Do Dems Have A Unified Message To Counter GOP Filibuster Of Fin Reform? Not Yet

How 'bout making the GOPers do a real filibuster for a change? Make them get up there and spend 24/7 arguing why we should cut Wall St. some slack.

I mean, enough is enough.

Is there something they know that the rest of us don't?

Their behavior is remarkably similar to the position the Bush Administration constantly took: no one could have anticipated A happening, while everyone else knew A was, of course going to happen.

They didn't expect GOP obstruction? Really? They really are the Charlie Brown party.

Beyond disappointing.

Way to drum up support for the midterms, guys.

"Oh no! The mean old Republicans might filibuster. Should we just capitulate now before they get mad at us? We don't have any plan to fall back on if they do filibuster the bill! I want my Mommy!"

What a bunch of pathetic cowards the Democrats in Washington are!

Here's a suggestion you cowering pussies: fight them! Expose them for the Wall Street shills they are! Force them to remain on the Senate floor 24/7 until they capitulate and show the nation what kind of whores they really are.

But then, that would take some balls wouldn't it?

Dems: "Bring it on!"
Reps: "OK"
Dems: "WTF?!"

Somehow, no Republican Senators are in any position to be threatened with the revocation of anything they might want. Amazing. Democrats have had power in both houses for how long now, and they've managed to pressure the Republicans HOW many times? Zero? less than zero? Disgusting.

Or it would be disgusting if I were still under the impression that the two-party system existed to do anything but maintain existing power structures and prevent the ascension of independent, truly representative individuals.

The D's get pwned again by the R's. Amazing isn't? With the majorities the D's have not only can they get nothing passed they have no power to stop the rampaging minority who are calling the shots. An exercise in post-partisan impotence.

The real problem is that this highlights the Democrat's bailout fund for the Goldman Sachs of the world. Goldman won't need the money, the people who OWE Goldman will. Just like they did this time around.
And of course the implicit guarantee from Govt. lurks a la Fannie and Freddie.... who now have an explicit guarantee.

A company going out of business doesn't need money from a fund. They are self-funding. A company that has to be propped up to pay off counter-parties does. Any protest to the contrary is just not believable.

I gotta agree with Douglash that Republicans holding together to oppose cloture should ALWAYS have been, and should still be, anticipated as a VERY REALISTIC possibility. The truth is having shrunk to 40/41 Senators makes it MORE likely a party hangs together, since they HAVE to as a matter of survival.

And more broadly, Democrats NEED to pass this bill, that's what voters expect when you have a supermajority (and 59 Senators is still a supermajority, even if shy of the magic 60). Obama understands that, he wants a bill passed.

All that said, Republicans are NOT acting like they did on health care. It's clear a few of them BADLY WANT a real deal, not just to play games and stall. Corker wants a deal, Snowe wants a deal, and I imagine the same goes for several others. They're talking in public very differently from how they talked at any point on health care.

Duh..the current Senate rules don't require that a real filibuster take place. There is no way, under those rules, to make anyone actually stand there and talk all night.

Lots of things could be done, if the Democratic Party was as autocratic as the Repub Party, but it isn't. For example, they could pull off a "nuclear option", or they could change the Senate Rules, or they could manipulate the reconciliation rules to cover this bill, etc. But, none of those tactics work when there is a large minority of Democrats who lean towards the Repub position on everything.

Then, there is the assumed power of the President to set up laws just by presidential proclamation, but Obama refuses to do anything like that unless it benefits corporations.

It's a feint designed to sucker the GOP into a false sense of security.

There is very little risk for the GOoPers in blocking ALL Dem legislation. Their constituents don't seem to mind; they never do.

GOp was incredibly smart to force retirement on all incumbents that would have been vulnerable - Martinez, Bunning, Voinovich, Gregg and Bond.

No way Voinovich could have not voted for this and expect any chance at re-election.

And I expect similar retirements for 2012 with Snowe and Luger being retired. Ensign will be out as well, and I think the GOP will use Scott Brown to obstruct now with no real hope he'll hold the seat in 2012 anyways. Kyl, Wicker, Hatch, Corker and Barasso are safe GOP seats.

Can we please stop with the "Make them filibuster the old way" BS?

First of all, Mr. Smith was fiction. Second, the current rules of the Senate (which have been in place for decades) would need to be changed and the earliest that can happen is January of next year.

So please, just stop. Its a nice fantasy, but it is just that. A FANTASY.

Instead, of living in a fantasy world, try coming up with ways to pressure gettable Senate votes to vote for cloture and possibly the bill itself. One of the best ways to do this is to target Senators that are up for re-election in November.

Even if they are in safe districts, concerted LTE's and pressing the local press to report that they are voting the will of the Wall Street Execs that wrecked our economy with their extremely risky and in some cases fraudulent practices. Remind people over and over again that the Republicans are voting against oversight and transparency of the Financial Industries. That Republicans don't want to make it illegal for Wall Street to create an investment portfolio that is designed to fail and deceive investors with prospectus that lie about the investment product.

The message writes itself--they just need to go on the air and repeat it every hour of every day. If they can't do that then they deserve to lose.

Chess? No. Checkers? No. Tittly-winks? You betcha!

Oh yes, those good old, wonderful days of the lockstep Democratic party with a unified message during the healthcare debate, according Brian Beutler's "concerned source." Thanks for the reminder.

OK, those pusillanimous Dems have no Plan B. I await some genius around here to suggest one that ends a Republican filibuster or just perhaps, the best Plan B is to let these Repugs filibuster and then to make this a serious electoral issue. It is never wise to count on the Democrats to be the attack dogs, unless they are fighting each other, but the latest DNC ad is really good and shows some promise. In addition, voters may not grasp the complexities of healthcare policy, but they know, in spite of all the bullshit from CNBC and Fox, who ate away their 401Ks, and it will not take much reminding. Let the Republicans pull their Gingrich strategies on the wrong issues, and let them enjoy the same results.

Nothing but corrupt and clueless idiots in the WH and congressional leadership..

...everyone knows that the bill is nothing but payback to his bankster buddies for throwing all that money his way during the election..

I think Bammie and Co. are stupid enough to try to paint this as GOP protection of the banks...funny thing...the GOP is proposing tougher provisions..but the corrupt Jackassocrats want to keep the bankster spigot flowing

Oh come on. This is nonsense. First you build up the Dems by saying they are ready for whatever when it comes to financial reform, today you say they aren't, but they are sorta kinda but not as forcefully as you think they should. The Dem machine is not as forceful as the GOP, but to say they didn't see this coming is bullshit. I don't care how many ways you spin it or how many lies the GOP tells, they will. not. win. this. one. People need to stop pissing in their pants every time the GOP opens their mouth. They are burying themselves by opposing financial reform. Stop the hand wringing. Maybe just maybe they think its best to let this play out and if the GOP doesn't comply, pummel them with it over the summer or going into the elections.

Jesus, I'm as much a non-fan of Democratic wimpiness and cluelessness as anybody, but this constant stream of weakly sourced sky-is-falling posts is really getting old.

It is, quite simply, a lie to claim that this bill leads to institutionalized bailouts. It's also a lie to claim that the bill was constructed in a partisan fashion. The White House and Democrats are calling out that lie. That's enough. That's the plan. When Republicans lie, call them liars and call them out on it. And I'd like to believe that the media might actually care enough about facts (and not just the game playing) to call the GOP on it too.

This doesn't really seem like an actual story. First you say the Democrats have no plan B, then they have a plan B, but not an organized enough one. The quotes from outside groups seem more along the lines of "we don't want to talk about our Plan B."

I'm having trouble figuring out what the story is here; something along the lines of "The Democrats may or may not have a Plan B if Republicans follow through on their threat to filibuster Financial Reform, but we can't get anyone to say anything interesting about it, so we'll assume there is no Plan B, unless maybe there is, in which case it may or may not be as tightly coordinated a response as you might expect, or at least hoped for."

This is not a story -- it's a waste of space. The Plan B is the election. I don't see Democrats going to McConnell, who insists that every GOP member ignore the president, and asking him what he wants the bill to include. It's not going to happen.

The senate is set up for a super-majority. Dodd needed to get GOPers to actually commit to backing the bill before it left committee. This didn't happen. Plan B is the election, folks, and that is a risky bet (but something that may be necessary).

Democrats should force Republicans to filiabuster this bill and stand in the weil for a week. Every candidate running for office in November will have ready made commercials to run on. If financial reform actually has to wait until next year, so be it. It's better than caving in to Republicans and accepting a watered down, do nothing bill. Sometimes nothing does beat something!

""When Republicans pulled their obstructionist tricks during healthcare, there was an immediate response from every pro-reform group," says a concerned source working in messaging at one of the largest Dem-aligned financial reform pressure groups in the country."

Are you kidding me? When were the Dems ready? In August facing the Town Halls? In January when Scott Brown was elected?
If that was so, the Dems would have passed the bill much earlier with much stronger support. We still suffer now from the lame response of the Dems in the HCR debate.
If at all the Dems are now much better organized and coordinated for FINREF than they ever were for HCR.

why is tpm trying to cause trouble where there isn't any? the dems will do ok. hmmmmmm isn't obama going on tv thursday?

I thought the origin of the term "filibuster" might be of interest to readers here. This is from the Wikipedia article on "filibuster":

The term "filibuster" was first used in 1851. It was derived from the Spanish filibustero, which translates as "pirate" or "freebooter." This term had evolved from the French word flibustier, which itself evolved from the Dutch vrijbuiter (freebooter). This term was applied at the time to American adventurers, mostly from Southern states, who sought to overthrow the governments of Central American states, and was transferred to the users of the filibuster, seen as a tactic for pirating or hijacking debate.

As Will Rogers once said, "I'm not a member of any organized political party; I'm a Democrat."

Where the heck is our PR Director? Bueller...Bueller...

Are the Democrats being Charlie Brown again, or are we being had? How could they not know the Republicans are up to their old tricks again? Have they not been paying attention for the last 30 years?

What is worse? The Democrats actually being perpetually clueless or pretending to be perpetually clueless?