does it matter anyway?

Senate seems to need 60 votes for anything to happen

This is why we need not just the WH but a dem 60+ majority in Nov

We can do this with Obama as the top of the ticket

I have no doubt that Pelosi and Reid will, as expected, notify candidates they need to attend a vote if it is an important issue that may not pass in the dems favor. The same is true for the republican leaders regarding needing McCain to attend a vote. I dont see this is a concern.

The Senate is a ponderous and sometimes excruciatingly deliberative body... and it was created so. Most items are introduced and sent to committee. Actually, let's be glad that they don't crank them out without fully looking into ramifications... they also need Congressional concurrence... so no big whop.

Could someone tell why Senator Obama missed 1/3 of votes? Thanks.

I'll tell you why Obama missed 1/3 of the vote. Because he's out campaigning. Unlike Hillary is known to most. Obama is not. Hillary AND McCain have ALSO miss 1/3 of the votes. THATS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU'RE RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT.

alison - the winning party in the Presidential years usually gains seats in Congress because a lot of people vote party ticket. That doesnt mean either side will gain a filibuster proof majority in the Senate. It also means that it does not matter which dem is on top of the ticket. What matters is whether the dems can win. They wond win without a team that appeals to the dem party voters who are loyal (not the indies and reps who support Obama).

Vanessa - try using real numbers, McCain 56.9%
Obama 40.6%
Clinton 29.2%

Clinton clearly leads the other candidates in doing her job as Senator while campaigning for President.

Just wondering - was one of the votes that you're counting in Hillary's total the one she cast to give Bush the go ahead to go to war in Iraq? Because if it is, I sure wish she'd spend more time on the campaign trail, and less time aiding and abetting the worst foreign-policy disaster in the history of this nation.

balth - Those are stats for the current Senate courtesy of the washington post database that keeps track. I dont have a problem with the votes in 2002 because I think they all did the best they could with the lies they were told. Obama was not a US Senator and did not vote under fire. He has already acknowledged he does not know how he would have voted at the time because he did not have the correct information. Most of his surrogates all voted the same way Clinton did for the same reason. Oh I guess you are not thinking about that... shouldnt he be denouncing and rejecting support from them? LOL

Thanks. It does raise more red flags about whether Senator Obama is qualified for the job.

Using "I was too busy campaigning" as an excuse is a poor quality for someone who wants to be a president. Obama has been chairman of Senate Foreign Relations Committee since January 2007, he has not held a single hearing. When asked, he said he was too busy campaigning. Obama stated that he pressed the wrong voting button 6 times.... Is this the type of president you want? LOL I know Obama surrogates claim Hillary would do anything to win the presidency. Think real hard if Obama isn't himself.

Dao - I think Joe Biden would be surprised that you have promoted Obama to be chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee! Obama is only chair of one of the several sub-committees.

My bad (and apologizes to Joe Biden =P) for not giving enough details. Obama is the chairman of the European Affairs, a subcommitte of Senate Foreign Relations Committee. And he hasn't held a single hearing since he became the chairman of the subcommittee.

Hillary has lost 14 contest out of 16 since super tuesday. This includes Texas now that it is confirmed he won the caucus which gives him more delegates for the state. Obama has won more states, more votes, and more delegates than hillary. How can she still be considered viable since she can't overtake his lead in states/delegates.

If Senators (or anyone holding political office) want to run for President then they should have to resign their seat in the senate. How is it they continue to get paid when they don't do their job? We essentially are paying them tax dollars to campaign. There is something very wrong with this.

alison: There is no rule requiring 60 votes to have cloture; the Senate rules require 3/5 members present to pass a cloture motion. In reality, there are very few votes where all 100 Senators are present, so the cloture threshold becomes lower. Moreover, the Senate decides most matters by voice vote. Only a few bills, resolutions, orders, motions, or votes are ever subjected to filibuster, and even fewer are actually clotured (because the rules provide for an additional 30 hours of debate after a cloture vote).

floyd: Because Obama doesn't have an absolute majority of the delegates, and Hillary believes that she can win the remainder in upcoming primaries and/or the convention. I don't think anyone should blame Hillary for being in the race at this point; they should blame the lame proportional representation rules to make it "fairer." I guess the Democrats love fairness as long as it means they lose elections.

Yes Andrew - the DNC does not seem to understand that their delegate apportioning system they allow the states to have is what beats them out of most elections since they do not always nominate the most electable candidate as a result. Hopefully, the SDs will show courage and do their job to offset disparities caused by the system design. (Without undue influence by surrogate organizations or polarizing issues.)

I think, Hillary would win the race for nomination, because:
- she wins Puerto Rico and gets all 63 delegates
- she wins florida again and has 50 delegates more
- she wins michigan and has 20 delegates more
- she das 40 more superdelegates
Summary: 177 delegates and she rises to the win !!!

There will be enormous pressure by the media , racist african american voters, and other radicals to seat obama because he has more delegates, in spite of the fact he cant win ONE major swing state. In fact , the only MINOR swing state he won, was at the 11th hour and by less than 1% Missouri.

This scenario seems very familiar, we have a candidate that is going to win the popular vote but he can still lose the election. Obama deserves the nomination.

I think it would be refreshing to hear the candidates get to the meat of the issues. Tell me what you will do for "we the people" if elected as our president. I want to be able to afford all of the medical benefits awarded to our government offfice holders. I want my husband to be able to retire at an age where he can enjoy the time he has left. I'd like for my husband to be able to work without fear of another of his jobs being outsourced to another country.
I want to be able to buy products made in America, by Americans. I want to purchase safe food/drugs made or grown here.
Why can't they impose high terriffs on goods made outside the counrty? Why can't businesses be taxed highly for goods manufactored wholely or in part in other counrties?
Let's work together to get :Made in America" to be a source of pride again.. even if it means paying a little more . This is sure to give us more confidence in the goods we are buying and ensure that America stays working and paying our share.

could anyone tell me why he markes him self down as present over 100times in his short 2 years as us senate,

If I remember correctly, at least the two democrats have been EXCUSED from voting. I think on main issues they come back, like lowering the definition of rich to just over $31,000 for this "blueprint" on the budget.