Yes, the Republicans were unanimous in approving DeVos. When it came up to the floor vote, two voted “no”… but those two both had an earlier opportunity to block DeVos in committee, and both voted “yes” then.
That’s a novel interpretation of Senate voting. So, any Democrat who doesn’t block Gorsuch in committee will have voted for him even he/she votes against him in the full session? Seems like it would be better to just admit a minor error. It’s of no import, really.
Seriously, there can be legitimate reasons for thinking a candidate deserves an up or down vote in the full Senate even if you don’t support that person yourself.
Sorry, mixed it up with the vote for that bigot Sessions.
So Trump hangs himself. Why should the voters then flock to democrats who supported him if they feel more at home with republicans who supported him or fresh new independents who don’t have to answer “Well, I didn’t vote against him, but it wouldn’t have mattered if I did.” to the question “Why did you support Donald Trump?”
Right. Senators often vote to move legislation (and confirmations) to the next level, i.e., voting something out of committee, voting yes on a cloture motion, etc., and then vote no on final passage/confirmation.
When the Democrats unanimously oppose Trump, they force the Republicans to unanimously support him and bind his millstone to their own necks. While millstones might float in some parts of the country, they will be a heavy burden in others.
The isolationist, racist base will always support Trump, but those who favored him for jobs and a better living will not be forgiving of his administration’s incompetence and corruption. Voting the current rascals out of office has always been a powerful force in America politics. Thus the pendulum of American politics swings ever faster.
The elected Democrats are being pressured by their supporters to do something about Republican control of both houses of the U.S. Congress, and Republican control of the WH.
The only tactics left to the elected Democrats is to A) drag their feet as much as possible, or 2) call in sick and prevent a quorum. Is that enough to prevent the elected Democrat’s constituents from replacing Senator Old and Busted with Senator New Hotness?
This. Strategery is nice and all, but the left’s problem is, they aren’t sociopaths who can throw everyone else under the bus for the sake of political strategy.
So they lose.
If Democrats are going to go along with really awful Republican decisions, why would I ever bother voting for a Democrat in the future? I’m already tempted to vote for third parties on principle even when I don’t think they can win, if Democrats aren’t going to do anything useful then in practice voting for a third party who doesn’t win has the exact same effect, has the small chance that they’ll actually win and be able to do something useful, and makes me feel better overall. It then becomes both a principle and practical win. Making yourself no more effective than the guy who didn’t even get a position in government is not a good strategy.
This. I want the Dems to check GOP/Trumpian stupidity and malice as it happens, to the maximum extent possible, rather than letting people’s lives be ruined just so that the Dems can win big in the next election.
First we do what we can to limit the bad shit that Trump and the GOP may cause in people’s lives. Later we worry about the next election.
Two Republicans crossed the aisle: Senators Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski.
Yes. And it’s the thing the Progressives are most up in arm about, which is a huge mistake.
Voters, mostly, dont care about illegal aliens, and they are scared of terrorism.
These are issues where Trump is leading the charge and where he does have most Americans behind him.
These are NOT the issues where we should fight him.
We need to fight him on issues where the American public doesnt support him, Like putting Big Bankers in his cabinet or DeVos.
As has already been pointed out several times, and apologized for.
What’s all this “blocking Trump” that you’re complaining about?
The Democrats can’t block Trump, he’s got a Republican house and a Republican Senate. Democrats unanimously voting against each and every Trump appointment and proposal won’t block shit.
There is no blocking Trump. Making speeches about how horrible his proposals are doesn’t block those proposals. Are you saying Democrats should shut about about how horrible they are, and just vote against them? Or that they should vote for them, after all the President wanted it, and the job of congress is to vote however the President wants?
The OP is incoherent. The Democrats aren’t blocking Trump, and can’t block Trump. So where does that put us? What exactly are the Democrats doing that you think they shouldn’t be doing?
You are mostly wrong on this.
Please read post #19
Stakes: Bragging rights on the SDMB–yooj right there!
Plus the loser always has to start any future post in any thread where we disagree: “You’ll need to check with CP/Okrahoma, but…” 
I think Trump will likely end badly by doing something that costs him his own base, and his exit will be a huffy one where he claims victory (duh) and that the job is complete enough to turn over the great team he’s put in place while he goes back to tending his brand.
Aside from having the emotional maturity of a 7th-grader, I think Mr. Trump will get bored with the job and tired of his phyllo-thin skin being abraded. In addition, his support spokespersons like Conway and Spicer appear to have the IQ of turnips…the likelihood is that they will only fuel whatever conflagration he has set off.
Mr Trump is going to do/say something spectacularly unfixable, and have mental midgets doing his damage control. LOL
Chill, Liberals. He’s gonna autodelete himself. Don’t even waste your attention on him, much less vest any effort in outrage.
I’m seeing this too. If you look at his dais speeches they are more tentative and I guess “grasping” might be the word. It’s like he had a little stroke.
He has overachieved by keeping it together for a couple of years as a campaigner for president who has no expertise or knowledge. I am really impressed by this actually, for a man of 70. I don’t think I would be able to do it. The fact that he never just ran the fuck out of words and said “where was I?” and had to leave the stage is really amazing.
But he is on numbered days as an actual leader. He just isn’t one. He just told Putin that he didn’t know what START was. Like he never even went through the stage where he asked fucking Bannon what it was! Do not pass go…
Here’s what voters care about, Gb:
Secretary of Education: 2 pts
Ivanka and Nordstrom: 2 pts
Right to Immigrate here: 2 pts
My job and US security: 94 pts
Some pollster: 0 pts
For anti Trumpers, the most dangerous event is a national terror incident. The most disconcerting non-terror-based development is an improved perception that US-based jobs are more lovingly cared for under Mr Trump.
And of course that only works by not reading the post.
The most important bit to me is that while most people are indeed worried and scared, they are indeed not amused by the executive order, most Americans ***still with all that fear ***do realize that vetted refugees, vetted visa holders, green card holders and Muslims that risked their lives to support American troops in those failed Muslim nations should be allowed to come in.
No, one poll contradicts another:
Its all in how the question is worded.