Does our 51 (D)'s count Lieberman in the total?

[Little Star]

I know, I'm dumb!!

[whistle]

1. No

[w4rma]

36. Yes. 50 D's btw. +1 independent (Sanders) who caucuses (a vote for Reid) with Dems.

Lieberman is a Democrat because he calls himself one.

[Webster Green]

2. Yes

[louis c]

40. The Dems have the advantage because Lieberman

was a Dem before the primary. his 18 years seniority counts as a Dem, it wouldn't count as a Repuke.

Joe is for Joe, and his best bet is with Dems.

I wish we has one more Dem so he wouldn't be needed, but alas, we have do what we have to do. After all, there are bigger fish to fry.

[Mass]

3. Yes. It counts Lieberman and Sanders.

Total is :
Dem : 49
Rep: 49
Ind 2.

[AlCzervik]

4. yes, lieberman will stay with democrats, he's getting the chairmanship of the

homeland security comm. the gop has nothing to offer to him. horse trading.

[Hosnon]

5. Haha...I see we have a disagreement here. I vote Yes. nt

[wryter2000]

6. A-yep

It also includes Bernie Sanders.

[WI_DEM]

7. Yes, we have 49 (D) and 2 (I) who will caucus with Dems--Sanders

and Lieberman.

[treestar]

8. It does, though I'm not sure why

Shouldn't it read 49 Democrats, 49 Republicans, 1 Socialist and 1 Independent?

[AlCzervik]

9. they both caucus with the democrats, Jeffords was an (I) but counted as a dem

for the same reason.

[Ignacio Upton]

17. Sanders is an ex-Socialist

I don't think he has officially called himself one since the '80s.

[cali]

35. Wrong.

Bernie absolutely and unabashedly calls himself a socialist. I know. I live here.

[TheWraith]

28. There's no nationwide Socialist party in the US.

Without such a party offering an endorsement, Sanders--like any official not elected on a party ticket--is officially an Independent.

[still_one]

10. Yes, and it means WE SET THE AGENDA

and that is EVERYTHING

[featherman]

11. The "majority" means who caucuses with who and elects the Majority Leader

and the chairs for the committees. Technically, anyone from either party can "caucus" with the other to create a majority but it nearly always breaks along party lines. In this case to two INDs will caucus with the DEMS.

[longship]

12. This is the precisely correct response.

Read post #11.

:kick:

[treestar]

14. That was the reason for the posts yesterday worrying about

Lieberman declaring he was a Republican suddenly? How certain is Lieberman - it is ultimately up to him, right?

[TheWraith]

29. Yes, although he's said repeatedly he's caucusing with the Dems.

Most recently, he just said it yesterday, I believe. In fact, there's been speculation that he'll seek full admission to the caucus so as to be D-CT instead of I-CT.

[kansasblue]

13. yes

[AIJ Alom]

15. Yes and you're not dumb. It's good to ask questions instead of

invading countries without just cause based on faulty intel and make up lies to make it happen. Dumb is the lame duck currently occupying the White House, you my dear are inquisitive.

Joe Lieberman (I-CT) wants to maintain his seniority and get chairmanships so he has decided to caucus with the Democrats.

[Little Star]

16. Soooooo

P*ick Cheney can't break a tie?

[AIJ Alom]

18. Nope he cannot. That is unless of course, Joe Lieberman

doesn't switch sides.

[Little Star]

41. Good! Thanks for answering. n/t

[GreenTea]

19. I wouldn't count on Lieberman or ex republican Webb on any liberal issues

when the Dems need their vote....I'm sure there are a few others conservative Dem senators you can think of as well...

[fujiyama]

20. I'm not as worried about Webb

but Lieberman is a pain in the ass.

Even more frustrating are southern senators like Landriu and Pryor.

Worst of all is Nelson of NE, who seemingly voted more often with republicans than Democrats.

Hopefully things will be much different since Dems will control the agenda and have the power to bring what they want to the senate floor.

[GreenTea]

21. The Nelson twins can't be counted on...(Nelson of FL) ...either

[liberaldemocrat7]

26. Max Baucus too. He voted for that crap prescription drug law that doesn't help the middle class.

Max Baucus voted for the crap prescription drug law.

The Republicans dragged in about 20 million poor low income people who already had full medication coverage from Medicaid to make it look like millions of people signed up voluntarily and will get full benefits, when actually they shanghaied them, to hide the fact that middle class people who did not have medication coverage yet and would only get 20 percent coverage, that this benefit would not appear popular.

When people griped about only getting 20 percent back after spending thousands of dollars when they did the math, the Republicans lied and said millions of people would get full coverage, and what are you talking about, in order to cover this up. Diane Feinstein also voted for this travesty, and Lincoln Chafee voted for it in committee to get it out of committee and then got to vote AGAINST it on the senate floor so he could go home and play moderate.


George W Bush and the Republican party, your empire has turned back to Sand!

[TheWraith]

30. Look at it the other way.

Sure, on some issues we'll lose people like Nelson and Landrieu, probably before we lose Lieberman. But we'll also be pulling over people like Snowe, Collins, Hagel, etcetera from the Republican side--moderates who see which way the wind is blowing and don't want to be garotted in the next election because of the R after their names.

[sandnsea]

22. Which liberal issues?

I can't think of any liberal issues that are set to be voted on. They both ran against things like the wiretapping law and Patriot Act, IIRC, so those shouldn't be a problem. They're both for ending the war. They both oppose a constitutional amendment against gay marriage. I don't see much of a problem with them.

[GreenTea]

24. Abortion, more spending on social programs, curbing corporations

money making in favor of the environment, taxing the rich, more corporate regulations, medical pot, free health care for every American...shit, I can go on ALL night there's a ton of issues!

[sandnsea]

25. Tester ran on most of that

He's an organic farmer, elementary music teacher who is head of the Senate in MT. Montana was the first state to require insurance to pay drug and alcohol treatment. They've had year long drug programs as an alternative to prison since the 80's. They just implemented a completely different prison system, separating various criminals and providing treatment and counseling instead of just time. Tester and Webb are both more libertarian and believe govenment ends at the front door. I think you're going to be quite surprised at how often they support good legislation, provided Greens don't actively look for something to criticize as Greens tend to do.

And NOBODY is supporting FREE health care. Doctors and nurses and support staff have to be paid, medicine costs money to produce, hospitals and clinics require maintenance - it has to be paid for. Nothing is FREE in this world.

[GreenTea]

27. Fuck Libeterians! Just republicans in different clothing...You think it's going to be

just one happy Dem senate 51 votes on every issue don't you?...Tester was never mentioned here so strike that paragraph....The government pays for health care for tens of millions already...so get the rest of the 45 million uninsured paid for with the rich & corporations tax dollars, stop corporate welfare, ...this is liberalism my friend...Not the moderate (Man, do I despise fence-sitting fucking moderates which-ever-way the wind blows, undecided, will vote for a republican) Libertarians, they are the same piece of shit in my book....No taxes everyone to fend for themselves...and you have no foresight of any liberal issues that will need to be addressed...what about medical pot, and regulations put back on corporations, ex Reuke, Webb worked under Reagan...who started all the corporate deregulation...

Edit: someone just wrote "Max Baucus too. He voted for that crap prescription drug law" There are so many liberal issues and there are some very conservative, corporation campaign supported democrats, who owe corporations favors...

[sandnsea]

31. Whine whine whine

:puke:

Greens will never be happy. Takes all kinds, I guess bitching is just the Greens' role on the planet.

I never said it was going to be a happy Dem senate that voted alike on everything, it isn't going to be. I said I think most people will be pleasantly surprised at the new Senators, partly because social Libertarians will vote against social intrusion based on the intrusion aspect alone. Mix that with economic populism, and you've got as close to liberal as you're going to get out of the mountain states. But if you want to stew in your green tea and never see the bright side of the world at all, be my guest.

[GreenTea]

32. Voluntarily Blind is no way to go through life dude!

You really believe this shit that ALL Dem senators like the two Nelsons, Lieberman, Webb, Backus, etc. etc. all have the same liberalism as say, a Barbara Boxer.

Secondly, I gave you five or six LIBERAL issues that absolutely will get different points of view and no way will all Dems see eye to eye on & vote the same way on all liberal issues.

How about oil exploration & funding of massive alternative energy programs,which I think is needed, I'd like to see them... I'm a Dem, would you? Would ALL 51 senators agree, many will agree but all?

You want to stick your head in the sand - and you see it as being optimistic!

You and I both call ourselves Democrats, I've been on this forum for almost six years....and I can pick out all kinds...So if we are both Dems and we can't agree, why is so hard for you see to it works the same in the political arena?

You think I'm putting down the Dems get fucking real...I've never missed an election since I turned 18 and voted for McGovern and I've ONLY voted for Democratic candidates...I donate and work hard for them...You have this silly rose colored idealistic view...that all is going to be perfect and let's not even think of any thing other than good thoughts and ALL will be spiffy-keen!

Don't point your finger at me and call me a Green...I can call you something as well...but it not how one conducts an argument on DU...with name calling!

[sandnsea]

33. Post #24

You made a list of issues and I told you newly elected Democrats ran on most of those issues, including Lieberman. You don't want to believe it, I can't make you. You want funding of alternative fuels, and so do most Democrats I know of. But there's always someone who will come along and say ethanol doesn't work or we should really use nuclear or whatever. That person then rants against the entire Democratic Party and calls them whores or tutus. It goes around and around and around. And it is typically Greens that do it because they've never had to be responsible for consequences.

I didn't say every Democrat is the same as Barbara Boxer, but let's remember she voted for the Patriot Act and Webb and Tester oppose it.

[GreenTea]

34. My point was simple...

There will be many - liberal, very liberal and extremely liberal issues that BushCo has destroyed, (myself, being extremely liberal) that will have to be dealt with...I believe and many Dem senators agree with me with this liberal issue, that the death penalty should be abolished...Do you think that issue will get all 51 votes, voting to abolish it, of course not...so there's my point....There are hundreds of issues, and to just talk about the "liberal" issues like the Patriotic Act, NSA, etc. just the issues that have been in the news and used in the recent campaigns... There's so many more... Bush & the republicans have been in complete power for six years and have destroyed hundreds of liberal programs, liberal organizations, funding. Take NPR and forcing the media back to equal time, or to the breaking up of monopolies and huge corporations, do all Dems believe in these liberal issues & will all Dems vote the same on each issues? Liberals also believe in getting rid of ALL corporate money in campaigns because it corrupts, will all the Dems vote to get rid of all that money flowing into their pockets...you believe all 51 will agree on that? Certainly not the conservative Dems...And there are many conservative Dem's, I was just pointing out a few of them... That is my point and there are so many liberal issues that need to be reversed, that some of the Dems still in the senate right now, voted against them...

I was making a very simple point...

[sandnsea]

38. And so was I

Pelosi and Reid don't plan on introducing much of anything that won't have concensus before hand, so there's really no purpose in filling people's heads with the damned centrist Dems are going to ruin everything anyway. Nobody is going to repeal the death penalty, but we probably can get some changes to the Patriot Act, wiretapping, and get habeas back. That's enough for me to cheer about, sorry the true liberals would rather cry in their beer.

[Hekate]

23. Yes. It's not just vote totals, it's committee chairs and agendas. Hallelujah.nt

[Raine]

37. YES

long as he has that "D" after his name. :-)

[Vidar]

39. Yes, it counts both independents (Lieberman & Sanders) who caucus

with the dems.