Republican Senate takeover = good for Hillary? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 27, 2024, 10:57:45 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Republican Senate takeover = good for Hillary? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Republican Senate takeover = good for Hillary?  (Read 1661 times)
Skill and Chance
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,680
« on: November 02, 2014, 04:04:20 PM »

2016 is a good year for the Dems to retake it back considering all the 2010 seats up for re-election.
True, true, but keep in mind that if Hillary has bad midterms like 2010, 2018 could see all of it undone and the GOP back in control. That really depends on how many seats flip in 2014 and 2016.


The trick for the GOP leadership from 2015 - 2017 is to
1.) block Obama's agenda and implement their own by putting through low-hanging fruit that Obama will cave to (ACA modifications, tax reform, Keystone XL, veteran's bill, etc.)
2.) control their Tea Party members (sacrifice the Ex-Im Bank, investigate a lot, beat up the EPA & Common Core)
3.) Give their 2016 candidate ammo ("Obama didn't want to compromise with us about stuff everyone supports!)" while not damaging them with embarrassing shenanigans (shutdowns, defaults, etc.)

Difficult, but not entirely impossible.

Someone seems to have forgotten that the filibuster is still in place when it comes to legislation.
McConnell could easily do away with it if he wanted. However, that won't be necessary just yet, because there are plenty of Blue Dog Democrats who want to be seen as moderate and centrist and are happy to vote with the GOP if Obama (who wants to still be seen as bipartisan) seems likely to sign something Congress passed.

Plenty of blue dogs? If the GOP takes the Senate, more likely than not Manchin and Donnelly will be the only ones left.
I don't think McConnell will eliminate the filibuster.  He probably knows that there is a chance that Hillary wins massively in 2016, with her coattails putting the House and Senate back in Democratic control, if only for 2 years.

So the question is this:  Are two years of getting vetoed by president Obama worth the risk of having 2 years of an unchecked Democratic control of the government?

It wouldn't make any sense to do it next year.  On the other hand, if the GOP wins everything in 2016, it would make a lot of sense for McConnell to kill the legislative filibuster in Jan 2017.  Between the 2018 senate map and the house districts, they would be virtually guaranteed full federal control until 2021.  So if he can just persuade his colleagues to save the legislative weirdness for 2017 when it can pass, he's golden.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.027 seconds with 13 queries.