Gregg pulls out of nomination - NOT ENOUGH TAX CUTS (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 16, 2024, 12:46:49 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Gregg pulls out of nomination - NOT ENOUGH TAX CUTS (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Gregg pulls out of nomination - NOT ENOUGH TAX CUTS  (Read 15019 times)
justfollowingtheelections
unempprof
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,766
« on: January 30, 2009, 12:33:00 AM »
I have to agree that getting a filibuster-proof majority really isn't that big of a deal.  Gregg most of the time would vote like a Democrat anyway.
Logged
justfollowingtheelections
unempprof
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,766
« Reply #1 on: January 30, 2009, 02:05:52 PM »
lol it sounds like a done deal.
Logged
justfollowingtheelections
unempprof
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,766
« Reply #2 on: January 30, 2009, 04:38:32 PM »
« Edited: January 30, 2009, 04:40:06 PM by unempprof »
There have been reports about Obama courting Snowe and Collins since the day after he was elected, but they both claimed they were not interested.  I guess Gregg was next in line.


BTW according to reports it's almost a certainty that Lynch will appoint a Democrat in his place.
Logged
justfollowingtheelections
unempprof
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,766
« Reply #3 on: January 31, 2009, 12:09:44 AM »
Quote from: © Warren Buffett buys groceries on January 30, 2009, 11:56:19 PM
what's to say Gregg cares about that?  he isn't any sort of prospect for higher office and collecting a salary without having to fight for anything through early 2013 has to be appealing for anybody.  the Dems are odds-on favorites to have a supermajority come next midterms anyway with or without Gregg.  a veteran Senator like him can't enjoy being relegated to a small minority caucus, especially since he could well lose...

I will have to agree.  I don't think Gregg really cares about the filibuster-proof majority thing.
Logged
justfollowingtheelections
unempprof
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,766
« Reply #4 on: February 01, 2009, 10:56:14 AM »
If Republicans were in the same position Obama and Lynch are, they would have never made such a deal.
Logged
justfollowingtheelections
unempprof
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,766
« Reply #5 on: February 01, 2009, 11:19:50 AM »
Quote from: brittain33 on February 01, 2009, 11:13:45 AM
Quote from: TheresNoMoney on February 01, 2009, 11:04:37 AM
Quote from: unempprof on February 01, 2009, 10:56:14 AM
If Republicans were in the same position Obama and Lynch are, they would have never made such a deal.

True, although no Republican president would ever appoint a Democrat in the first place.

I love how Democrats are expected to be bi-partisan but Republicans are not.

John Breaux turned down the appointment to Sec. of Energy rather than be replaced by a Republican. There haven't been any other examples.

Really, I think both parties would behave the same way in this kind of situation.

That's our point.  He had to turn down the cabinet appointment because he would have been replaced by a republican.  The GOP would not make a deal to replace him with another member of his own party.
Logged
justfollowingtheelections
unempprof
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,766
« Reply #6 on: February 02, 2009, 10:16:39 PM »
Not a good idea if Gregg is replaced by a Republican.  Gregg votes like a Democrat so I would prefer that he stayed in the Senate, but I would like someone liberal in the Cabinet.
Logged
justfollowingtheelections
unempprof
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,766
« Reply #7 on: February 02, 2009, 10:27:53 PM »
That's why I said I would like someone liberal in the Cabinet (not Gregg).

CNN btw confirms that Bonnie Newman will be his replacement.
Logged
justfollowingtheelections
unempprof
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,766
« Reply #8 on: February 02, 2009, 10:47:05 PM »
No, but on most issues he votes like a Democrat.  Which is why I would prefer him in the Senate rather than in the Cabinet, especially since he will be replaced by another Republican.
Logged
justfollowingtheelections
unempprof
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,766
« Reply #9 on: February 02, 2009, 10:50:59 PM »
Quote from: ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ on February 02, 2009, 10:48:23 PM
Quote from: unempprof on February 02, 2009, 10:47:05 PM
No, but on most issues he votes like a Democrat.  Which is why I would prefer him in the Senate rather than in the Cabinet, especially since he will be replaced by another Republican.

What are "most issues"? Considering that 86% of Americans supported raising the minimum wage a couple of years ago, eliminating the minimum wage is a particularly extreme view.

So you want him to become Secretary of Commerce?  Because that's what I'm arguing against, something you obviously cannot understand.
Logged
justfollowingtheelections
unempprof
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,766
« Reply #10 on: February 02, 2009, 10:55:48 PM »
Well he will be around for 4 more years and not only that, he also got to choose his replacement (she's supposedly a RINO, but she was a Reagan/Bush staffer).
Logged
justfollowingtheelections
unempprof
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,766
« Reply #11 on: February 02, 2009, 11:03:56 PM »
Why are you so aggressive?  I don't feel very comfortable either with a Reagan/Bush staffer.
You seem to have a hard time understanding my messages.
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 0.025 seconds with 12 queries.