Am I the only one here who thinks the Repubs will cave on financial reform?

I believe the two Maine senators, Brown from Mass and possibly even what's his face from Iowa who is going to have a tough re-election bid and possibly others will in the end be voting for the bill. I also predict a couple of them will be standing behind Obama when he signs the bill. I don't think Obama is going to give much on this bill and the Republicans are going to have to swallow their pride but swallow they will, this time. Am I being too optimistic?

... so I dont know about "cave" and I doubt she'll be standing behind the President .... but yeah ... I expect Susan Collins (at least) to vote for the bill.

of FAIL pie being served up to them by Pres. Obama and the Democratic party. By this time next year, they will be rolling over to us on a regular basis.

I'm not even sure what hand they're dealing here, besides the "we're against everything that n_____ proposes". I'm not sure how the obstructionist approach is going to work for them in this case - especially listening to the animosity of the right-wing trolls to the bank bailouts that they weren't against when Bush implemented them - lol.

not them. How that is going to work over the long term remains to be seen. They were at a loss to explain their recent meetings with Wall Street and campaign contributions from them. They are fixated on this idea that the reform bill allows for perpetual bank bailouts like TARP (although, as I understand it, it is actually a fund that BANKS would pay into to be used if they would need to be propped up in the future) and so they are using that as a club to beat the Democrats over the head with and try to tie them to Wall Street. Obama was apparently willing to concede that portion of the bill but the Republicans still said "no" and are now insisting, as they did during the HCR debate, that everybody start all over again with another "clean sheet of paper". :eyes:

AKA - an INSURANCE POLICY

Republicans are so fucking stupid that they are going to mess up a really good provision in the proposal to score political points. Motherfucking morons!

Hugh Morans!!!! :hi:

when he speaks on reforms on Thursday.

although I'm sure he will. I don't get why some people think he's weak because so far he's been pretty damned aggressive towards the Repubs from what I've been seeing of him.

reform will give more bailouts to the financial industry...which is a bald face lie. If they accept it like they accepted "death panels" most of the GOP may stay obstructionist.

Besides, Obama and Geithner have already stated that the $50B self-funded insurance policy is not a deal breaker for them, though I get the feeling that the Dems in the Senate want to shove it down the Republican's throats for bald-faced LYING about it.

campaign slogan.

Mitch McConnell is really looking like an asshole right now because of his flagrant lying about financial reform and his connections to Wall Street. There's only so much of that they can take before they cave.

And if all else fails, the financial reform bill can be turned into an amendment and attached to some other must-pass bill.

Snowe has said the bill needs to be more bipartisan, whatever that means. Basically these two are repeating the same thing they did with healthcare reform.

One would think that opposing financial reform would be political suicide. Yet, here we are. Again. When you have the mainstream media carrying your water for you, and a population that generally lacks critical thinking skills, you can get away with just about anything, apparently.

I think it will be very hard to explain not doing so. Especially those from bluer states.

Julie

The only way that the Dems are going to win this is by tying the Repubs to the dastardly Wall Street bankers. They have to run ads against the Repubs and hope that the public will join them.

As for the senators from Maine and even Brown, they will stay with their buddies since that is the only strategy that they have. They have nothing else in their playbook.

He has spent the last few days talking about how he will not support any bill concerning financial reform because as far as he's concerned things are JUST fine the way they are.

Why everyone thinks Scott Brown is some sort of moderate who will actually take principled stands as opposed to a Jim DeMint in sheep's clothing is beyond me. He's two-faced scum and if you let him fool you he will--over and over.

where he spoke of tens of thousands of jobs that it would cost in MA. Even Scheiffer, who was willing to give him a platform that few Senators get in their first year, pushed back on. http://www.google.com/search?q=Scott%20Brown&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbo=u&tbs=nws:1&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wn#

The Boston Globe really covered that very thoroughly - which was good because they had been giving him better coverage than he deserved. http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2010/04/20/democrats_hit_brown_over_job_loss_estimates/

But, there was another slip he made that appears to have gone unnoticed. He speaks of chairing an Armed Services sub-committee hearing the day before the Palin rally in Boston. Here it is 8 and 1/2 minutes in. The Chair was actually Lieberman. No Republican chairs anything on Armed Services - and if they controlled the Senate - he might be too junior to chair a sub-committee. (This also fits a pattern where he sometimes seems to thing he is more than a Senator. )

After all he went to good colleges, Tufts and Boston College (for Law school), so you would think that he would be able to speak in reasonably clear sentences and seem to have some coherent view of the topic, but in everything I've seen he has gone off tangent - speaking of jobs in Afghanistan(??) and left me with no idea of what he thought on the main issue.

I also don't think many Senators confuse sitting on a committee and chairing it.

His daughter is another attention-seeker. Lovely family.

In addition to the ones that you mentioned, Corker has said that the differences he has could be resolved quickly. I don't know about Brown. He is trying to play to two audiences - ignoring that they are incompatible. He has stood behind the idiotic comments on the tens of thousands job losses this bill will create, even when his supposed source said that was a bad (somehow doubled) estimate of jobs lost by the company since the market crashed.

My guess is that they will push some change - and no matter how insignificant, say they fixed it.