Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Hillary Clinton: ‘All bets are off’ if Iran deal fails [View all]MADem
(135,425 posts)45. You keep expecting him to be someone he is not. You will endure disappointment so long as he
serves in the Senate. That will likely be for a while.
He can -- and will -- lead the caucus. I know you are displeased with this, but it's not up to you. His fellow Democratic Senators WILL vote him in--not because of or despite his political views, but because he's a very good housekeeper. He will keep the paperwork moving, he will keep the deals percolating, he will direct his minions to horsetrade, he will raise a king's ransom in PAC money, and he will distribute it to his esteemed colleagues in need of some fiscal love.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
92 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Good, decisive comment about the agreement. Let's hope people listen to Obama and her.
George II
Aug 2015
#3
Good, I'm glad she did this, now can she exert any influence on the traitor Schumer? n/t
A Simple Game
Aug 2015
#5
Dissent? Is that what we call taking your orders from a foreign government now? n/t
A Simple Game
Aug 2015
#8
Then you probably agree with me that many of the "protected" groups should be disbanded.
A Simple Game
Aug 2015
#88
Except the reasons the Schumer used to reject the deal were republican talking points. His argument
still_one
Aug 2015
#30
the problem is Schumer has shown no willingness to fight for things liberals care about
geek tragedy
Aug 2015
#39
You keep expecting him to be someone he is not. You will endure disappointment so long as he
MADem
Aug 2015
#45
Oh, like, who knows what Iran will do? Who knows how badly this will affect any future agreements
Hoyt
Aug 2015
#37
I guess when you have such a bias against someone you have to make things up about that person
still_one
Aug 2015
#31
So you bring AIPAC into it. Schumer is against the deal, Hillary and every other Democratic
still_one
Aug 2015
#41
Correct. Now how do we get through to #'s 10 and 12 above that they didn't get it? nt
stevenleser
Aug 2015
#15
But we won't--and our greedy corporate bums will be pressuring Congress to find a reason
MADem
Aug 2015
#42
of course, invasion and regime change are the only way to prevent a country
geek tragedy
Aug 2015
#44
if you rule out multilateral diplomacy, then it's invasion or let them get the bomb nt
geek tragedy
Aug 2015
#51
Israel doesn't have that bunker buster. Only we do. And ours may not be good enough
geek tragedy
Aug 2015
#62
Since Israel gets much of their weaponry--or the money to buy their weaponry--from us, that's
MADem
Aug 2015
#75
Wait... She Supports The Deal, But Then Warns That If It Falls Through, "All Bets Are Off" ???
WillyT
Aug 2015
#19
It is important to note that the other NY Senator from New York supports the deal, Kirsten Gillibran
still_one
Aug 2015
#32
She means we lose any leverage on Iran because the sanctions regime will collapse.
Adrahil
Aug 2015
#61
It seemed obvious to me what she meant in context. It's a common turn of phrase. nt
Adrahil
Aug 2015
#66