Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Sen. Obama's 129 Present Votes

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
realFedUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 02:39 PM
Original message
Sen. Obama's 129 Present Votes
Barack wasn't present on many key votes in the U.S. Senate.

http://facts.hillaryhub.com/archive/?id=5191

Fact Sheet: Sen. Obama's 129 Present Votes
1/15/2008 3:39:13 PM

Today, Sen. Obama’s campaign held a conference call to defend his record of voting present on choice issues. But the Obama campaign failed to address the fact that Sen. Obama voted present 129 times on a wide array of issues, including choice, privacy for victims of sexual assault, and school violence. In fact, the Obama campaign claimed that Sen. Obama’s present votes were part of a legislative strategy but failed to mention that Sen. Obama was the lone present vote on a number of key issues.

Sen. Obama’s Present Votes By The Numbers

Sen. Obama voted 'present' 129 times while in the State Senate.

In 1999, Sen. Obama voted 'present' more often than he voted 'no': According to state records, Obama voted 'present' 43 times in 1999, while voting 'no' just 29 times.

At least 36 times, Sen. Obama was either the only State Senator to vote present or was part of a group of six or fewer to vote that way.

Other Present Votes of Interest:

(continued)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Teaser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 02:41 PM
Response to Original message
1. I am scratching my ass right now
These Obama-Hilary wars are so important I just have to scratch myself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indimuse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #1
61. :rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 02:42 PM
Response to Original message
2. Of the things that bother me about Obama
This is the most troublesome. Some of those "present" votes were regarding abortion. Those who support a woman's right to choose, beware!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Connie_Corleone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. God forbid if we vote for someone with a 100% rating from NARAL.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. Some of these people are pushing their anti-choice agenda on DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
terisan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #4
70. A "100%" based on a lot of present votes. Does not look lik a guy I want to trust with my rights
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
killbotfactory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. Those present votes on abortion were supported by Planned Parenthood
Why would they support present votes on controversial anti-abortion legislation? Maybe you should investigate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
terisan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #8
45. and opposed by NOW nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 12:49 AM
Response to Reply #45
79. Illinois NOW on his present votes
During Sen. Obama’s 2004 Senate campaign, the Illinois NOW PAC did not recommend the endorsement of Obama for U.S. Senate because he refused to stand up for a woman’s right to choose and repeatedly voted ‘present’ on important legislation.

As a State Senator, Barack Obama voted ‘present’ on seven abortion bills, including a ban on 'partial birth abortion,' two parental notification laws and three 'born alive' bills. In each case, the right vote was clear, but Sen. Obama chose political cover over standing and fighting for his convictions.

“When we needed someone to take a stand, Sen. Obama took a pass,” said Grabenhofer. “He wasn’t there for us then and we don’t expect him to be now.”

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. Is that why I've seen people post
that they question his commitment to women's choice?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #2
11. those "present" votes were coordinated with Planned Parenthood
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
realFedUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #2
14. We can't afford a President who's just "present"
We've had that and worse for the last 7 years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nailzberg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #2
28. I'm troubled by Hillary distorting and attacking Planned Parenthood strategy.
The present votes on abortion issues were part of a voting strategy organized by Planned Parenthood. Bills were brought to the floor in the republican controlled General Assembly to force pro-choice members in conservative areas to effectively vote themselves out of office, and this present strategy thwarted that. Saved pro-choice seats while voting down anti-choice bills.

I would like to know why Hillary takes issue with that?

Those who support a woman's right to choose, beware? Obama is 100% pro-choice, according to PP and NARAL. And the more Hillary attacks this strategy, the more opposed to her I become. I doubt there will be many Hillary buttons at the Planned Parenthood Chicago Roe v Wade gala next week.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
terisan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #28
48. How do liberal groups tally "present votes? are they counted for or against or not counted
when adding up the score.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nailzberg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #48
62. When that liberal group asks you to vote present, a present vote is considered voting with them
Planed Parenthood doesn't give points for being with them "most the time". Obama's 100% is well earned. My friends there refuse to vote for Hillary based on this distortion of Obama's present votes, and that was critical to me, as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #2
29. he voted present because abortion rights groups asked him to
i believe planned parenthood sent out an email recently explaining this. a vote of present usually means "i agree that something should be done about this, but this legislation is not it."
see, you get that kind of thing when you elect someone who is an expert in constitutional law. you should try it. you will like it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #29
35. Your tone is very condescending
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 05:12 PM
Response to Reply #35
67. compared to what?
compared to the people who peddle this shit here every day?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #67
71. I'm not replying to them, I'm replying to you
And no, I don't peddle shit here everyday. I found your response to be condescending. What does this have to do with the constitution? Obama found a way to vote to take Republican heat off of him in Illinois. This smacks of a politician, a political insider who will do anything to stay in office. And he preaches the message of change? I'm unimpressed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
terisan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 05:18 PM
Response to Reply #29
69. Who asked whom is apparently unclear. Obama's present votes indicate lack of commitment. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 10:10 PM
Response to Reply #69
74. no they don't.
neener neener. wow, what an intelligent debate we get around here.
spin your little heart out. everyone here with 2 brain cells knows it is empty bullshit that you all are selling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
killbotfactory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 02:43 PM
Response to Original message
3. Voting present in the Illinois state senate is equivalent to voting no
Basically, it means you have a problem with the bill being voted on.

And, yes, you have to be present to vote present.

The votes in the US senate were missed because he's running for president. Just like Kerry and Edwards had to miss a bunch of votes the last time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. This is a Hillary press release.
Who cares?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
killbotfactory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. Hillary supporters, apparently
It's the no slime left behind campaign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
realFedUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #5
17. Gee, I was waiting for that comment.
It's still true, whatever the source. Facts are our friends.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #17
23. OK Baghdad Bob
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
realFedUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. yeah, right.
Call names when you don't have the argument.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MethuenProgressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #3
16. No is NO. Yes is Yes. Present is I don't wanna have this vote on my record.
I agree though with the US Senate missed votes - except Kyl-Lieberman. He shouldn't have missed that vote. 98 other Senators made the vote, I don't buy his "I was surprised" line.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
realFedUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #16
19. Exactly. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
killbotfactory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #16
54. Present could mean a couple things
Either the legislation is inflammatory, as with the anti-abortion bills, and you have a problem with that, or you have a problem with a certain portion of a bill but agree with the general nature of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
realFedUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #3
24. 36 times he was the only state senator voting "present"
An examination of Illinois Senate records found 36 times in which Obama was the only state senator to vote "present" on a particular piece of legislation, according to The New York Times.

It shows a lack of leadership.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
killbotfactory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #24
55. Why did he vote present on them?
Could it be he had a problem with the legislation for whatever reason?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 10:51 PM
Response to Reply #3
78. It's called political strategy, Obama detractors can't seem to understand it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 12:51 AM
Response to Reply #78
80. "Strategy" to vote present over "no" by a 3:2 ratio?
You are right. The strategy is not taking a stand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 02:44 PM
Response to Original message
6. Lets not forget these.
In 1999, Sen. Obama voted 'present' more often than he voted 'no': According to state records, Obama voted 'present' 43 times in 1999, while voting 'no' just 29 times.

At least 36 times, Sen. Obama was either the only State Senator to vote present or was part of a group of six or fewer to vote that way.

Sen. Obama was the only State Senator to vote 'present' on a bill that sought to protect the privacy of sex-abuse victims, and the only state senator to not support the bill.

Sen. Obama was the only State Senator to vote 'present' on an adoption bill that imposed stricter requirements for parental fitness, and the only State Senator to not support the bill.

Sen. Obama voted 'present' on a bill that would increase penalties for the use of a firearm within 1,000 feet of a school. The bill called for the mandatory adult persecution of a minor at least 15 years of age being tried for using a firearm within 1,000 feet of a school.

Sen. Obama voted 'present' on a bill to prohibit the presence of adult sex shops near schools, places of worship, and day care facilities; bill allows local governments to regulate the presence of adult sex shops.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. I guess I'm on everone's ignore list now.
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rock_Garden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #12
21. Not mine, William. This is well worth talking about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
realFedUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #6
13. Right....n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #6
20. Or these: The IWR and Kyl-Lieberman.
Edited on Thu Jan-17-08 02:53 PM by AtomicKitten
Now, how did Hillary vote on those again?

Tell us the story about how her YES votes for war and more war are BETTER than not voting.

I love that story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #20
33. Is this thread about Hillary?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #33
37. This thread is about trashing Obama re: votes -- VOTES. That's the topic.
I think you have to actually submit an application to become a moderator before just assuming that position ad hoc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #37
38. So I was right then.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #38
39. No, you were wrong. You misstated the topic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #39
40. And how did I do that?
Edited on Thu Jan-17-08 03:40 PM by William769
ON EDIT: I do see though that you are running as fast as you can not to answer the original question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #40
42. Wrong again. The response you take issue with was not in response to the OP but #6.
You'll have to look for somebody else to play your reindeer games.

Thanks for playing.
Drive through.

:hi:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #42
43. Still not answering the question.
Which is expected of you. Don't forget your fries when you go to the next window.

Seems like your running a little faster now. :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #43
46. Oh, I know you Clinton advocates are getting cranky but it's almost over now.
Invoke Zen; it may help take the pain away.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #46
47. Sill no answer.
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #47
50. Here's my answer: HILLARY'S YES VOTES FOR WAR AND MORE WAR pale in comparison to all else.
And that is just sad and particularly so in that Democrats - like you - are turning a blind eye to your own candidate mimicking various vile GOP behaviors.

But, if she does somehow manage to scheme and cheat her way to the nomination, just know many, many Democrats will sit this election out because they, in fact, do not approve of her tactics and record.

VIVA ANYBODY BUT CLINTON!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #50
52. I have to give you credit, your deflection is A|#1!
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #52
56. DEFLECTION OPPOSED: Hillary's YES votes for war and more war will not be swept under the carpet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elixir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #50
57. "HILLARY'S YES VOTES FOR WAR AND MORE WAR pale in comparison to all else"
In comparison to what else? Obama's lack of voting altogether?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #57
59. Still waiting.
In 1999, Sen. Obama voted 'present' more often than he voted 'no': According to state records, Obama voted 'present' 43 times in 1999, while voting 'no' just 29 times.

At least 36 times, Sen. Obama was either the only State Senator to vote present or was part of a group of six or fewer to vote that way.

Sen. Obama was the only State Senator to vote 'present' on a bill that sought to protect the privacy of sex-abuse victims, and the only state senator to not support the bill.

Sen. Obama was the only State Senator to vote 'present' on an adoption bill that imposed stricter requirements for parental fitness, and the only State Senator to not support the bill.

Sen. Obama voted 'present' on a bill that would increase penalties for the use of a firearm within 1,000 feet of a school. The bill called for the mandatory adult persecution of a minor at least 15 years of age being tried for using a firearm within 1,000 feet of a school.

Sen. Obama voted 'present' on a bill to prohibit the presence of adult sex shops near schools, places of worship, and day care facilities; bill allows local governments to regulate the presence of adult sex shops.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elixir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #46
51. Just to recap - this thread is about Hillary, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #51
53. This thread is about what some perceive as "shitty votes" -- I offered up some comparative analysis
that should assist people in a more accurate overview as opposed to the typical DU kneejerk reaction. If you prefer the latter, have at. But I will post whatever I like, thanks for your concern.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elixir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #53
60. You go ahead and post whatever you like because we love you. W/out you we wldn't have fun.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #20
65. since when do 2 wrongs make a right? Oh ok she did this so it's ok if I do this?
Some people's logic truly astounds me.:banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Proud2BAmurkin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 02:50 PM
Response to Original message
15. A thin and unimpressive resume of 3 years in the senate, half of it running for president
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
realFedUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #15
22. I wouldn't want him as V.P. either.
He doesn't have the stuff to be President or VP. He
really needs to work harder as a Senator.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nailzberg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 02:51 PM
Response to Original message
18. Yawn
So I gather either Hillary Hub cannot grasp the concept of the Illinois general assembly, or they just don't care. So what is it, lack of intellect, or lack of intellectual honesty?

This is the line of attack that solidified my opposition to Hillary when she pushed it months ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:04 PM
Response to Original message
26. And let's compare and contrast with HRC's: 1) IWR & 2) to SUPPORT (not ban) Cluster Bomb Munitions
How are the poor CEOS, et. al. Executives within all those D.C. Military Contracting Corporations going to buy THEIR "baby new shoes" if they can't MAKE PRETTY BOMBS that serve to blow other kids to "kibbles and bits and bits ... and bits." :wow: :crazy: :nuke:



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PresidentObama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:06 PM
Response to Original message
27. I sincerely like Obama, and he's my second choice. But this will hurt him.
If he's the nominee, this will come back to bite him in the ass.

And hard. All the candidates have things, however, that would.

But I hate to think of the attacks the Republicans are preparing to cook up.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nailzberg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #27
30. This echoes an IL GOP oppo memo I read a couple years ago.
Nothing new about this attack. This is the third time this cycle HRC has come back to it. I'm just not sure there is much oppo out there that we haven't already heard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYCGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:11 PM
Response to Original message
31. Nowhere in that site does it say this was 129 votes out of over 4000 bills.
Just for the record.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:13 PM
Response to Original message
32. Your first sentence is wrong.
You wrote US Senate but the article is about the Illinois State Senate. I can understand your confusion since it looks as though the site you linked to makes the distinction deliberately obscure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rinsd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #32
66. I think the OP is making reference to his Senate attendance record.
Which is poor for 2007.

That is in addition to his present votes in the IL Senate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:16 PM
Response to Original message
34. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #34
36. Care too respond to post #6?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DangerDave921 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:42 PM
Response to Original message
41. educate me
Sorry for my ignorance, but what does a vote of "present" signify?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Igel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #41
64. "Abstain".
It's what you do when you're there and vote neither 'nay' nor 'aye', but vote, either because you want to or because you have to.

Personally, pretty much the only times I've ever "abstained" were when I honestly couldn't figure out how I wanted to vote. At times the motion was too complex for me to sort out whether I thought it was a good thing or not, at other times I honestly couldn't figure out if it was in accordance with "my" group's charter and bylaws or if what was proposed was legal--we has no mechanism for anything like "constitutional review". If it was a trivial motion, I'd let it slip to a vote anyway. If it was a serious motion, I'd try to prevent its coming to a vote until I was satisfied ... esp. if I was chairing the meeting. There were a few abstentions in my past because of conflict of interest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #64
68. personally, where? are you some sort of office holder?
hmmm?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Lane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #64
75. Sorry, but you're just wrong.
In most assemblies, including the U.S. Senate and nonprofit groups' boards that I've been on, "Present" and "Abstain" votes are ways of being on the sideline. To determine whether the bill or motion passed, you compare the number of "Yes" votes with the number of "No" votes, and you ignore the "Present" or "Abstain" votes.

The Illinois State Senate, however, is different. As has been explained on here more than once, in that body a bill is defeated unless it obtains the affirmative support of more than half the members. Therefore, Obama's votes of "Present" had the same practical effect as if he had voted "No". That probably wasn't true of the instances where you considered abstaining.

What I don't understand is why there are people so keen to bash Obama that they just keep bringing this up over and over and over. They insinuate, or charge outright, that his "Present" votes were wimpish abdications of an opportunity to fight against bad bills. Given the rules under which he was operating, that's simply not true.

Edwards paid too much for a haircut. Clinton tipped too little at a diner. Obama voted "Present" as a State Senator. I'm not backing any of these candidates (go Dennis!), but I believe strongly that all of these petty attack points are utter CRAP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nailzberg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 12:59 AM
Response to Reply #75
81. Absolutely correct on the how present votes count in the IL Assembly.
I've followed the IL GA a while now, and I've familiarized myself with Obama's work there over the years. This strategy of attacking Obama on present votes is what drove me to support him in '04.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BarackBucks Donating Member (141 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:48 PM
Response to Original message
44. No issue here as far as I can see
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosa Luxemburg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 03:53 PM
Response to Original message
49. "nit picking'
obviously the people who are complaining about his voting history are clutching at straws
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bunnies Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 04:00 PM
Response to Original message
58. 129....
About half as many times as this dead horse has been beaten on DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Texas_Kat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 04:22 PM
Response to Original message
63. Well, I guess it was good that he was 'present' at least....
...maybe he just couldn't find a copy of the bill he was supposed to be voting on. After all, he said he needed a 'good person' to deal with those kinds of things in the Las Vegas debate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hayu_lol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #63
72. We can solve this argument quite easily...
all the Obama supporters can just vote 'PRESENT' on their ballots. You may have to write it in, but you seem to think present will do the job.

Then lets see how your opinion changes about 'present' votes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
awaysidetraveler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 06:20 PM
Response to Original message
73. Maybe I should post a giant list of Hillary's lobbyists, starting with the health care and oil guys.
You know, Hillary's name should be Patsy, because she's the GOP's fall gal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gloria Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 10:15 PM
Response to Reply #73
76. You know, they BOTH STINK!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stravu9 Donating Member (945 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 10:28 PM
Response to Original message
77. Why Am I Suddenly Reminded Of EDDIE HASKLE!?
"Present Mrs. Claever!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 03:28 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC