, they're not."

In theory the House can shut down anything they want by denying funding.  In actual practice there is no such power.  Shutdowns and financial brinksmanship are so wildly unpopular with the electorate that anyone who attempts it REPUBLICANS will be forced to back down by popular pressure, no matter who threatens the shutdown.  

We've tried it a handful of times in recent memory.  It's always failed, and always for the same reason: the electorate media won't stand for it.

In this country the people generally get what they want from their politicians.  I know we don't like to admit it, because doing so requires acknowledging that our beliefs might be out of step with the wider populace, but it's true.  The people get the government they want.  And one thing the people want, unequivocally, is politicians who don't shut down the government over partisan disagreements.

Fixed that for you.

[Scout26]

In the election immediately after that last "shutdown" the Republicans gained control of the Senate (increased by NINE seats) and increased their number of seats in the house (TWELVE seats)?

So explain to me again how shutting down the government (aka Stopping Obama) "hurts" the Republicans?

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

We've covered this before, I think.  The 2012 elections were driven by the monumental failure of the Obamacare rollout.  Nobody remembered the shutdowns on election day.

And just to be clear, I don't object to budget brinksmanship because it hurts the Republicans politically (though clearly it does).  I object because it's a losing strategy that doesn't work.  I'd like to dump it in favor of some new strategy that has a chance of succeeding.

[makattak]

We've covered this before, I think.  The 2012 elections were driven by the monumental failure of the Obamacare rollout.  Nobody remembered the shutdowns on election day.

And just to be clear, I don't object to budget brinksmanship because it hurts the Republicans politically (though clearly it does).  I object because it's a losing strategy that doesn't work.  I'd like to dump it in favor of some new strategy that has a chance of succeeding.

That's great. What's the new strategy? Sit on your hands and tell the people who elected you that there's nothing you can will do to stop an out of control executive?

That's SURE to make people want to vote for you next time.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

I don't know what the new strategy is.  I'm open to ideas, and I can suggest a few if you want to discuss it.  At this point I figure we could try just about anything and have better odds than the shutdown ploys that never, ever work for us.

[KD5NRH]

So, the GOP is either useless as tits on a boar hog or complicit with the marxists in power.

Why can't it be both?

[Scout26]

I don't know what the new strategy is.  I'm open to ideas, and I can suggest a few if you want to discuss it.  At this point I figure we could try just about anything and have better odds than the shutdown ploys that never, ever work for us.

Here's a novel idea.  The one that drove people to the polls last time:

Stopping Obama.  Amnesty, Obamacare,  All the scandals, the lot of it.  Smaller .gov, reduced taxes, reduced regs.  Worked for that Actor from CA in the 80's.  Anyone ever bothered to look at what those two electoral maps show? 

[Perd Hapley]

Nobody remembered the shutdowns on election day.

Wow. Sounds like that govt. "shut-down" was "wildly unpopular." Really wildly unpopular.

[Ben]

Wow. Sounds like that govt. "shut-down" was "wildly unpopular." Really wildly unpopular.

It was the most overblown thing ever, thanks to the media and certain parts of the government wanting to "make it hurt". Had the government not gone out of its way to strategically negatively affect the public (e.g., closing down picnic areas and overlooks), most people would have gone on with life and not known the difference. Had it been a real shutdown that included infrastructure, it might have been a different story.

[Blakenzy]

I'm still waiting for that "duh!" moment, when The People realize that the US Government as a whole, and all the political body that surrounds it, has become an occupation government, and that it does not represent their interests at all.

[Tallpine]

I'm still waiting for that "duh!" moment, when The People realize that the US Government as a whole, and all the political body that surrounds it, has become an occupation government, and that it does not represent their interests at all.

Yeah, I sometimes imagine these "opposing" politicians all having a drink together in some back room, and laughing and planning out the next big divisive public argument so that the voters still think they have a choice.

[TommyGunn]

I'm still waiting for that "duh!" moment, when The People realize that the US Government as a whole, and all the political body that surrounds it, has become an occupation government, and that it does not represent their interests at all.

You're gonna have a really loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooonnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnggg wait if the people Jesse Waters interviews on the O'Rielly Factor are a general indication of what the IQ of the general population has sunk to.  

[Perd Hapley]

I'm still waiting for that "duh!" moment, when The People realize that the US Government as a whole, and all the political body that surrounds it, has become an occupation government, and that it does not represent their interests at all.

What did people think "Occupy" was all about?

[TommyGunn]

What did people think "Occupy" was all about?

That was a bunch of "progressive/commie" agitators being shipped in to cause rouccus and mayhem and to poop on police cars and make life hard on city dwellers in general.

[Perd Hapley]

That was a bunch of "progressive/commie" agitators being shipped in to cause rouccus and mayhem and to poop on police cars and make life hard on city dwellers in general.

Sure. I just thought the name was very apropos, given that the Left has been an army of occupation here for the past few decades.

[Battle Monkey of Zardoz]

Yeah, I sometimes imagine these "opposing" politicians all having a drink together in some back room, and laughing and planning out the next big divisive public argument so that the voters still think they have a choice.

Good. I'm not the only one.

[TommyGunn]

Yeah, I sometimes imagine these "opposing" politicians all having a drink together in some back room, and laughing and planning out the next big divisive public argument so that the voters still think they have a choice.

That's what Tammany Hall was for....probably goes by another name these days.......

[SADShooter]

That's what Tammany Hall was for....probably goes by another name these days.......

It does. Inside the Beltway.

[lupinus]

Using funding and shutting down useless functions of the government would work a lot better if republican leadership actually grew a set of balls and didn't let the democrats completely run over them for it.

Stop being a bunch of pussies desperately trying to be liked, grow some *expletive deleted*ing balls, and do the damned job people elected you to do.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk