Yesterday no longer exists.... tomorrow and the next two years will be very interesting......

After seeing how the republicans royally screwed up things, I firmly believe that no one party should control congress and the White House. A divided government means compromise and checks and balances.

Long live divided government!

Now if we could only get a substantial third party, that would be super.

Originally Posted by WarMachine

Long live divided government!

Now if we could only get a substantial third party, that would be super.

It will only be short lived. Two years.

I hope the GOP learns from this and corrects this grand mistake and take back the House and Senate and keep the White House.

All I know now is that the Dems will truly make it a living hell for pro 2nd Amendment folks and also the ideas of national defense and self defense are a thing of the past.

GW can Veto bills but still, after the veto the Senate can still pass a bill with a majority vote.

Originally Posted by 5.56X45mm

I hope the GOP learns from this and corrects this grand mistake and take back the House and Senate and keep the White House.

All I know now is that the Dems will truly make it a living hell for pro 2nd Amendment folks and also the ideas of national defense and self defense are a thing of the past.

GW can Veto bills but still, after the veto the Senate can still pass a bill with a majority vote.

If I remember correctly it has to be more of a 2/3 to 1/3 vote to overturn a veto. At 49-49-2 that seems unlikely.



Override (a veto)

Congressional enactment of a measure over the president's veto. A veto override requires a recorded two-thirds vote of those voting in each house.

http://clerkkids.house.gov/glossary/...erride+(a+veto)

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

And you can bet your asses that if the vote passes enough to get to the president, it will probably get passed w/o him.

Amazing, the Democrats managed to force a split in the Senate (49-49-2) and take the house despite not having a platform to stand on and calling all the troops idiots.

Can't wait for 2008 though! McCain/Whoever vs. Stewart/Colbert. It will be a record high turnout at 78%, Stewart/Colbert will win the 18-25 year old demographic, McCain/Whoever will win every other group and 77% of the states, and Hillary Clinton will come clean about her sex change operation seven years ago with the following statement: "I wear the pants in this household."

Unlike Australia, Britain and probably Canada, it seems to me that in the US Congress, party affiliation is not so steadfast. Thus on many votes, Democrats and Republicans "swap" sides. US Congressmen and Senators seem more independent. However they tend to be, it seems, either 'liberal' or 'conservative.'

Now my question is: if you add up the conservative Rep's and Dem's versus the liberal Dem's and Rep's, who is out in front?

For example, conservative Republican senator R. Santorum (Penn) was beated by his Democratic challenger (Casey). But Casey is conservative (eg. anti-gay marriage, pro-life). I've read that the Dems fielded "religious" and or "conservative" or "conservate leaning" candidates in order to counter the Reps love-in with the Religious Right. So even thought the Dems have won control of the House and maybe the Senate, are there a lot more Democrats in the Congress who on social or ethical issues would side with conservative Republicans?

I think it is leaning towards conservatives right now, it's why I've tried to avoid saying the liberals took the House, I have noticed that quite a few of these Democrats have rather strong conservative tendancies.

I don't think party lines are big of a deal in America as they are elsewhere, the Prime Minister in the UK and several other parliamentary systems is chosen by Parliament, is it not?