fickman wrote:I want Strauss removed more than anybody.
But I'm not sure it would fix anything.
Can we reach quorum without the democrats? I fear they'd likely leave the state as they did in '03 if Strauss wasn't appeasing them with committee chairs and a moderated calendar. This would effectively shut the entire legislative session down and nothing would get passed.
(My guess is that we'd get a larger portion of our platform through, but still wouldn't have carte blanche.)
Also, is there a chance that we get a few revolutionary bills through and wake a sleeping, non-voting giant, effectively bringing the other side to action and possibly turning the state purple? (I hope not, but what if?)
Due to the size and population of the blue spots in this state, I don't think we'll ever get to pass things like they do in Oklahoma, Wyoming, or Alaska.
So instead, we're stuck.
- The dems support him because he gives them power
- The GOPers support him because it's too costly to be left out by yourself
- His district supports him because he's prominent and powerful
Outside of Patrick / Abbott finding something that the state base is desperately clamoring for and loudly pinning its failure to Strauss, we seem to be stuck with the status quo until he gets it in his mind to go off and try something else for a change.
You are really harshing my mellow.
Why all the negative waves, Moriarty?
It ain't working all that great right now. Doing so without Straus could not be worse. If the GOP acted like they had the majority, which they do, we might get somewhere.Instead, a lot of them get elected as conservative GOP then turn left. See my sig line.
