7 ms·
Breakdown of party affiliation and vote YEAs ---50 R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R NAYs -
by notmarkus 10y ago
Breakdown of party affiliation and vote
YEAs ---50
R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R
NAYs ---48
D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D I D D D D D D D D D D D D I D D D D D D D D D D D
Not Voting - 2
R R
(https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=115&session=1&vote=00094 https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_...)
- koolba 10y agoIt's interesting how the non-fixed font size makes the Ds look like they're more than the Rs.
- spinlock 10y agolet's replace the electoral college with non-fixed fonts!
- jacquesm 10y agoI'd suggest RLE: Yes: 50 Republicans No: 46 Democrats and 2 independents Abstentions: 2 Republicans edit: tx fjert!
- fjert 10y ago>No: 48 Democrats and 2 independents I think you meant 46 Democrats and 2 Independents.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- dwaltrip 10y agoThat's incredible. Our two party system is so clearly suboptimal, yet there seems to be no strong agreement, or even leading ideas, on what we can do to improve it. One day... if we can overcome our deeply set ideologies...
- rukittenme 10y agoI think the common consensus online is: more representatives and a transition to a non-FPTP (first-past-the-post) voting system.
- pcmaffey 10y agoA 3rd party? Even if they held only 4 seats, would change the entire political landscape.
- neaden 10y agoEh. Multiparty systems generally form a couple of coalitions anyway. It's not really clear to me what the big difference would be if Rand Paul had an L next to his name instead of an R.
- pcmaffey 10y agoPerhaps he'd vote against instead of abstaining, since he wouldn't be beholden to the big R? Breaking the dialectic stranglehold the two party system has on this country would be the benefit. Nothing's perfect, but multiparty gives the system more diverse voices, more opportunity for people to choose and think for themselves.
- gpawl 10y agovoting with the minority is the same as abstaining.
- pfranz 10y agoI think the idea is that with multiple parties the coalitions would be more fluid. There's already a soft version of that with "blue dog" and "gang of 8." You do need some sort of coalition to get anything passed.
- ajross 10y agoThird parties in a non-parliamentary government always serve to hurt their own interests. No matter what the messaging or issues or preferences du jour are, they will always end up being more closely aligned with one of the two major parties than they are with the other. And thus they will "steal votes" from that party. The more successful the third party is, the more successful the less closely aligned major party will be.
- Analemma_ 10y agoBut, but, the internet told me that both sides are equally bad!
- MrZongle2 10y agoBoth sides serve different masters, none of which is the American public. If one offers you ice cream more often than the other, that doesn't make them "less bad". Chemotherapy is "less bad" than cancer, but most folks generally don't want to have either.
- colmvp 10y agoIf one party says, "hey, let's try to work on this bill together" and essentially appropriates a lot of the ideas from one of the opposing members (Romney), and is able to create a compromised, conservative approach to at least helping millions of Americans get health insurance (the ACA), and other side says, "let's undo this right now, not because we have a better solution, but because politically we have to" and tries to expedite the process because they know their bill wouldn't survive a rigorous and lengthy review, which is predicted to give substantial savings to the richest people in America while leaving millions without healthcare, then yes, I would say one side is 'less bad.'
- MrZongle2 10y agoYou can cherry-pick this all day long. Partisans from both sides can point to specific cases of the opposing party behaving badly and/or biting an outstretched hand. Both parties are self-serving. Both parties have supported the surveillance state. Both parties ignore their constituents when convenient. Both parties have promoted legislation that they themselves are exempt from. "Less bad" is a red herring. What's better, a shit sandwich or a sandwich with 90% less shit in it? Partisans will try to convince you that any sandwich will have shit in it, and their particular sandwich's shit is barely noticeable and actually good for you if you were smart enough to realize it.
- ebspelman 10y ago
- trendia 10y agoThe only two Republicans who didn't vote for the bill were Rand Paul and Johnny Isakson. Pretty sad. edit: Rand Paul is listed as a cosponsor on the bill.
- pcmaffey 10y agoAlso a problem with this political setup: they chose not to vote rather than voting against. To avoid being wood-shedded by their party I assume?
- drzaiusapelord 10y agoNot present is not a 'no' vote. Its a petty attempt to not be associated this bill once Paul knew the GOP had enough votes to pass it without him. He could have voted no and stopped this bill if he chose.
- emehrkay 10y agoHacker News'ers, why did you vote for republican senators knowing they'd do something like this?
- jrs235 10y agoDidn't expect Trump to win.
- komali2 10y agoWas it a protest vote then? edit: Oh I see, you voted for a republican senator but not necessarily a republican president.
- AdmiralAsshat 10y agoAnd knowing that you personally helped bring this about, what do you plan to do?
- jrs235 10y agoFight the two party system.
- ebfd 10y agoThe changing demography of the country is a bigger issue to me than internet privacy laws.
- vedranm 10y agoNot a US citizen, but I would vote for Rand Paul if I was and had the option to do so, even in the 2016 presidential primaries. Why? He's, among the current set of senators on both sides, the most libertarian one and, despite not being a purist on the level of his father, I consider him worthy of the Paul surname. It's impossible to predict something down to this fine graining, but I agree with Rand on the issues he lists at [1] and he has a record of standing against NSA spying [2]. [1] https://randpaul.com/issues https://randpaul.com/issues [2] http://www.cbsnews.com/news/rand-paul-wraps-up-nsa-filibuster-after-10-hours/ http://www.cbsnews.com/news/rand-paul-wraps-up-nsa-filibuste...