U.S. Senator Alsobrooks

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a MAGA enthusiast, I’m pleased with Alsobrooks. She’s voted for more Trump appointees than almost all Senate Democrats, and way more than far-left Van Hollen.

She's solidly in the middle of senate democrats -- of the major nominees, voted against 8, did not cast a vote on 1, and voted for 4.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/02/06/us/politics/cabinet-confirmation-votes.html

That's a dud for an MD senator. We are bluer than most states and her seat is very safe. I'm extremely underwhelmed.

She voted for Sean Duffy, the guy who blamed the plane crash on DEI.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She has been less than impressive already. The Maryland defense industry is under a direct threat from DOGE and she wasn’t even answering emails.
The email that came, eventually, was a form letter saying, “I attended meetings” essentially.

It’s tough to be newly elected and walk directly into a firestorm, but this is Trump 2.0 and totally predictable. It’s why she was elected to try and balance the house.

Van Hollens has been louder and more present. She needs to quickly finish setting up her staff and get in front of this nonsense.

I may be an unemployed federal employee soon. I would be happy to answer her phones and make up crap like that Karoline woman on camera.

Let’s make it known that Maryland is going to take a major financial and quality of life hit by the Musk takeover.

You should be calling instead of emailing. Call multiple times in a day.

Fed employees aren't allowed to call reps during duty hours. I start work early, so I try calling after (between 4-5 pm) and get a machine every time.

[Anonymous]

She and Van Hollen are having a town hall Wednesday at 7:30

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She has been less than impressive already. The Maryland defense industry is under a direct threat from DOGE and she wasn’t even answering emails.
The email that came, eventually, was a form letter saying, “I attended meetings” essentially.

It’s tough to be newly elected and walk directly into a firestorm, but this is Trump 2.0 and totally predictable. It’s why she was elected to try and balance the house.

Van Hollens has been louder and more present. She needs to quickly finish setting up her staff and get in front of this nonsense.

I may be an unemployed federal employee soon. I would be happy to answer her phones and make up crap like that Karoline woman on camera.

Let’s make it known that Maryland is going to take a major financial and quality of life hit by the Musk takeover.

Of course Van Hollen has been louder and more present. He’s our senior senator. If you’re serious about the phones, Please call her office and offer your services.

Your "of course" is not logical here...being the longer seving senator doesn't mean he has to work and she doesn't.

I doubt she knows where the bathroom is. Contrary to popular opinion, there's a lot to learn in the Senate. I am sure she and Van Hollen are communicating and he is advising her.

I was leaning toward "dud" until about a week ago--for the reasons that PPs highlight. But I have noticed her becoming increasingly engaged on social media and in statements re: the "firestorm" (maybe because she in fact is taking counsel from Van Hollen, which would be smart on her part). It is a crisis and she probably doesn't even know her way about the building yet! So I am cautiously hopeful.

[Anonymous]

Has she published any statements to explain her voting choices?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a MAGA enthusiast, I’m pleased with Alsobrooks. She’s voted for more Trump appointees than almost all Senate Democrats, and way more than far-left Van Hollen.

She's solidly in the middle of senate democrats -- of the major nominees, voted against 8, did not cast a vote on 1, and voted for 4.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/02/06/us/politics/cabinet-confirmation-votes.html

That's a dud for an MD senator. We are bluer than most states and her seat is very safe. I'm extremely underwhelmed.

You do know that bipartisan support for cabinet nominees is typical, right? Only during the Trump admins have Democrats broken that tradition.

This is a really bizarre way to frame this issue. There was bipartisan support for cabinet nominees precisely because cabinet nominees are well-qualified and unobjectionable. Trump broke that tradition and Congressional Republicans have gone scorched Earth to ram unqualified nominees down our throats.

In any event, ask Barack Obama and Bill Clinton whether all of their nominees enjoyed bipartisan support before you decide to rewrite history as this issue being instigated by Democrats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She and Van Hollen are having a town hall Wednesday at 7:30

You can register to receive a link is that the one?

Van Hollen will also have town hall live on his webpage

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a MAGA enthusiast, I’m pleased with Alsobrooks. She’s voted for more Trump appointees than almost all Senate Democrats, and way more than far-left Van Hollen.

She's solidly in the middle of senate democrats -- of the major nominees, voted against 8, did not cast a vote on 1, and voted for 4.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/02/06/us/politics/cabinet-confirmation-votes.html

That's a dud for an MD senator. We are bluer than most states and her seat is very safe. I'm extremely underwhelmed.

You do know that bipartisan support for cabinet nominees is typical, right? Only during the Trump admins have Democrats broken that tradition.

This is a really bizarre way to frame this issue. There was bipartisan support for cabinet nominees precisely because cabinet nominees are well-qualified and unobjectionable. Trump broke that tradition and Congressional Republicans have gone scorched Earth to ram unqualified nominees down our throats.

In any event, ask Barack Obama and Bill Clinton whether all of their nominees enjoyed bipartisan support before you decide to rewrite history as this issue being instigated by Democrats.

You are flat out ahistorical. Maybe you should check your facts before spouting off.

Check out Barack Obama confirmation votes here: https://www.senate.gov/legislative/nominations/Obama_cabinet.htm
First Cabinet - trust me, Republicans didn't love some of these...
Visack: voice vote
Eric Holder: 75-21
Gary Locke: voice vote
Leon Panetta: 100-0
Arne Duncan: voice vote
Steven Chu: voice vote
Kathleen Sebelius: 65-31
Janet Napolitano: voice vote
Shaun Donovan: voice vote
Ken Salazar: voice vote
Hilda Solis: 80-17
Hilary Clinton: 94-2
Ray LaHood: voice vote
Tim Geithner: 60-34
Eric Shinseki: voice vote
A couple of people withdrew in scandal.


Bill Clinton first cabinet:
Mike Espy: UC
Janet Reno: 98-0
Ron Brown: UC
Les Aspin: voice vote
Richard Riley: UC
Hazel O'Leary: UC
Donna Shall: UC
Henry Cisneros: UC
Bruce Babbitt: UC
Robert Reich: UC
Warren Christopher: voice vote
Federico Pena: UC
Lloyd Bentsen: voice vote
Jesse Brown: UC

Worse showing by any Clinton cabinet nominee across the two terms was 85-13
Zoe Baird withdrew after Nannygate

https://www.senate.gov/legislative/nominations/Clinton_cabinet.htm

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a MAGA enthusiast, I’m pleased with Alsobrooks. She’s voted for more Trump appointees than almost all Senate Democrats, and way more than far-left Van Hollen.

She's solidly in the middle of senate democrats -- of the major nominees, voted against 8, did not cast a vote on 1, and voted for 4.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/02/06/us/politics/cabinet-confirmation-votes.html

That's a dud for an MD senator. We are bluer than most states and her seat is very safe. I'm extremely underwhelmed.

You do know that bipartisan support for cabinet nominees is typical, right? Only during the Trump admins have Democrats broken that tradition.

This is a really bizarre way to frame this issue. There was bipartisan support for cabinet nominees precisely because cabinet nominees are well-qualified and unobjectionable. Trump broke that tradition and Congressional Republicans have gone scorched Earth to ram unqualified nominees down our throats.

In any event, ask Barack Obama and Bill Clinton whether all of their nominees enjoyed bipartisan support before you decide to rewrite history as this issue being instigated by Democrats.

You are flat out ahistorical. Maybe you should check your facts before spouting off.

Check out Barack Obama confirmation votes here: https://www.senate.gov/legislative/nominations/Obama_cabinet.htm
First Cabinet - trust me, Republicans didn't love some of these...
Visack: voice vote
Eric Holder: 75-21
Gary Locke: voice vote
Leon Panetta: 100-0
Arne Duncan: voice vote
Steven Chu: voice vote
Kathleen Sebelius: 65-31
Janet Napolitano: voice vote
Shaun Donovan: voice vote
Ken Salazar: voice vote
Hilda Solis: 80-17
Hilary Clinton: 94-2
Ray LaHood: voice vote
Tim Geithner: 60-34
Eric Shinseki: voice vote
A couple of people withdrew in scandal.


Bill Clinton first cabinet:
Mike Espy: UC
Janet Reno: 98-0
Ron Brown: UC
Les Aspin: voice vote
Richard Riley: UC
Hazel O'Leary: UC
Donna Shall: UC
Henry Cisneros: UC
Bruce Babbitt: UC
Robert Reich: UC
Warren Christopher: voice vote
Federico Pena: UC
Lloyd Bentsen: voice vote
Jesse Brown: UC

Worse showing by any Clinton cabinet nominee across the two terms was 85-13
Zoe Baird withdrew after Nannygate

https://www.senate.gov/legislative/nominations/Clinton_cabinet.htm

Ha! Ahistorical my ass. The sins of Zoe Baird, Hershel Gober and Bill Richardson pale in comparison to the likes of Hegseth. Alas, Democrats have standards, morals, and decency, whereas their colleagues across the aisle continue to debase themselves to appease a conman and plumb new depths every day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a MAGA enthusiast, I’m pleased with Alsobrooks. She’s voted for more Trump appointees than almost all Senate Democrats, and way more than far-left Van Hollen.

She's solidly in the middle of senate democrats -- of the major nominees, voted against 8, did not cast a vote on 1, and voted for 4.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/02/06/us/politics/cabinet-confirmation-votes.html

That's a dud for an MD senator. We are bluer than most states and her seat is very safe. I'm extremely underwhelmed.

You do know that bipartisan support for cabinet nominees is typical, right? Only during the Trump admins have Democrats broken that tradition.

This is a really bizarre way to frame this issue. There was bipartisan support for cabinet nominees precisely because cabinet nominees are well-qualified and unobjectionable. Trump broke that tradition and Congressional Republicans have gone scorched Earth to ram unqualified nominees down our throats.

In any event, ask Barack Obama and Bill Clinton whether all of their nominees enjoyed bipartisan support before you decide to rewrite history as this issue being instigated by Democrats.

You are flat out ahistorical. Maybe you should check your facts before spouting off.

Check out Barack Obama confirmation votes here: https://www.senate.gov/legislative/nominations/Obama_cabinet.htm
First Cabinet - trust me, Republicans didn't love some of these...
Visack: voice vote
Eric Holder: 75-21
Gary Locke: voice vote
Leon Panetta: 100-0
Arne Duncan: voice vote
Steven Chu: voice vote
Kathleen Sebelius: 65-31
Janet Napolitano: voice vote
Shaun Donovan: voice vote
Ken Salazar: voice vote
Hilda Solis: 80-17
Hilary Clinton: 94-2
Ray LaHood: voice vote
Tim Geithner: 60-34
Eric Shinseki: voice vote
A couple of people withdrew in scandal.


Bill Clinton first cabinet:
Mike Espy: UC
Janet Reno: 98-0
Ron Brown: UC
Les Aspin: voice vote
Richard Riley: UC
Hazel O'Leary: UC
Donna Shall: UC
Henry Cisneros: UC
Bruce Babbitt: UC
Robert Reich: UC
Warren Christopher: voice vote
Federico Pena: UC
Lloyd Bentsen: voice vote
Jesse Brown: UC

Worse showing by any Clinton cabinet nominee across the two terms was 85-13
Zoe Baird withdrew after Nannygate

https://www.senate.gov/legislative/nominations/Clinton_cabinet.htm

Ha! Ahistorical my ass. The sins of Zoe Baird, Hershel Gober and Bill Richardson pale in comparison to the likes of Hegseth. Alas, Democrats have standards, morals, and decency, whereas their colleagues across the aisle continue to debase themselves to appease a conman and plumb new depths every day.

Do you understand what "ahistorical" means? You said "ask Barack Obama and Bill Clinton whether all of their nominees enjoyed bipartisan support before you decide to rewrite history" and I just showed you overwhelming bipartisan support for both cabinets.

Yes, Democrats broke the tradition. Of course "qualified" is subjective. But many Republicans gave and continue to give nominees the benefit of the doubt, while Democrats use confirmations to bludgeon a president they despise. That's out of the norm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She's voted against Trump policies and appointees, so I am 100% pleased with her thus far.

So a brainless party line opposition vote.

A trained goldfish could probably do the same thing. For way less money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She has been less than impressive already. The Maryland defense industry is under a direct threat from DOGE and she wasn’t even answering emails.
The email that came, eventually, was a form letter saying, “I attended meetings” essentially.

It’s tough to be newly elected and walk directly into a firestorm, but this is Trump 2.0 and totally predictable. It’s why she was elected to try and balance the house.

Van Hollens has been louder and more present. She needs to quickly finish setting up her staff and get in front of this nonsense.

I may be an unemployed federal employee soon. I would be happy to answer her phones and make up crap like that Karoline woman on camera.

Let’s make it known that Maryland is going to take a major financial and quality of life hit by the Musk takeover.

Ironically Hogan would have been more vocal.

No, he would’ve been licking their boots.

Such a gross meme statement. He would have been far better. Look at the state the county has been left in. Budget and crime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She and Van Hollen are having a town hall Wednesday at 7:30

What's on the agenda?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a MAGA enthusiast, I’m pleased with Alsobrooks. She’s voted for more Trump appointees than almost all Senate Democrats, and way more than far-left Van Hollen.

She's solidly in the middle of senate democrats -- of the major nominees, voted against 8, did not cast a vote on 1, and voted for 4.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/02/06/us/politics/cabinet-confirmation-votes.html

That's a dud for an MD senator. We are bluer than most states and her seat is very safe. I'm extremely underwhelmed.

You do know that bipartisan support for cabinet nominees is typical, right? Only during the Trump admins have Democrats broken that tradition.

This is a really bizarre way to frame this issue. There was bipartisan support for cabinet nominees precisely because cabinet nominees are well-qualified and unobjectionable. Trump broke that tradition and Congressional Republicans have gone scorched Earth to ram unqualified nominees down our throats.

In any event, ask Barack Obama and Bill Clinton whether all of their nominees enjoyed bipartisan support before you decide to rewrite history as this issue being instigated by Democrats.

You are flat out ahistorical. Maybe you should check your facts before spouting off.

Check out Barack Obama confirmation votes here: https://www.senate.gov/legislative/nominations/Obama_cabinet.htm
First Cabinet - trust me, Republicans didn't love some of these...
Visack: voice vote
Eric Holder: 75-21
Gary Locke: voice vote
Leon Panetta: 100-0
Arne Duncan: voice vote
Steven Chu: voice vote
Kathleen Sebelius: 65-31
Janet Napolitano: voice vote
Shaun Donovan: voice vote
Ken Salazar: voice vote
Hilda Solis: 80-17
Hilary Clinton: 94-2
Ray LaHood: voice vote
Tim Geithner: 60-34
Eric Shinseki: voice vote
A couple of people withdrew in scandal.


Bill Clinton first cabinet:
Mike Espy: UC
Janet Reno: 98-0
Ron Brown: UC
Les Aspin: voice vote
Richard Riley: UC
Hazel O'Leary: UC
Donna Shall: UC
Henry Cisneros: UC
Bruce Babbitt: UC
Robert Reich: UC
Warren Christopher: voice vote
Federico Pena: UC
Lloyd Bentsen: voice vote
Jesse Brown: UC

Worse showing by any Clinton cabinet nominee across the two terms was 85-13
Zoe Baird withdrew after Nannygate

https://www.senate.gov/legislative/nominations/Clinton_cabinet.htm

Ha! Ahistorical my ass. The sins of Zoe Baird, Hershel Gober and Bill Richardson pale in comparison to the likes of Hegseth. Alas, Democrats have standards, morals, and decency, whereas their colleagues across the aisle continue to debase themselves to appease a conman and plumb new depths every day.

Do you understand what "ahistorical" means? You said "ask Barack Obama and Bill Clinton whether all of their nominees enjoyed bipartisan support before you decide to rewrite history" and I just showed you overwhelming bipartisan support for both cabinets.

Yes, Democrats broke the tradition. Of course "qualified" is subjective. But many Republicans gave and continue to give nominees the benefit of the doubt, while Democrats use confirmations to bludgeon a president they despise. That's out of the norm.

I'm well aware of what ahistorical means. I wonder why you left out all of the nominees whose names were withdrawn? Could it be because those examples complicate your "democrats did it first!" narrative?

You seem reasonably clever. It's odd that you would be a Republican.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She and Van Hollen are having a town hall Wednesday at 7:30

What's on the agenda?

90% of it will be spent discussing how much they hate Trump.

Very productive.