Politics and Money

[fuagf]

wall, on your "but ok. Let's go back to the beginning. At the start of Obama'a
presidency, he had the votes to get almost anything he wanted passed." ..

YES, you have been reminded of the situation in the Senate, by Steph .. anyway here is
more detail in the open again .. it's a repeat, hope that's ok .. repeat post starts here ..
................
on the myth of 2 year liberal control of the House ..

fuagf .. Friday, September 09, 2011 12:33:21 AM .. to Imcat ..

Even if you generously put all of the swing state Democrats into the “progressive” group, and that’s stretching it when it comes to certain votes, that put the president at minus 18 reliable “progressive” votes in the Senate.

And because Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell made it clear from the start that he
intended to have his caucus use the filibuster on every piece of legislation, and vote as a
bloc, forcing Democrats to always need 60 votes to pass anything, those numbers really matter.

At best Obama was 16-18 progressive votes short on every measure. The Democratic
majority of 58 Dems and 2 Independents in the Senate lasted for exactly 5 months in 2009.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=67107137

wall, it is important as your .. "but ok. Let's go back to the beginning. At the start of Obama'a presidency, he had the votes to get almost anything he wanted passed." .. i'm really sorry to say just wasn't the fact of the matter back then.