Welcome to Dem Land

[aj3647]

Recalculating, that means the 31 yes votes and 20 nays from this bunch in 2012 works out to 61% not 66% as I previously wrote. My point still stands that Democrats voted much more for extending FISA in 2012 [[61%) than in 2018 [[44.7%)

31/53 = 58%, not 61%. That's twice now you messed up basic math, the first being when you claimed there were 59 Democrats instead of 53. It's OK, math is hard, much like how the English language is hard for Richard.

But hey, there you go, the percentage of House Democrats opposing FICA remains largely unchanged and the percentage of Senate Democrats supporting it dropped from 58% to 44%. So clearly that's proof of a HUGE anti-Trump effect. 14 whole percentage points in one chamber of Congress! WOW! I would point out that many of the Democrats who voted for it in 2012 were "Blue Dogs" or red state Democrats who are no longer in Congress. Just to name a few: Joe Lieberman, Mary Landrieu, Kent Conrad, Kay Hagan, Mark Pryor, Ben Nelson, Tim Johnson, Jim Webb, Jay Rockefeller, etc. So, just consider this strange possibility, do you think that 14% point swing in the Senate might have something to do with the fact that the composition of Senate Democrats in 2018 is different than it was in 2012 and maybe not just reflexive hatred of Trump? If it was all about Trump, shouldn't there have been almost no Democratic votes at all? We've seen plenty of party line votes already, such as the tax bill, so pointing to a 14% drop in support among Democrats in one chamber isn't really indicative of anything since if they voted based on hatred of Trump, there would have been 0 votes in support.

Also, if Obama signing the FISA reauthorization in 2012 makes him a "dictator" according to you, what does that make Trump? You know he also signed the FISA reauthorization last week. I mean, surely you will apply your political standards equally and not judge Obama and Trump differently for doing quite literally the exact same thing.

What do you think they do? Go there with a #2 pencil with an ereaser and just write over something.Before you can change or reform anything you have to remove what is already written or repeal it.

All the word semantics in the world will not change that.

Amending a bill and repealing it are NOT the same thing, even if they are in your head.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/repeal

: to rescind or annul by authoritative act; especially : to revoke or abrogate by legislative enactment

That's why last year the Republicans made it a point to distinguish between REPEALING Obamacare or REPEALING and REPLACING Obamacare, whereas the Democrats wanted to AMEND it. See the difference? Some Republicans just wanted it to go away entirely and not replace it with anything [[repeal). Some wanted it to go away entirely and then replace it with something brand new and completely different [[repeal and replace). Democrats wanted to keep it and make changes to it so it would function better [[amend). I literally can't dumb this down any further for you so your brain can comprehend it. Changing a law is not "repealing" it, nor do you have to "repeal" a law in order to change it. Don't get mad at me because you don't understand the English language, that's on you.