If the GOP wins the Senate..

[Peacetrain]

Last edited Sun Oct 26, 2014, 10:58 AM - Edit history (1)

They will be able to block every single Federal Appeals Court Judge nominee brought up by the President.

Just like 2010 was the nightmare of the GOP taking over the governorships that ended up redistricting states.. (We have to wait another 6 years.. to try and re-balance that)
this election is about Judges..

And that nightmare could be generational in how bad things could get and set back.

So for my fellow Democrats who are out calling and walking.. this is one to share with people who are saying that this election is not one they think is important.

We have been blessed with nice weather so far.. so hope it is that way for you also..

[MineralMan]

1. If that happens, we have failed to GOTV adequately.

It is that simple.

[Peacetrain]

3. I know that is the thing that worries me the most

[MineralMan]

5. Me too. There's still time, though.

GOTV 2014 and Beyond!

[Peacetrain]

6. Oh yes there is.. a week is a life time in politics

and the right is stumbling all over itself right now..

[MineralMan]

7. I'm confident that Al Franken will be back

for a second term. I've just about finished my precinct walking for this election. I know how my precinct will vote, and it will be strong for Franken and all of the other Democrats. I also know that turnout will be higher than in some other precincts in my city.

GOTV works! It has always worked. It is the one thing that people can do that has a measurable impact on results. It can be stronger than advertising paid for by PACs. It can overcome difficult odds. It just flat works.

It takes a lot of work, though, which is why it's employed less than it should be.

Again,

GOTV 2014 and Beyond!

[cali]

8. That's simply not true

many of the Senate races are in red states. The MSM has a marked tendency to slag off dems in a way they don't do with republicans. It's the 6the year of a democratic presidency and the history of elections in such is that the party holding the presidency loses in these elections. It's a fear driven election and republicans capitalize on that. They win when there is a lot free floating fear.

GOTV is important, but it's not the only thing or even necessarily decisive.

[MineralMan]

9. Cali, several Senate races are very, very close.

Those will be decided by who turns out and votes. I don't give a shit about locked up races in red states. I do give a shit about Kentucky, Alaska, Colorado, and other states where the margin is slim. In those states GOTV can make an enormous difference.

I'm not buying defeatism these days, thanks.

Like you, I live in a state where the Senate race isn't really in doubt. Even so, I'm doing GOTV here, and I hope plenty of people are doing the same in the states where the election is close.

Don't tell me that GOTV isn't worthwhile. I've seen it work too many times to listen to that nonsense. You do or don't do whatever the heck you want. I'll be here encouraging GOTV efforts right up to November 4. I doubt I'm talking to you at all.

You don't like me stressing GOTV? OK. I don't really care a bit about what you think of those efforts. If you're tired of seeing my GOTV posts, just put me on Ignore.

[madokie]

2. How much simpler can it get than exactly what you say here.

The implications of what would be is enormous and thats why each of us needs to get off our asses and go vote and take as many with us as we can muster up

[Peacetrain]

4. It is as simple as that madokie

Sometimes people have gotten themselves so tied up in knots about parties, and politicians, that they cannot see the forest for the trees as my Dad used to say.. and just getting them to sort it out a little seems to help.. to what really the election is about in the end

[madokie]

10. One of the most important things we do in our lives

and so many don't participate or let wedge issues determine their votes. God Guns Gays and Abortions are what pukilCONs use to win elections. sad but true.

[Doctor_J]

11. can't they block them all anyway?

The Repukes don't seem to need majorities to get their way.

[CK_John]

12. They are blocking all appointments now and they will probably win control the Senate.

We get the government we deserve.

[KingCharlemagne]

13. Would that really be such a bad thing? Seems to me giving the Republican

whackjobs control of both houses of Congress for two years is just what America needs to set the stage for a crushing Democratic landslide in 2016, the kind that President Obama needed in 2008 but didn't quite pull off.

Let that son of a bitch Cruz -- he who rails at Obama for allowing Ebola into the country while it was Cruz' OWN SHUTDOWN that stymied the NIH from developing an effective vaccine -- man the helm for a couple years and drive America back into the ditch.

Then watch the Dems put the Republicans into the dustbin of history once and for all in 2016 (when many more Republican Senate seats will be up for grabs to boot).

I guess what I'm asking is, really, how much more damage can these Republican shitheads do in two years that they haven't already done or tried to do?

[Peacetrain]

15. That is the same state of mind that got us 2010 and the redistricting

nightmare that will have radical house republicans in place for years to come.. Yes it is a very bad thing..

[KingCharlemagne]

22. Is it though? I don't recall hearing that sentiment being bruited in 2010. Instead, what I remember

Last edited Sun Oct 26, 2014, 02:25 PM - Edit history (1)

was Blue Dogs trying to out-Republican Republican whack jobs and getting smacked down for it when Dem voters in Blue Dog districts decided to stay home rather than support Republican-lite.

[demwing]

32. That's not history, it's revisionist miss-story. /nt

[MineralMan]

17. There is no overestimating the damage the GOP could do

in two years. There is no way that Republican control of both houses of Congress can be seen as a good thing. The idea that things would be so bad if the Republicans got control that the country would rise up and elect Democrats in a landslide is just plain bogus. It wouldn't happen. Instead, the Republicans would hold America hostage for two years. They'd pass bills that the President would have to veto. They'd shut down government, as they have tried to do in the past. They'd block all Presidential appointments, which they've been trying to do ever since Obama's election.

If you think there would be any benefit and no damage from Republican control, you couldn't be more wrong. I hope you never have to experience what could happen. I truly do.

Your idea is a short-sighted and dangerous one. Truly.

[KingCharlemagne]

20. Oh, make no mistake. I don't see it as a 'good thing'. Just not so much of a 'bad thing.' I hate and

despise Republicans with every ounce of my being and I want to see that party put into the dustbin of history where it has belonged since at least 1980, if not 1932. (I'm going to start a thread about that on GD here in a couple minutes, btw, so stay tuned.)

Assuming Republicans don't gain veto-proof majorities in both houses, all that the next two years will represent is more of an opportunity for them to demonstrate how utterly unsuited to governance of the modern nation-state they truly are.

If Republicans have control of both houses and put the country back into the ditch, only an incompetent Democratic candidate will fail to capitalize on it to stomp them into the ground in 2016 in the presidential and congressional races.

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one, although I'm open to being convinced. But my basic position right now is: short term pain brings long term (permanent) gain. Can you please show me the error in my logic, if indeed I am not thinking this through clearly?

[MineralMan]

23. Despite being handicapped by GOP control of the House,

Having a Democratic majority in the Senate has enabled the President in getting some progress made. I'm not going to present a long list of achievements of this administration in this reply, but much good has been done. Not enough, and not to the extent it should have, but good has been done. If both houses of Congress had been in GOP hands, the legislation sent to the President would have been far worse. If both houses were GOP dominated, we'd have had government shutdowns, not just the threat of them. We'd still have DADT in place, or worse. There are many things that would be far worse had we not had a majority in the Senate.

Take that away from any President and have him facing hostility from both houses of Congress and you have a recipe for disastrous budgets and other measures and total gridlock whenever Congress wanted gridlock.

[KingCharlemagne]

24. Yeah, I think you've got a point. I'm thinking it over, OK? Haven't changed my mind yet (or

finished composing that thread for GD) but I can see the logic in your position for sure. With Obama already being a lame duck, though, I see us as playing defense until 2016 anyway -- barring miraculous intervention by the Almighty -- and am trying to think beyond these mid-terms to the next major round.

That said, your position deserves total respect and cannot be dismissed outright.

[MineralMan]

25. Thanks for your consideration.

[KingCharlemagne]

26. I've just started a new thread on GD. I'd be honored to have your contributions there:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025717948

[Savannahmann]

14. Anyone who has had Civics in High School knows that the Republicans can already do that.

IT takes sixty votes to bring a measure to the floor, the Democrats have fifty five. This by the way is why we don't have a Surgeon General.

So even if we hold the Senate by one vote, that won't change. The best that can be accurately promised to the voters is two more years of gridlock. The House passes asinine restrictions on the ACA. The Senate dumps it into the nearest trashcan refusing to even consider the matter. The Senate passes some common sense legislation, and the House dumps it into the nearest trashcan refusing to even consider it.

That is where we are, and that is where we'll stay. If the Republicans win the Senate, then instead of Senator Reid dumping the thing into the trash can, President Obama will veto the abomination. That is if there are nine Democrats willing to bring it up for consideration. Probability on that is pretty slim wouldn't you say?

The worst thing the Republicans could actually do is fire up some hearings on the nonsense conspiracy things like IRS, Fast and Furious, and Benghazi. There really isn't any way to spin those to make the Democrats look bad, and the Republicans will look awful doing it, which means they probably have the subpoena list ready to go.

Since Harry Reid has been unwilling to exercise the Nuclear Option and bring the candidates to the floor for a vote then holding the Senate won't fill the vacancies any faster than it is being done.

The most we can promise is two more years of gridlock. That's going to happen no matter who controls the Senate as long as the House in in Republican Hands.

[Peacetrain]

18. So lets just throw our hands up in the air and give them more power yet??

How is that working for ya?? Not me...

[Savannahmann]

21. And Lying to the voters makes them loyal how?

People are already viewing the Republicans more favorably than they do Democrats.

So putting out nonsense as part of a doom and gloom get out and vote against that anyone who took Civics knows is bullshit will accomplish what exactly?

Well there are really only two options. Either the person putting out the claim looks like a blithering idiot who doesn't understand how our Government works. That doesn't really work to our advantage does it?

Option two. We look like pathological liars. I'm not sure how that works to our advantage either.

Oh, and blaming the Republicans for not confirming a Surgeon General and then in the very next breath you inhale to continue speaking saying that the Republicans winning would mean that Judges wouldn't get confirmed makes you look pretty bad wouldn't you agree?

So what can we do? We could have campaigned on issues, and perhaps campaigned on populist ideals, like legalizing Marijuana, reigning in the NSA, demilitarizing the police. All three of those issues have in excess of fifty percent support nationally. Did we run on any of those issues? No we did not. We handed them to the moron Rand Paul.

We could have run on strengthening the fourth amendment rights of the population, but we didn't.

We could have run on passing a law to require Federal Reviews for any police involved shooting. But we didn't.

We could have run on issues that the public wants, and would GOTV in massive numbers. Instead our plan was to pray that the Republicans made a "real rape" screw up. Instead they learned from the last election, and briefed their candidates on what not to say.

Now, running on lies at this late hour makes us look like ignorant morons or pathological liars. Why in the world would you want your party to look like that?

[Peacetrain]

27. It is my party..you are right.. and op was a support mechanisms for Democrats

and non Democrats are welcome to vote with us.. you can read our platform .. that is what we work for.. sometimes it is two steps forward and one step back.. we run on issues.. have no idea what you are referring to..


If you have specific issue you think is not being addressed, by all means join us.. go to your local gatherings, get on the state conventions..

If all you have is " you are no good so why should we try ".. can't help you..

[Savannahmann]

33. Pfui.

The OP was a call on people to lie in an effort to gin up support. It was nothing more, nor anything less than that.

We are nine days from the election, to try and make the election about something now, especially something blatantly untrue, is worse than useless. It drives supporters to the opposition. Because we can't deliver on the promise to fill vacancies in the various courts without a rule change that Senator Reid has already passed on.

Not delivering on promises is what has driven our supporters away in the first place.

You can't promise something if you win, and then sit on it and do nothing. You have to actually act on the promise. Making this about Federal Judges nine days away from voting time is too little too late. More than half of the ads the Democrats have run in every race from Governor through Senator to dog catcher has been about the War on Women. We played that song so often that there was little discussion of anything else. It is driving support from our side with the target audience, women.

Most voters don’t consider the so-called “war on women” a war at all but see it as just a political tactic. But women are less convinced than men that they share the same political interests.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 22% of Likely U.S. Voters believe there is really a political “war on women” going on. Fifty-nine percent (59%) say the “war on women” is primarily a slogan used for political purposes instead.

All that money, and every candidate in the nation running on it, and it has lowered our support among women in Texas, where it was supposed to play big. Worse, the phenomenon is now a national trend.

All the way back in February, I was talking about the upcoming election, and calling on the party to run on issues that rated high in surveys. In March I warned about democrats at a disadvantage, and said we needed to get serious and fight for the election. I was told not to worry, that the Republicans would certainly screw it up.

April, I posted again, that it was the economy according to polling that had consistently been the biggest issue. That was when everyone assumed that Citizens United would couple with the Government Shutdown to drive the Republicans out of office just short of being tarred and feathered.

April I called on the party to nationalize the elections, make the issues nationally important that affected the local areas. June I warned of falling poll numbers for Democrats.

Yes I sent many of these observations to politicians, and all I got in return was suggestions that i needed to donate to fight against the Republican war on women. Earlier it was suggestions that I had to donate to fight the Citizens United decision.

Now, with nine days left, you want to make it about confirming judges, and your suggestion is that we lie to the people. Because lies never come back to haunt you or something right? Ask the Latino population, oh wait, they're disgusted and planning on sitting the election out. I know, I can motivate them to go to the polls by talking about Judges because that's on the high point of their worry list.

The Judge issue is a distraction at best, and worse, it's one that we have to lie about in order to make it an issue. That's why I took issue with your OP, because it called on us to lie in an effort to get people to the polls. It would have been an obvious lie, and those are the ones that drive support away. We've already lost the war on women issue, because we over played it. We lost support of women is the worst part.

Here is an idea, try telling the truth. Tell them that without the Senate as a filter, the President will have little choice but to veto the budget in order to protect spending on social services like Medicare, Healthcare, and education.

But for the love of God, don't go out and start lying to people because all you do then is drive support away. We're already losing the senate, let's try to keep it from being a landslide.

[Peacetrain]

35. VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE Democratic!

[tritsofme]

38. Um...you may want to enroll in one of those Civics Classes. Reid went nuclear last year.

The filibuster was eliminated for all nominees except the Supreme Court, cloture can be invoked with 50+1 votes. We don't have a Surgeon General because of those 55 Democrats, there are not 50 that wanted to vote on the nomination prior to the elections.

In the year since Reid implemented the nuclear option, we have made considerable progress on judicial vacancies. This will be ground to a halt in a GOP Senate, they are likely to shut down all nominees, even potentially the Supreme Court.

Pretty big error for someone lecturing others about taking "civics classes"

[dumbcat]

39. But the rules have changed since your high school

civics class.

"IT takes sixty votes to bring a measure to the floor, the Democrats have fifty five. This by the way is why we don't have a Surgeon General. "

Harry Reid and the Dem majority in the Senate changed the rules for confirming many appointments. They only need a majority to confirm the Surgeon General. Reid doesn't have 51 Dem votes so won't bring it to a vote. The NRA has gotten to some of the rural Dems.

Use today[edit]
Typically, a congressional hearing is held to question an appointee prior to a committee vote. If the nominee is approved by the relevant committee, the full Senate must then approve the nomination. The actual motion adopted by the Senate when exercising the power is "to advise and consent" .[5][6] For appointments, a majority of Senators present are needed to pass a motion "to advise and consent". A filibuster requiring a three-fifths vote to override, and other similar delaying tactics have been used to require higher vote tallies in the past. On November 21, 2013, the Democratic Party, led by Majority Leader Harry Reid overrode the filibuster of a nomination with a simple majority vote to change the rules.[7]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advice_and_consent

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/15/us/senate-balks-at-obama-pick-for-surgeon-general.html

ETA: Damn, that's what I get for typing slow and doing other things while posting. Missed the previous post. So this is a dupe but I'll leave it for the links.

[world wide wally]

16. It doesn't seem to matter how badly Republicans screw this country because when election time

rolls around, theDemocrats never even bring it up. I haven't heard one word about how they shut down the country, filibustered more times than in all our previous history combined, including veterans benefits, the appointment of a Surgeon General, raising minimum wage, the jobs act and on and on and on.......

How much ammo do Dems need before they actually start using some?

[Peacetrain]

19. Well when those of us who walk the blocks

this is something that can help people focus...

[KeepItReal]

28. This "Democratic" Senate is sitting on 200+ unfilled nominations TODAY

http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/nominations-and-appointments

I'm just sayin...

[Peacetrain]

29. more the reason for us as Democrats to GOTV

and do what we can to inform the public

[KeepItReal]

34. Voting is key. But Sen. Harry Reid is THE WORST.

We need Sen. Elizabeth Warren as Senate Majority Leader.

[demwing]

30. So leave the seats unfilled

better that than a compromise of values

[KingCharlemagne]

31. Recommending for the great discussion you have inspired. Serious hat tip! - nt

[Andy823]

36. K&R nt

[tritsofme]

37. If we lose the Senate, the AG nominee should wait, and Reid should spend the entire lame duck

confirming any and all outstanding appellate court nominees. Fund the government and confirm these nominees, it would be the last opportunity for Obama to shape the courts.