Jump to content

Still serving at 87, Dianne Feinstein brushes off calls to resign over memory issues: The official thread of what year is it where am I who are you who am I?

Jason

By Jason
in The Political Re-Education Camp

 Share

Recommended Posts

legend

legend

Posted
Posted

The article suggests that if she steps down, Dems lose control of the Senate, but (1) don't they still maintain it by the VP breaking the tie? And (2) how long would it actually take to get a new Senator appointed by the Governor? Newsom is a democrat, so presumably he would appoint a democrat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
b_m_b_m_b_m

b_m_b_m_b_m

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, legend said:

The article suggests that if she steps down, Dems lose control of the Senate, but (1) don't they still maintain it by the VP breaking the tie? And (2) how long would it actually take to get a new Senator appointed by the Governor? Newsom is a democrat, so presumably he would appoint a democrat.

Republicans would have 50-49 control so control of the chamber would flip for a few days/weeks until her successor is sworn in

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jason

Jason

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

Republicans would have 50-49 control so control of the chamber would flip for a few days/weeks until her successor is sworn in

 

You'd think they could arrange to have Newsom's appointment in Washington ready to get sworn in the moment she steps down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
legend

legend

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

Republicans would have 50-49 control so control of the chamber would flip for a few days/weeks until her successor is sworn in

 

Well now I'm a bit confused. My understanding is in Georgia we only need one of the senators to flip blue to make Chuck majority leader by making a tie that the VP broke. But we got both, which should have given us a lead.  So what part of the calculus was wrong or what made it special?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
b_m_b_m_b_m

b_m_b_m_b_m

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, legend said:

 

Well now I'm a bit confused. My understand is in Georgia we only need one of the senators to flip blue to make Chuck majority leader by making a tie that the VP broke. If we're currently at 50-50, how would that have worked?

Vp can only break ties, she is not a vote in an of herself. That means the gop can have a straight up majority and harris can't do squat about it unless there's an abstention

Link to comment
Share on other sites
legend

legend

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

Vp can only break ties, she is not a vote in an of herself. That means the gop can have a straight up majority and harris can't do squat about it unless there's an abstention

 

But I mean why was it enough to only flip one of the Georgia senators to change majority leader? That is what I kept reading, but if what you're saying is true, then it seems like we would have needed to flip both (which we did of course, but that didn't seem to be what I was reading).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Joe

Joe

Posted
Posted
Just now, legend said:

 

But I mean why was it enough to only flip one of the Georgia senators to change majority leader? That is what I kept reading, but if what you're saying is true, then it seems like we would have needed to flip both (which we did of course, but that didn't seem to be what I was reading).

 

You read wrong. We always needed two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ThreePi

ThreePi

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, legend said:

 

Alright then. I feel like finding those previous sources and shaking my fist at them then :p 

 

Those old sources might have been operating under the assumption that there was no way a deeply unpopular Susan Collins would get reelected.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
legend

legend

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, ThreePi said:

 

Those old sources might have been operating under the assumption that there was no way a deeply unpopular Susan Collins would get reelected.

 

Haha maybe. It's already been a million years political time, so it will be hard to find where I read it. I'd be curious to see what their reasoning was though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
Chairslinger

Chairslinger

Posted
Posted

Apparently Feinstein is the latest moderate Dem to come out and back the idea of some kind of filibuster reform after previously saying no way.

 

And it keeps making me think of an Onion headline something like.....

 

 

 

"In a boost to progressive moves to reform filibuster longtime opponent Dianne Feinstein forgets she opposes filibuster reform."

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
Jason

Jason

Posted
  • Author
Posted
5 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

 

 

 

When I saw this bumped it occurred to me that there's a real risk we have a Republican governor in place when she dies. The recall is two questions on the same ballot. One is if Newsom should be recalled and then on the same ballot you pick who you want if he does get recalled. There's no runoff, whoever gets the most votes wins, even if that means the vote is split a bunch of ways and the single biggest vote count is only 30% or whatever of the votes. 

  • Guillotine 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
b_m_b_m_b_m

b_m_b_m_b_m

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Jason said:

 

When I saw this bumped it occurred to me that there's a real risk we have a Republican governor in place when she dies. The recall is two questions on the same ballot. One is if Newsom should be recalled and then on the same ballot you pick who you want if he does get recalled. There's no runoff, whoever gets the most votes wins, even if that means the vote is split a bunch of ways and the single biggest vote count is only 30% or whatever of the votes. 

California is such a dumb state. Too much nice weather has terminally rotted brains

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jason

Jason

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

California is such a dumb state. Too much nice weather has terminally rotted brains

 

Oh I forgot to include the part where if the first question goes through Newsom isn't one of the choices on the second question. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...