DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - 2008 Presidential Election

**warrgazur** · 11-06-2008, 08:38 PM

Because Senate politics is practical, not idealogical - its about getting your bill passed - not loyalty to the leadership.

I understand how government works.

1. There are two Independent Senators that now caucus with the Democratic Party, The other is Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

2. Some of the seats that were picked up this cycle, and several incumbent Democratic senators can be described as moderate-conservatives. If you're not getting bi-partisan support on a particular bill, don't assume your going to get unanimous support from Democratic members.

3. My desire to see Lieberman stripped of his Homeland Security Committee chairmanship has nothing to do with party loyalty. His support and campaigning for McCain was accepted by most in Congress; he was only asked not to speak at the RNC convention. He not only did so, but with relish, ripping at Obama. I guess at the time it looked like Sarah was going to get him a cabinet post. Now he's heaping praise on Obama. No character.

I generally support Israel, but Lieberman's fixation is an embarrassment.

He isn't worth the senate vote.

4. John McCain is still a Republican Senator. What are the chances that he's going to toe the Republican line? The same can be said for other Republican senators, especially those in states showing a demographic shift.

The Bush era is over, the McCain campaign is history... why dwell on it? It seems to me that you're dwelling on it, assuming the partisan divisiveness of the Bush era will continue in the next Congress.

Because Senate politics is practical, not idealogical - its about getting your bill passed - Actually, that better describes House politics.

11-06-2008, 08:38 PM	#18
warrgazur Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 586 Senior Member	Because Senate politics is practical, not idealogical - its about getting your bill passed - not loyalty to the leadership. I understand how government works. 1. There are two Independent Senators that now caucus with the Democratic Party, The other is Bernie Sanders of Vermont. 2. Some of the seats that were picked up this cycle, and several incumbent Democratic senators can be described as moderate-conservatives. If you're not getting bi-partisan support on a particular bill, don't assume your going to get unanimous support from Democratic members. 3. My desire to see Lieberman stripped of his Homeland Security Committee chairmanship has nothing to do with party loyalty. His support and campaigning for McCain was accepted by most in Congress; he was only asked not to speak at the RNC convention. He not only did so, but with relish, ripping at Obama. I guess at the time it looked like Sarah was going to get him a cabinet post. Now he's heaping praise on Obama. No character. I generally support Israel, but Lieberman's fixation is an embarrassment. He isn't worth the senate vote. 4. John McCain is still a Republican Senator. What are the chances that he's going to toe the Republican line? The same can be said for other Republican senators, especially those in states showing a demographic shift. The Bush era is over, the McCain campaign is history... why dwell on it? It seems to me that you're dwelling on it, assuming the partisan divisiveness of the Bush era will continue in the next Congress. Because Senate politics is practical, not idealogical - its about getting your bill passed - Actually, that better describes House politics.
	Quote