Tuesday, September 30, 2008

Democrats Fail, Yet Again

The bail out bill has been voted down in the Congress. Yes, that's right. The Democratic Party which has majorities in both the Senate and the Congress was done over because it couldn't persuade enough OF ITS OWN MEMBERS to vote for their measure.

Here's the roll call.


AyesNoesPRESNV
Democratic14095

Republican65133
1
Independent



TOTALS205228
1

This is the party that has talked big but failed to deliver on ANY of it's big noted promises since it gained control. Remember how they were going to cut off funding for the troops in Iraq?

12 comments:

Ackers said...

Do you think it's a good or a bad thing that the bill has failed Adolf?

McCain and Obama both supported it. Were they wrong to do so?

Clearly the majority of voters are opposed to it. It's toxic for either party to be seen as the one carrying the can on this.

A fascinating dilemma don't you think and one McCain could potentially exploit to rescue his tanking campaign.

Spam said...

I think its refreshing to see that members are actually allowed to vote based on THEIR views, rather than towing the party line.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Where is Obama? Nowhere to be seen. He's voting 'present' again. Not a good look for your man, Ackers.

Yes Ackers, I think it is a good thing or more precisely, the better of two not so good things.

The original Democrat proposal contained some $150 bil 'pork' expenditure which the Rebublicans stripped out but the fact remains the Dems should have got it through when they had 65 Republicans voting yes.

Barnsley Bill said...

The republicans voted this down due to the vitriolic and hate filled speech that Pelosi gave pouring shit all over bush blaming him for the crisis.
if she had put politics to one side this would not have happened.
I have just watched her speak in a press conference where she looked contrite and her comments were much more conciliatory.
Wall street has dropped 6% so far.

Anonymous said...

McCain didn't support that bill.

Obama did.

McCain and the republicans understand economics.

Obama doesn't.

Anonymous said...

Anon this isn't economics, it's a worldwide crisis that economics alone won't solve.

Gooner

Cicero said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Cicero said...

Pelosi has now got a lot of egg all over her face.

Anonymous said...

I may be a little dim, but if the GOP had voted in favour of the bill, the thing would have passed. And don't the figures show that more Republicans voted against it than Democrats? How is the Dems problem that the Republicans couldn't get their act together?

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Yes anon. You are a little dim.

Ackers said...

Adolf and I can agree! Dim is the word. Just in case you missed it annonymous McCain backed the bill.

"What Senator McCain was able to do was to help bring all of the parties to the table, including the House Republicans, whose votes were needed to pass this," McCain senior Steve Schmidt said on Meet the Press yesterday."

"We're optimistic that Senator McCain will bring House Republicans on board without driving other parties away, resulting in a successful deal for the American taxpayer," McCain spokeswoman Kimmie Lipscomb said a few days ago."

Politically he needed this to pass more than Obama did having invested so much capital with his campaign suspension stunt.

Intrade is really looking ugly for McCain 61.8 - 38.0
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

But too early to predict where this is going to end up.

Anonymous said...

Adolf I dont understand your logic

Lets firstly assume that the passing of this bill is overall desirable.

I think it is reasonable to assume that every single no vote is equally responcible for the failure of the bill, each is only counted once and therefore no more or less important then any other vote.

The Dems had 95 no votes and the Reps had 133.

Therefore blame for the failure of the Bill should be spread in ratios. By this logic the Reps are more to blame by a ratio of 133:95.