Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (94022)	10/29/2010 11:49:21 AM
From: Carolyn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224858

Which one controls the money, Kenneth?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (94022)	10/29/2010 12:19:27 PM
From: Bill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224858

Can't they stop Obama's bills by controlling just one chamber?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (94022)	10/29/2010 12:37:59 PM
From: Jorj X Mckie	5 Recommendations Respond to of 224858

A tie is not a win. Anything that hobbles the government is a win. The ideal situation is for both the house and the senate to win enough to get 2/3 majority so that presidential vetoes can be overridden. And the more damaging laws that have been passed in the two years can be repealed. That's not going to happen, but we can dream. Next best situation is to win the house and not the senate so that we have gridlock while at the same time not having a republican dominated congress such that the Blamer in Chief can't freely blame the republicans without looking like a fool (not that this has stopped him in the past) Next best situation is to win both the house and senate, but not with a 2/3 majority. Putting the brakes on the runaway democrat socialist train is definitely a win. Not as big a win as the best case scenario, but still a win.