E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe Washington Post’s write-up of its new Post/ABC poll: “The midterm elections - in which Republicans gained 63 seats to take control of the House and added six seats to their Senate minority - were widely seen as a rebuke to President Obama. Still, the public trusts Obama marginally more than they do congressional Republicans to deal with the country's main problems in the coming years, 43 percent to 38 percent. The poll suggests that the election, while perhaps a vote against the status quo, was not a broad mandate for Republicans and their plans. The survey also underscores the degree to which Americans are conflicted about who they think is setting the agenda in Washington.”
Steele watch: “Senate Republicans unhappy with the leadership of the Republican National Committee are quietly pushing for change in the wake of Chairman Michael Steele opting to run for a second term,” Roll Call reports. “Congressional Republicans have little influence over the RNC leadership elections. That factor, and a desire to avoid inserting the heavy hand of Washington into a contest mostly decided by 168 RNC committee members in the states, has led many Senate Republicans to keep out of the debate over Steele. But two key Senate Republicans on Tuesday expressed what many in their Conference have been feeling throughout the chairman’s controversial two-year tenure” -- Jim DeMint and John Thune.
“Iowa’s Republican National Committee delegation is divided in the race for the GOP’s national chairman,” the Des Moines Register writes. “On Monday, state Chairman Matt Strawn said he was supporting former Iowan Gentry Collins, who resigned as the RNC’s national political director last month. Today, Iowa’s Republican National Committeeman Steve Scheffler said Tuesday he was for Wisconsin Republican Party Chairman Reince Priebus in the RNC chairmanship race.”
Leave a Comment:
"No" and "Mandate" are the what represent the Republithugs.
No big surprise here. The exit polls were clear, but Conservatives are so convinced they're the majority that they confidently overreach at every opportunity.
What difference does it make? The Republicans won the election and that really is all that matters. Mandate or no mandate, Republicans will set the agenda in the House.
You just don't like the fact people voted against the liberal agenda. That is exactly what people did whether you accept it or not. Damn what an exit poll said.
This country is divided about 45-45 with 10% confused.
And you don't seem to get that a majority in the House doesn't give Conservatives the right to set the entire agenda. Everyone in Congress was approved by their constituents, as was the President.
Oh Ok. I get it. When fake azz Pelosi set the agenda it is OK.
I think the SPEAKER in the house sets the agenda, and who will it be?... John B..who John B
If you don't think the agenda will be set by him, just wait and see.
Pelosi never set an agenda, John B will never set an agenda,,,,Do you have no idea how the system works???
You've missed the point. We have a House, Senate, and President. Legislation has to get past all three.
Bo:
I think I'm very well schooled on how things work.
Legislation starts in the house legally. To which means the speaker sets the agenda. He says what comes to a vote and when......TY Sir.
Not as well schooled as you think. From Article 1, Section 7;
Section 7 - Revenue Bills, Legislative Process, Presidential Veto
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A1Sec7
Bills originate in the Senate all the time, and they have the Constitutional ability to do so.
you mean that bawling mess that can turn on the waterworks faster than a faucet? that john b....the boy raised democrat until he had money, then turned repub? that john b?????
John B was bought and paid for by the Butler County republican leadership -- that is who will set his agenda
Actually I would call it a mandate for Obama to keep up the good work, Republicans took control of the house yes, But historically they took it by the smallest margin EVER during a mid-term election.
The party majority has ALWAYS changed during mid-term elections, The really surprising thing was that Republicans did not take control of both houses as is the norm. The next one should see Republicans LOSING control and considering how small their gain was during the last election Democrats should have nearly a 75% majority after the next one.
Cry Baby Boehner, Weeper of the House, Now that's Leadership for ya, yeah you betcha! Compromise is not in my vocabulary Boehner is not going to improve anything, just muck up a broken system even more than it is now.