Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:At this point the Republicans have said that they won’t vote for a replacement for her on committees, so she needs to stay as far as I’m concerned.
Regretfully, I have to agree with this.
They are basically holding an old and sick woman hostage because of politics.
She asked for it when she ran again, despite being in the throes of dementia.
Others who endorsed Senator Feinstein back in 2018: Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Chuck Schumer and the CA Democratic Party. The state could have nominated Wile E Coyote as it's nominee and the canine would have won. After seeing the disgrace of Senator Thurmond's last several years in office, shame on California and national Dems for not pushing Feinstein out in 2018. This is what we get.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:At this point the Republicans have said that they won’t vote for a replacement for her on committees, so she needs to stay as far as I’m concerned.
Regretfully, I have to agree with this.
They are basically holding an old and sick woman hostage because of politics.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:At this point the Republicans have said that they won’t vote for a replacement for her on committees, so she needs to stay as far as I’m concerned.
Regretfully, I have to agree with this.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:At this point the Republicans have said that they won’t vote for a replacement for her on committees, so she needs to stay as far as I’m concerned.
Yes the republicans have the majority so the dems have to suffer through this.
The Republicans do not have the majority now, but they will be back to even on committees if she resigns.
No if the dems had a majority they would just appoint another dem to the committee. Why would the minority party have a say in who the majority party appoints to a committee? Why would the majority who controls the senate give the other party a veto over anything?
Surely the base of the Democratic Party would demand the senate act instead of just excepting the rules made by the majority?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:At this point the Republicans have said that they won’t vote for a replacement for her on committees, so she needs to stay as far as I’m concerned.
Regretfully, I have to agree with this.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:At this point the Republicans have said that they won’t vote for a replacement for her on committees, so she needs to stay as far as I’m concerned.
Yes the republicans have the majority so the dems have to suffer through this.
The Republicans do not have the majority now, but they will be back to even on committees if she resigns.
No if the dems had a majority they would just appoint another dem to the committee. Why would the minority party have a say in who the majority party appoints to a committee? Why would the majority who controls the senate give the other party a veto over anything?
Surely the base of the Democratic Party would demand the senate act instead of just excepting the rules made by the majority?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:At this point the Republicans have said that they won’t vote for a replacement for her on committees, so she needs to stay as far as I’m concerned.
Yes the republicans have the majority so the dems have to suffer through this.
The Republicans do not have the majority now, but they will be back to even on committees if she resigns.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:At this point the Republicans have said that they won’t vote for a replacement for her on committees, so she needs to stay as far as I’m concerned.
Yes the republicans have the majority so the dems have to suffer through this.
Anonymous wrote:At this point the Republicans have said that they won’t vote for a replacement for her on committees, so she needs to stay as far as I’m concerned.
Anonymous wrote:At this point the Republicans have said that they won’t vote for a replacement for her on committees, so she needs to stay as far as I’m concerned.
Anonymous wrote:It was beyond ridiculous when Strom Thurmond was wheeled around the Senate like a weekend at bernie's skit, and the current situation with Feinstein is equally ridiculous. The woman is not capable of fulfilling her duties and she hasn't been for some time. It is ridiculous of Schumer and the others to act otherwise.
Anonymous wrote:It was beyond ridiculous when Strom Thurmond was wheeled around the Senate like a weekend at bernie's skit, and the current situation with Feinstein is equally ridiculous. The woman is not capable of fulfilling her duties and she hasn't been for some time. It is ridiculous of Schumer and the others to act otherwise.