Roll Call: Latest News on Capitol Hill, Congress, Politics and Elections
July 30, 2014

Would McConnell Have a Governing Majority?

mcconnell020414 445x283 Would McConnell Have a Governing Majority?

(Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call)

Sen. Mitch McConnell has long coveted the chance to be Senate majority leader, and while he could get the job come 2015, it may be more than he bargained for.

The Kentucky Republican and current minority leader could end up with the narrowest of majorities, with tea party firebrands such as Ted Cruz of Texas holding the power to sink, for example, a Republican budget blueprint if they aren’t satisfied.

It would be similar to the scenario faced by Speaker John A. Boehner, R-Ohio, whose fractious conference has repeatedly revolted against and thwarted House leadership’s agenda.

On most issues in the Senate, of course, 60 votes are still needed and that means working with Democrats. McConnell has said repeatedly that he would run a more open Senate and would seek to restore some semblance of regular order. If he only has 51 Republicans, he’ll have to corral his conference and nine or 10 Democratic votes each week to advance legislation. And that need for bipartisanship is sure to put stresses on his party’s internal dynamics.

Conference Vice Chairman Roy Blunt, who has served in GOP leadership on both sides of the Rotunda, said the party would face a test of whether it’s ready to govern.

“There are some things like the budget that 51 Republicans in the Senate would have to vote for,” the Missouri Republican said. “That [and] how we use our committees would be two of the big tests of whether we are ready to be a governing party or not, and I think it’s something we ought to be thinking about just in case the majority does happen.”

Republicans could try to nullify the health care law through budget reconciliation rather than by threatening another government shutdown, for example. But drafting a budget that gets 51 votes would be the toughest challenge — especially if McConnell doesn’t have a vote to spare.

Blunt is one of many Republicans contrasting how McConnell would run the Senate with the current Democratic rule under Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.

“No. 1, I hope we’ve learned the lessons of what happens when you don’t do the business the right way,” he said. “Second, the times that Republicans did lead the House and Senate, there was a budget and the appropriations bills generally came to the floor one at a time, and all came to the floor in some form to be debated and amended.”

That could help Republicans attract Democratic votes to advance legislation, although it won’t necessarily close the sharp split over tactics between McConnell and Cruz and others in the GOP base.

Operating in the minority, Republicans fractured over the tactic championed by Cruz of tying the funding of the government to defunding Obamacare. McConnell, notably, cut the deal to reopen the government.

“The tactical choices you make can actually help your chances or hurt your chances. Shutting down the government to defund Obamacare was a tactical mistake. We’ve overcome that,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.

Cruz later feuded with McConnell, as the Texas Republican forced his fellow GOP senators to walk the plank on the debt limit.

Cruz senior communications adviser and speechwriter Amanda Carpenter said in a recent interview with CQ Roll Call that she didn’t envision her boss changing course.

“He’s said before, ‘I don’t trust Republicans, I don’t trust Democrats.’ He’s still going try to do the things he set out to do. The goal of being in the Senate isn’t just to be the guy with the most people on your team. It’s to fix it,” Carpenter said.

Other senior Republicans acknowledged the balancing act McConnell would face. The challenge would be to balance the desires of the conservative base with trying to operate a functional chamber.

“We won’t have 60,” noted Sen. John McCain of Arizona, who is in line to be Armed Services chairman in a GOP-led Senate. ”One of the things I know for a fact because I’ve got the commitment for Sen. McConnell is that we will take up bills in the regular order, and we will do as we did for years.”

The party also has to focus on what’s achievable, suggested Republican Conference Chairman John Thune of South Dakota.

“You can’t set unrealistic expectations,” Thune said, adding that it’s something the party has been guilty of previously. “You have to define your reality, and the reality will be, even if we win the majority, is that we will be working with a Democratic president for the next couple of years who has a veto pen.”

In a recent interview with The New York Times, McConnell opened the door to reversing November’s “nuclear” rules change, though that would be a postelection debate.

“The Senate can be returned to the place of great debates, contentious debates, but where you can still get outcomes on things where you have at least 60 senators,” McConnell said.

“I definitely think that there is support for what I would consider to be regular order, which is moving to approps bills,” said Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. “When we are to assume that [majority], we are going to have some different faces, different folks. So, you take every session as it comes.”

Thune conceded that keeping the conference unified would be a challenge and there could be more disputes like the one over defunding Obamacare. But he said that having the majority is a “very different scenario.”

“In the minority you are reacting all the time, and in most cases you are trying to put up a defense against what the other side is trying to do. But when you are calling the plays and setting the agenda, I think there is more of a, I hope, more of a buy-in to what the goals are. If we have gotten the buy-in and gotten everybody invested, taking ownership of what we want to achieve, then I think it gets easier to get people together, but we will see.”

  • blfdjlj

    He would hopefully pass TPA, maybe some form of immigration reform, and together with Boehner get these issues resolved. The budget will be a make-or-break point – if he gets 51 votes there, he can go to conference with the House-passed budget, resolve the issues, invite Obama to the table, and maybe possibly start the lengthy fiscal negotiations over entitlements, taxes etc.

    • Rob_Chapman

      Invite Obama to the table?

      Obama has repeatedly invited McConnell and been rebuffed at each instance.

      What more proof does one need that GOP interests are power and not comity?

      With McConnell as majority leader and Rand Paul, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio all running for POTUS all we can expect from a GOP majority leader is a circus.

      • Quartermaster

        A circus is what we have in the Senate and WH now. Therefore, no change.

        • Rob_Chapman

          Clearly you have been abroad in an electronic dead zone, Quartermaster.
          Had you been in America the past few weeks, you would undoubtedly had read about or seen the media coverage on the contretemps in Phoenix.

          The Arizona debates are what we have in store for us for two years if McConnell becomes US Senate Majority Leader.

          You can take that to bank, QM.

          • Quartermaster

            I’ve been around and am quite observant. The Senate is a 6 ring circus with a drunk ringmaster.

            The only reason for the circus is Phoenix is that Kweers have no desire to live and let live and are insisting they be not just left alone, but praised and honored for engaging in their perversion. Such things will continue as long as the left continues to try to break the country to its saddle. What we have in the Senate now is no debate. It’s the unhinged left simply shirking its duties and insisting the country follow on their lawless path.

            You can take that to the bank.

      • Jon Vinc

        I’ll take a circus that involves cutting taxes, protecting the American homeland from amnesty, and expanding freedom versus the circus we’ve lived through since 2007 that brought a recession we’re still in the midst of, taxes at an all time high, businesses hoarding cash, and a Congress capitulating to 90% of insane ideas of a juvenile, hypocritical, foot stomping Man-Child.

        • Rob_Chapman

          Let’s keep 11-13 million people in the economy without legal protection to take jobs, push down wages and make things that much more difficult for the kids starting out in life. Brilliant!

  • Lee Finn

    Before McConnell should be taken seriously he needs to explain – in detail and not vague “bad faith” accusations – why he’s ready to work with the President and Senate Democrats now, and why he couldn’t work with them for the last six years. After all, this was the man who said his principal legislative goal was to insure that Obama was a one-term president.

    • aniptofar

      Almost half the country wanted Obama to be a one term president. I think more people wish it were true now.

      • LiberalPatriot

        More than half the country never wanted W to be President to begin with. I think more people wish it were true now.

        • aniptofar

          Except our choices were worse…. Al Gore or Kerry.

          • LiberalPatriot

            More than half the country voted for Gore.

          • aniptofar

            Liberals live in this delusion. The vote count studies produced after showed differently …. BUT let me make this point:

            Al Gore out scr9wed himself by attempting to cherry pick only districts that would contain the most undercounts for himself. Had he went for the whole state AS WOULD HAVE BEEN HONEST AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW, he might have won the count. As he tried to deceive, he lost.

            The looney left avoids these facts like the plague.

          • fare_the_well_obama

            Gore failed to carry his home state. Those who knew him best, knew a lot!!!!!!

          • RealAmerican

            Actually, in cnn,s msnbc’c and moveon’s recounts, Bush won all of them by 3000 votes or more. The marxists don’t like it, but gore just couldn’t cheat enough.

          • LiberalPatriot

            Do you not realize that I am referring to the national popular vote count, which Bush lost by more than a half million votes? That is an undisputed fact.

            As for the corrupt Supreme Court ruling stopping the vote count in Florida, that is a totally different issue.

            I made my original comment to you because you said almost half the country did not want Obama. I was simply pointing out that MORE than half did not want Bush. Apparently the point eludes you.

          • aniptofar

            Do you not realize our constitution doesn’t count the popular vote JUST LIKE IT DOESN”T DECREASE the votes of senators from small states.

            I don’t think the SCOTUS ruling is in a vacuum because Gore tried to cheat the system.

            Wouldn’t it be a better discussion if you stayed on point?

          • Whit_Chambers

            Lib… crazy name you have.

            No such thing as a Liberal Patriot.

          • fare_the_well_obama

            You have heard of the electoral college? By your standard, Bubba Clinton never achieved 50 percent of the popular vote.

          • Marcus Lindroos

            > Except our choices were worse…. Al Gore or Kerry.

            Worse than Bush? The guy whose job approval was 28% on election night 2008 when the country was electing a successor to clear up the mess?

          • aniptofar

            His successor is around the same margin at this point, it’s just that 12% of the population is voting for his skin color, not he quality of his job performance.

          • Marcus Lindroos

            > His successor is around the same margin at this

            > point,

            Not true. I only have Gallup’s figures right now, but Bush was approaching the mid-30s at this stage in March 2006 whereas Obama is at 42%; slightly up from December last year.

            > it’s just that 12% of the population is voting for his skin
            > color,

            As if white Republicans were any different:-)
            Obama actually WON the white vote in New Hampshire, Iowa while Wisconsin was a draw in 2012. However, in states such as Alabama and Mississippi, he won only 20% of the white vote. Wonder why that is, huh?

            BTW. Bush’s job approval among Republicans was still in the 70%..80% range even when his overall approval (R+D+Ind.) had fallen to 30%.

          • DickNixon

            Because people in Alabama and Mississippi aren’t stuck on stupid, is that the reason?

          • aniptofar

            Obama is at 38% with 100% of his ethnicity’s vote. Your point is obviously not equivalent.

          • Marcus Lindroos

            My point was that certain other demographic groups from the South tend to be as monolithic in their “political beliefs” as African Americans are. If you are white, Evangelical and from a member of the former Confederacy, you’ll continue to give George W Bush high marks no matter what happens.

          • aniptofar

            No one is from the former confederacy and those that were were democrats!

            And no, GW Bush was a fiscal progressive, social conservative. When we have a vote for pres. these days it is single issue/best choice out of two bad choices we make.

            When you can explain why a half african american with an almost nonexistent resume got to be president, we can talk.

          • fare_the_well_obama

            yeah, look at the joke of a little man Kerry is on the world stage right now. next to putin – he looks like a spineless little weasel crying foul when the real problem is that his boss is a wimp and unqualified to hold the office.

        • Whit_Chambers

          Lib, what we wish were true is that dictator Obama would resign.

          NO ONE, NO ONE has been as bad as Obama.

          • LiberalPatriot

            Yes, I am aware that is your far right wing MINORITY opinion.

            That is the problem with you wingers, you hate and refuse to cooperate with anyone not in you tiny circle, yet you claim to speak for all of the “American People”. This is why your party will continue to lose non-gerrymandered national elections for the foreseeable future.

            Come out of the Fox News bubble and into the light.

      • Marcus Lindroos

        > Almost half the country wanted Obama to be a one term
        > president.

        So what?
        If 2012 is the yardstick, a significantly bigger share of the electorate wanted Bush to be a zero term president (or at least not a two term one).

        • aniptofar

          Try staying on point. If half the population wanted him to be a one term president, there is nothing wrong with McConnell stating the fact.

  • PFPorlock

    This presumes McConnell is re-elected. If the GOP gain in the Senate looks as large as the election approaches as it appears to be now, don’t be surprised to see the Tea Party voting for McConnell’s Democratic rival just to remove McConnell from the leadership.

  • Henry Bowman

    Voting Bevin, and if he loses the primary I’ll vote Grimes.

    McConnell plays his supporters for chumps, he ends cloture ensuring a bill’s passage then votes against the bill. He needs to get gone. I don’t care if it’s Grimes.

    (At least if Grimes wins I’ll get a few laughs. I’ve never seen someone so inept since a certain senator from Illinois)

    • Whit_Chambers

      Grimes would be a rubber stamp for dictator Obama.

      If you are voting for Bevin and Grimes, the your vote is wasted… McConnell wins easily

      • Henry Bowman

        I said what I’d do.

        And I’m going to do it.

    • Pragmatic Conservative

      That’s just plain stupid. What your type don’t seem to understand is, that every time you use some stunt to slow down or stop all progress in Congress, you are giving the Democrats a playbook for exactly what to do when the GOP is back in control of the Senate. Are you going to be as happy with needing 60 votes to pass anything when there are 53 Republicans in the Senate? As you going to be happy with Democrats trying to filibuster tax reform, and bills to reduce government spending?
      Do you even understand that it actually costs money to shut down the government, and that before a shut down any productivity comes to a halt as the agencies and departments plan for how to shut things down in an orderly manner. Ted Cruz has been needlessly wasting government money every time he tries to shut things down, but you so-call fisal conservatives praise him for it. As I said before, it’s just stupid.

      • Henry Bowman

        Tough.

        If you want to keep “holding your nose” as the GOP runs candidates who are more and more like democrats, feel free.

        I’m done.

  • takeresponsibility

    I wouldn’t be too worried about a 51/49 majority for the Republicans, this will be a wave election, based primarily on Obamacare and the anemic economy, it is much more likely to be 55/45 Republican majority and if there is any justice higher than that. Montana, West Virginia, South Dakota, Arkansas, North Carolina are changing to Republican, Louisiana is in the 95% + for change, Michigan if they don’t screw it up will change to Republican, and Colorado at this point is 80+. That leaves Iowa which needs to get going and I really hope the people in Minnesota see through the clown/comedian/dummy they have in Franken, what has he done?? Kentucky and Georgia will stay Republican. Virginia is now in play with Gillespie but at best 50/50 depends on how big a wave it is, and I would not count out Oregon, which may actually wake up from it’s drug induced stupor, not likely but possible. New Hampshire, maybe but not much of a gain in one aspect as we trade a Northeast democrat for a Northeast republican, marginally better but not by much.

    • Whit_Chambers

      good summation… I think you are exactly right

    • rappbrown

      check out nate silvers midterm predictions

  • surfcat50

    McConnell believes the country will be better off with him directing the increases to taxes and spending.

    • Whit_Chambers

      stupid comment.

      ANYTHING would be better than the DemoNazi’s that are there now

      • RealAmerican

        Tell me, what is the difference between a demonazi stealing our money to waste it on parasites to lazy to fend for themselves, and a decepticon stealing our money to waste on foreign aid and wars in places where we have no interest? What is the difference between the marxists trying to control our lives and the decepticons controlling our lives? reid, mcconnell, bohner, pelousy, all cut from the same soiled kerchief.

        • Whit_Chambers

          wrong… Reid and Pelosi are an evil all to their own..

          There may be some Republicans that need improvement, but there are no good Democrats

          • RealAmerican

            You have a point, but mconnells and boehners constant capitulation is as evil as reid and pelousy. How many Republican incumbents voted for the American people in the last round of government theft numbers? I think it was 18 (Don’t have the numbers in front of me). I just don’t see any difference.

          • Pragmatic Conservative

            What you don’t seem to understand is, there is a difference between compromise and capitulation. McConnell and Boehner can’t compromise, however, if the likes of Cruz, Lee, etc. constantly work against them and thereby diminish their strength. I’ve seen this in Congress before – so-called conservatives voting consistently to empower Democrats as a way to express their displeasure at GOP leaders for not giving them everything they want. It’s just stupid, and it plays into Obama’s hands.

          • RealAmerican

            No, Senators Cruz, Lee, Representatives Amash and Gomert and other principled Americans understand they must stop the likes of mconnell and boehner from capitulation. There is no such thing as compromise with the marxists. They will lie now in order to lie later to get everything they want. President Reagan and the Republicans in congress “compromised” with marxists in the 80′s and look what that got us. The problem with mcconnell and boehner is that they are big government douche bags that if given the chance will not only go along with the marxists, they will encourage them. How these two were ever given leaderships posts is baffling, why these two have not been drawn an quartered is also baffling. We should fight them and anyone like them. We must clean our own house before we can rid ourselves of scum like reid, pelousy, and the occupant.

          • Pragmatic Conservative

            So, since Boehner and McConnell are bad for compromising with marxists, I assume you believe that Reagan was equally bad for making similar compromises?
            A civics lesson for you – Our nation was set up so that those of differing opinions would have to negotiate and compromise. The only other choice is tyranny, in which one side gets to dictate everything to the other side. I, for one, am grateful that we don’t have such a system, because otherwise we wouldn’t be able to fight against Obama, Reid and Pelosi. You, however, seem to favor such a system, as long as Cruz and his buddies eventually get to be the tyrants. The essence of those of your ilk is that you oppose democracy because you believe a small minority should be able to dictate to the rest of us how the country runs.

          • RealAmerican

            Yes Reagan was wrong for trying to compromise with the marxists. So you prefer the tyranny where the marxists and the Republicans both steal your money and enslave you. got it. The problem with pos’ like boehner and mconnell, is that they are not fighting the liquid turds like pelousy and reid. Yes I oppose democracy, as did the founders. I, like the founders embrace constitutional republicanism. You should maybe try getting your civics from places other than the so called history books, becuase obviously you either lack critical thinking skills or you are dreadfully misinformed. Principled member of congress such as Cruz, Lee and others are what is preventing the tyranny of the occupant and his minions. boehner and mcconnell are enablers. Theya re simply looking out for themselves. Our system only works with men of virtue in congress, you and your ilk are content with the mcconnells, boehners, reids, and pelousys. I prefer my government as small and as close to me as possible, so that I can keep an eye on it.

          • Pragmatic Conservative

            I know that we are a republic, but that doesn’t change the essence of my comment. Even in a Republic, the majority gets to rule so long as it does not infringe on the rights of the minority. Tea Party types seem to think that it’s their “right” to run the government as they see fit, regardless of who the elected leaders are. The “tyranny” you imagine is nothing more than right wing extremists not getting their way on public policy.
            Face it, the people spoke, and elected Obama and a majority of Democrats to the Senate (thanks to the Tea Party nominating so many unelectable candidates in states that otherwise would have gone Republican). While we can try to keep them from running over us completely (and the House has done an excellent job of stopping the worst of Obama’s transgressions where they can), nothing in the Constitution says the minority gets to dictate how the country will function.
            You sound like a huge fan of Custer and Pickett, since their tactics are pretty much what Cruz and Lee embrace. Charge into battles where you are completely outgunned, and which you have no hope of winning. The only difference is, Custer and Pickett at least were smart enough to have plans, even if they were bad plans. Cruz and Lee have no strategy, other than to obstruct everything that isn’t to their liking, even if it means wasting vast amounts of taxpayer money (which is what government shutdowns do) and putting the entire economy at risk against the wishes of the overwhelming majority of the public.
            I prefer a smaller government as well, but the difference is, I don’t believe it’s my “right” to force it on a nation that disagrees. If you want to make a smaller government, you need to convince the public of the righteousness of your cause through debate and public discourse. The Tea Party approach of telling everyone that they are stupid for not embracing libertarianism is never going to accomplish that. And until you can win the debate, and the elections that follow, you have no “right” to set policy for the nation.
            Finally, your definition of “virtue” is nothing more than tyranny by the minority, something our founders neither endorsed nor embraced. Re-read your constitution if you don’t understand that.

          • RealAmerican

            Do you really think that way? You are part of the problem, not the solution. The solution is not more Republicrats. The solution is not more rinos. The solution is not more government. the solution is not more boehner and mcconnell. The people did not speak and re-elect the pos in the White house. Wide spread fraud and illegal activity did that. We would win these battles if pos establishment types would act for the interest of the people and not themselves. Many good people were defeated because establishment types would bad mouth them in public or change the rules in mid stream. I support Cruz and Lee and the others that stand on principle, what do you stand for? You obviously went to public school, because your definition of tyranny is tyranny. Your argument is full of straw-men and circular logic. try reading the radification debates to learn of the Constitution and what it means. You have it all wrong, which is why you are part of the problem.

          • Pragmatic Conservative

            No point arguing. Anyone who thinks Obama won because of fraud and illegal activity (rather than because he ran a better campaign and because people like him, even if they don’t like his policies) simply isn’t rational. I do appreciate the twist on the usual Tea Party claim that Obama won because Romney was too moderate, though, so I applaud you for coming up with a more original (although equally incorrect) theory.
            And stop with the whining about “the establishment” not supporting “conservative” candidates. The Tea Party nominated unelectable candidates over and over again, plain and simple. Delaware hadn’t elected any Republican stated wide other than Mike Castle since I can’t remember when and he had a commanding lead in the polls, but the Tea Party threw him overboard for an inexperienced, right-wing radical who would never succeed in a blue state. But somehow that’s “the establishment’s” fault. Sharron Angle and Todd Akin said so many stupid things in their campaigns that they completely lost the independent vote, but somehow, that’s “the establishment’s” fault.
            Republicans are getting tired of Tea Party hypocrisy. You whine about how “the establishment” won’t support your chosen candidates (which is untrue), but then brag about how you sit at home on election day, and offer no support to any Republican who isn’t a libertarian anarchist.

            Finally, your definition of tyranny is not getting your own way. I guess you didn’t go to school at all.

          • RealAmerican

            Pull your head out. As the investigations conclude, more and more are being charged with fraud. You establishment type are the problem. You are why we are losing liberty and the country. Get informed you ignorant pos. Better yet, just go back to your mommy’s basement. The adults are trying to save our country. Your type we do not need. You are dismissed.

          • Pragmatic Conservative

            It is impossible to argue with one who is delusional and who must resort to name calling because they have no facts to back up their arguments.

          • RealAmerican
          • Pragmatic Conservative

            Your first link indicates evidence of 17 non-citizens voting in Ohio. No evidence of a conspiracy, and certainly not enough to sway the outcome of the Presidential election year.
            You second link indicates examples of how voter rolls desperately need to be cleaned up, and states that voter IDs laws are important. Only liberals would argue with either of those points, and I’m not a liberal. But the link makes no reference to any kind of substantive fraud indicating that Obama wasn’t elected legitimately. I don’t like him either, but I’m not going to fall into the extremist (both right and left) mindset that anytime I don’t get my way it must be because of a conspiracy. The American people were stupid for voting for Obama, but that’s what they did and we have to live with the results for four years. That’s how elections work.
            And nice job with the continued insults and clever “you are dismissed” line. Proving yet again, that you don’t really have anything to back up your arguments.

          • RealAmerican

            Weren’t you dismissed? Idiot. You have no critical thinking skills, no substantive argument. Yes you are a leftist pos. I am done with you. You are obviously too indoctrinated to understand what evidence means. So again, dismissed.

          • Pragmatic Conservative

            There’s a difference between critical thinking, and imagining conspiracies that don’t exist. But don’t let that stop you. And keep that tinfoil hat securely in place so the NSA can’t find out what you are thinking. I’m done with this conversation.

          • RealAmerican

            Yay, ’bout time sfb. It goes to reason that if 15 were found, how many weren’t, you twit. Why just this week they discovered a body in Detroit that has been voting dead for at least two years. Guess who she was voting for. Sfb. F off and die you liberal pos. I got your hat, right here. Sfb. The nsa is laughing at you.

      • surfcat50

        Granted, therefore, ANYBODY would be better than McConnell as the Senate leader opposing Democrats since he doesn’t actually oppose them.

        • Pragmatic Conservative

          McConnell is smart enough to know (unilke Cruz), that if he’s the Majority Leader he doesn’t need to focus on opposing Democrats, he can focus on leading Republicans. The Tea Party needs to learn that governing doesn’t mean just throwing bombs and saying “no” to everything. He means leading and effecting real solutions to our problems. McConnell is more than up to that job. If you think the sole job of a Senator is to oppose the other party, then you have no idea how a government is supposed to function.

          • surfcat50

            OK, I’ll play.
            Please name the five most significant accomplishments and real solutions to our problems resulting from Mitch McConnell’s leadership of the US Senate since the 2012 election. I look forward to hearing them.
            In the meantime, you should consider the prospect that if you think it is not a principle function of the opposition party to oppose the other party, then you have no idea how a constitutional republic and its government is supposed to function.

          • Pragmatic Conservative

            Since you apparently couldn’t take the time to actually read my previous post, let me try again. It is NOT the SOLE job of a Senator to oppose the other party. Senators are also to try to come up with ideas to help the country. McConnell has been a leader on numerous issues over the years, including limiting the sway of trial lawyers over the courts, and protecting political speech. In addition, he has, as best as could be expected, led the opposition against many of Obama’s objectives, including the stimulus, Obamacare, cap and trade, etc. Just because he hasn’t been successful on all of these isn’t his fault. After all, he’s in the minority, and the system wasn’t set up (contrary to Tea Party opinion) to allow the minority to always get its way. Ted Cruz’s idea that you oppose the other side at all costs, has done nothing more than give Democrats a road map of how to obstruct everything the GOP tries to do once we take back the Senate. I suppose you’ll be cheering Chuck Schumer when he demands 60 votes to enact tax reform, or eliminate unnecessary government agencies since you are such a fun of pointless obstructionism? Or are you just a hypocrite who thinks you are entitled to get your way all the time whether you are in the majority or minority.
            As for significant accomplishments since the elections of 2012, that’s just a childish question. No one in Congress has any significant accomplishments in the last year, including Ted Cruz.

  • Steve_o

    If McConnell has a majority he can continue the expansion of big government with the assistance of Democrat/socialists. Terrific.

  • Doc3

    Hopefully McConnell will be retired in November.

    • Whit_Chambers

      not gonna happen

      • Doc3

        It could happen.

        • DickNixon

          Like the hat. Are you Tiny Tim?

          • Doc3

            Al Yankovich. You are aging yourself.

        • DickNixon

          Proctologist to The Stars? Dude…….

          • Doc3

            Have you seen how many a-holes there are in Hollywood?

    • Mygoodness

      Not with Grimes, the Louisville and Lexington papers can’t elect her, try as they do.

  • obsinatepiper

    If the Republicans get the Senate, guys like Joe Manchin might be tempted to change parties. It’s happened before. That changes the math of governing.

  • Whit_Chambers

    51 Seats is not going to be the circumstance.

    Republicans look to be in a position to pick up 9 seats minimum….. maybe as many as 13

  • Alan Amark

    “The goal of being in the Senate isn’t just to be the guy with the most people on your team. It’s to fix it,” Why can’t Mitch McConnell just agree with that?

  • Larry Rappaport

    It trust this assumption will be deferred until after the midterm elections. I however am seeing a slight reconciliatory movement by McConnell to the right based upon interviews with FOX and CNN. I would encourage the others i.e. King, McCain, et al., follow suit as opposed to the feeble name calling attempts in an attempt to silence this large electorate which only adds more citizens to Tea Party principals hence ranks. Regardless of any politico talking head, this constituency is imperative to the party’s political success, non negotiable. The Establishment must acknowledge this or its over as America’s backbone is represented by this leaderless group where one does not have to be a member to align with its message. Therein lies the rub for the Establishment. You need to coalesce under what you folks have been saying is a big tent if the party is to survive. If cohesion takes place there is no party that will stop this alignment especially at this time in history so, as politics change so must our leadership, either by self induced electoral hari kari or the understanding that we all share the same solid principals and move forward. Your choice Establishment.

  • fare_the_well_obama

    There is also a good chance that regular order will be replaced by an enhanced nuclear option to govern by simple majority. If Reid remains the minority leader, I would threaten that at every turn and beat that soulless vampire into submission.

  • Glenn Koons

    These two lib Dem flacks going the full monty for Reid and the Dems. Oh the croc tears.
    Can Mitch govern? Oh my. Any Pub would do a better job as majority leader than the corrupt lying snarky Reid. I love the media trying to do anything to restrain any Pub gains. Dem libs are an absurdity as we can see domestically and internationally and these two dopes wonder if Mitch can govern. Well pal, let us hope the voters put more Pubs in charge of the Senate and then you two can wail that no one listened to you media Pravda dunces.

  • Ihaveaclue Doyou

    Just because he is the current Senate minority leader, doesn’t make him the best majority leader after 2014.

    • daniel155

      i would not put it past Reid to reinstate the previous filibuster rules in a lame duck session if the Democrats do lose the Senate.

      • michael renn

        And i would definitely support Reid in that endeavor.

  • fbowman

    It would take ONE Democrat fillibuster and the GOP will change the Senate rules for legislation. Reid set the president so the Democrats will have to live with it.

  • Moonlight Hangzhou

    Obama has proposed a 2015 budget of 3.9 trillion dollars. This is crazy. The House and Senate need to get their act together and shrink government spending in a big way. Additionally they need to understand the education shortfalls that will lead our next economic moves so we can employ the unemployed. Stop handing out money for nothing including to foreign governments. They need to push China into support for the situations like UN support troops so they can share the responsibility to world peace. They need to walk the walk instead of talk the talk so much. This way they will truly share the burden..

  • Whit_Chambers

    Reid is a low POS….. he should be frog-marched across the border and put in a mexican prison for about 50 years

  • Montesquieu

    Where most activities are restricted and controlled, the term “liberties” is often used to describe those options which are still available.

  • Larry Hollingsworth

    I don’t want to lose the Republican seat in Kentucky but I would prefer McConnell not be the Senate majority leader.

  • Hugh Jass

    Those who harbor utopian delusions work very hard to undermine the institutions and traditions, such as private property, upon which civilization depends.

  • Sam Sung

    Despite conceited claims by those opposing liberty, we cannot change our morals, customs, and traditions without risking irreparable damage to the civilization that relies upon them.

  • Audrey_I

    Mitch McConnell does not deserve support when he brokers deals with Democrats where the Democrats get ninety percent of what they want. Mitch McConnell is a closet supporter of Barack Hussein Obama.

  • Audrey_I

    Harry Reid is the most partisan and nastiest little man to ever lead the Senate. As long as the Democrats make socialism their priority, the Republicans need to everything in their power to oppose those who want to destroy America.

    Mitch McConnell has been an enabler and not a leader.

Sign In

Forgot password?

Or

Subscribe

Receive daily coverage of the people, politics and personality of Capitol Hill.

Subscription | Free Trial

Logging you in. One moment, please...