Spysk, what you posted was a vote on a motion to invoke closter on an amendement not the final vote on the bill. It was a straight party line vote which simply resulted in the debate or filibuster on the floor of the senate continued because of the 60 vote rule. You are playing fast and loose with the facts which is a disservice to the thread and we who poster here. You need to include some context when you make these types of claims other wise you come off as a sycophant.Why don’t you explain the context of this legislation to board? And don’t say do your own research when you throw out some arcane roll call vote and claim Tester is defined by it you should properly detail the facts and politics and maneuvering behind the legislation. Thanks for playing though. Right on :thumb:
-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
What do you think about Tester?
- Thread starter clawman
- Start date
Dutch Lane said:
Look, Genius, you cant vote for legislation until you get a consensus.
The progressives voted party line as well as the conservatives, on this particular proposal, the proposal is crystal clear " To ensure that State and local law enforcement may cooperate with Federal officials to protect our communities from violent criminals and suspected terrorists who are illegally present in the United States."
What part of that don't you understand,? And the progressives voted it down, including Jon Tester the U.S Senator representing the constitutes of Montana, and he voted with the demands of Schumer in place of the consensus of the majority of Montana constitutes. And by the way, voted with Schumer against Kates Law.
Just who is Jon Tester representing, Schumer and the rest of the Socialist or the people of Montana, Your call.
Now, is that enough content for you.
Now, this sycophant would like to debate, discuss, have a dialog with someone who knows what they are talking about, unfortunately, this person is not you.
It appears you have the allusion that you have to prove to readers on this forum that you are astute in political science, guess what, reading left wing blogs do not inform you, they brainwash you and keep you in a bubble.
I'm okay with your Socialist leanings, and you should espouse them, however, please don't get confused when facts are provided, and you enter the conversations, and you are confused, and you have to attack with vailed hyperbole.
Here’s some of the context Spsyk keeps leaving out. :thumb: H.R. 2579 was a bill passed by the republican controled House of Representatives to amend the IRS code to allow a tax credit with respect to unsubsidized COBRA continuation coverage. Which is a reasonable thing to do. However when the bill was was sent to the Senate for consideration, rather then vote on the legislation, Mitch McConnel took this bill to use as a vehicle to deal with the DACA or the dreamers issue and amended it to include 115-Senate Amendt. 1959, a proposal to provide a path to citizenzenship for 1.8 million inividuals brought into the country without permission as children, $25 billion for boarder security, limits on chain migration or family based migration and eleiminating the visa lottery system. McConnel couldn’t get the 60 votes needed to invoke cloture and move the legislation forward for a vote on the floor. McConnel then has Republican Sen. Pat Toomey offer Senate Amndt. 1948 to Senate Amendt.1959 to H.R. 2579, in an effort to help invoke cloture. Cloture is simply the procedure used for ending the debate and taking a vote. Toomey’s amendement proposed to ensure state and local law enforcements continued cooperation with federal officials to protect our communities from from violent criminals and suspected terrorists who are illegally in the country. How could anyone be against this proposal right? No one would be if it wasnt added on as a rider to the DACA bill. So what Spsyk fails to explain is that amendments like this are routinely added on to legislation knowing they have no chance of receiving the 60 votes needed to invoke closture because of the underlying bill, but rather are added on in order to make a senator from the other party look bad by voting against the cloture motion on the amendment. Because it makes it look like he’s voting against the substantive language of the amendment rather then on the motion to invoke cloture. In this case Tester the “progressive” voted with every other Democrat against cloture even though Toomey’s amendment seems reasonable on its face.
Spsyk again also failed to mention that if Tester and some other Dems would have voted with the Republicans to give McConnel the 60 votes to invoke cloture not only would the amendment go to the floor for a final vote but so would the DACA part of the bill even though there is no consensus on it yet after something like 34 or more votes on it. McConnel knowing this, used Toomey’s amendement in a cheap attempt to make Tester and the other Democrat senators up for re-election this year look bad for voting against the amendment even though no one would have been against if it wasn’t also a rider to the DACA legislation. This unfortunately is just politics as usual in D.C. and unfortunatley it works when people like Spysk post raw vote tallies with no context in order to try and make the progressive Tester look like he is for open boarders and against continued cooperation between local and federal law enforcement to protect our communities from violence and terrorists in the country illegally. See how silly this really is, rather then debate DACA and get a consensus bill passed for the good of the country McConnel uses the process to try and F*** guys like Tester because he knows guys like Spsyk will undoubtedly claim Tester is for open boarders, ect., when they know full well he really is not. This Spsyk is the context needed for readers to really understand Tester’s vote, but of course it is also way too much context for your argument because it makes you look like you are hiding something which was your whole point of only posting the raw vote tally, right? Nice try but it won’t work on anyone other then uninformed sycophants. I’ve never ever claimed to be genius and I’m not a socialist and I’m not trying to show anyone how astute I think I am, but I do possess a political science degree from the Harvard of the West and I’m willing to debate or discuss political issues with anyone interested with the facts and not just ad homonym personal attacks. Your turn Spsyk. Thanks man, good hang. :thumb:
Spsyk again also failed to mention that if Tester and some other Dems would have voted with the Republicans to give McConnel the 60 votes to invoke cloture not only would the amendment go to the floor for a final vote but so would the DACA part of the bill even though there is no consensus on it yet after something like 34 or more votes on it. McConnel knowing this, used Toomey’s amendement in a cheap attempt to make Tester and the other Democrat senators up for re-election this year look bad for voting against the amendment even though no one would have been against if it wasn’t also a rider to the DACA legislation. This unfortunately is just politics as usual in D.C. and unfortunatley it works when people like Spysk post raw vote tallies with no context in order to try and make the progressive Tester look like he is for open boarders and against continued cooperation between local and federal law enforcement to protect our communities from violence and terrorists in the country illegally. See how silly this really is, rather then debate DACA and get a consensus bill passed for the good of the country McConnel uses the process to try and F*** guys like Tester because he knows guys like Spsyk will undoubtedly claim Tester is for open boarders, ect., when they know full well he really is not. This Spsyk is the context needed for readers to really understand Tester’s vote, but of course it is also way too much context for your argument because it makes you look like you are hiding something which was your whole point of only posting the raw vote tally, right? Nice try but it won’t work on anyone other then uninformed sycophants. I’ve never ever claimed to be genius and I’m not a socialist and I’m not trying to show anyone how astute I think I am, but I do possess a political science degree from the Harvard of the West and I’m willing to debate or discuss political issues with anyone interested with the facts and not just ad homonym personal attacks. Your turn Spsyk. Thanks man, good hang. :thumb:
Ok Dutch,
Since you're Poly Sci, can you explain why Jon would vote to put gun owners on lifetime ban lists twice in 3 days? I guess it can't be a mistake twice...
Can you explain how he keeps saying he has had 16 or 23 or whatever (keeps going up) bills passed and signed by President Trump, when in fact he has written only One bill that has been signed by the Donald?
Can you explain how long it takes to co-sponsor the rest of the bills he claims to have written?
3 seconds? 4 seconds?
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/browse?sponsor=412244#current_status[]=28
Since you're Poly Sci, can you explain why Jon would vote to put gun owners on lifetime ban lists twice in 3 days? I guess it can't be a mistake twice...
Can you explain how he keeps saying he has had 16 or 23 or whatever (keeps going up) bills passed and signed by President Trump, when in fact he has written only One bill that has been signed by the Donald?
Can you explain how long it takes to co-sponsor the rest of the bills he claims to have written?
3 seconds? 4 seconds?
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/browse?sponsor=412244#current_status[]=28
Help me with some reference to the votes by Tester that you are specifically talking about so I can look at them. I don’t keep up on roll call votes much.
Dude I’m not a Tester splainer. I’m gonna vote for the guy though and I like Pearl Jam and thought the poster was a non issue. So yeah let’s bat around the Tester gun rights votes you talked about. Thanks man
Dude I’m not a Tester splainer. I’m gonna vote for the guy though and I like Pearl Jam and thought the poster was a non issue. So yeah let’s bat around the Tester gun rights votes you talked about. Thanks man
Here is the June 20 2016 Feinstein Amendment..
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/06/20/latest-gop-senator-to-vote-for-democratic-gun-amendment.html
Here is a writeup about the June 23 2016 Collins-Ayotte Amendment..
https://www.gunowners.org/news06212016.htm
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/06/20/latest-gop-senator-to-vote-for-democratic-gun-amendment.html
Here is a writeup about the June 23 2016 Collins-Ayotte Amendment..
https://www.gunowners.org/news06212016.htm
Ok I think I got a grip on it here goes- 4 competing gun amendments were made to a big science appropriations bill in 2016. 2 of the amendments were offered by republicans and 2 from democrats. None of the amendments had the 60 votes to invoke cloture. Does that sound right to you? If so what is the issue how Tester voted on the cloture motions and how that should be interpreted regarding his stand on gun rights? I think what we are talking about is putting people on like a no firearms/explosives list if they are a known or suspected terrorist as defined by the AG guidelines. I take the rub with the 2A is the lack of due process in losing a right based upon agency guidelines and putting the burden of proof on the individual who is suing to have their constitutional right vindicated? Is this what we are talking about? Thanks man
Dutch Lane said:
zengriz said:
So it is okay for Tester to have a million dollar house in Washington DC, to look after the whims of the lobbyist, and stay in line with the liberals of his party, in lieu of looking after his constituents in Montana.
In his twelve years of service, what legislation has he himself produce for the people of Montana. Get back to me.
Tester is no better than the trash that he replaced, with the exception of his phony Downhome demure.
Spsyk, I have no idea what you mean when you call me a socialist. Do you want me to be offended? Is it some form of a personal insult? What exactly is the point to show your disdain for my views in general? Why do you constantly use that as your default ad homonym attack? Were you deeply wounded by the 60’s or something and are still fighting against the socialist radicals of the day trying to reshape the world? What does socialism have to do with you trying to use arcane roll call votes on motions to invoke cloture to distort and attack Tester? That’s all you can come back with so I’m a socialist and I like Tester and Pearl Jam? Wow.spsyk said:
I listended to Pearl Jam before I ever voted for Tester. One of the socialist qualities I really do admire about him though is he can properly pronounce the name of his home state and he does have an A- rating from the fellas over at the NRA, they don’t try and hold the cloture votes against him because even they know that would be silly. Ok thanks man. :thumb:
Cuervohola said:
Dutch Lane said:
