|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
jgraz (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-17-09 01:17 AM Original message |
Why *CAN'T* Connecticut recall LIEbermouse? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TheWraith (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-17-09 01:19 AM Response to Original message |
1. Because you'd need 3/4 majority in each chamber? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jgraz (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-17-09 01:22 AM Response to Reply #1 |
3. Is it really just the "blogosphere" who can't stand Lieberman? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TheWraith (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-17-09 01:27 AM Response to Reply #3 |
6. I doubt he's got an overall 75% disapproval rate. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
quiller4 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-17-09 03:39 AM Response to Reply #3 |
11. Lieberman still polls well in his home state. Members of the state |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hlthe2b (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-17-09 01:22 AM Response to Original message |
2. Because US representatives and Senators are covered by the |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jgraz (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-17-09 01:24 AM Response to Reply #2 |
4. Good point. So let's amend the Federal Constitution |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hlthe2b (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-17-09 01:27 AM Response to Reply #4 |
5. I've been waiting since the 1970s for women's rights to be ratified |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jgraz (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-17-09 01:34 AM Response to Reply #5 |
7. We never really try anymore. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hlthe2b (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-17-09 01:55 AM Response to Reply #7 |
8. Well, if the selection of 2000 did not stir a real effort to amend |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
greennina (295 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-17-09 02:50 AM Response to Original message |
9. I don't understand the need for the recall. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EmeraldCityGrl (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-17-09 02:56 AM Response to Original message |
10. Why would they want to recall him? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Mon Sep 16th 2024, 02:34 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
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