Why the sudden "bi-partisanship" from the Republicans?

[kentuck]

It's rather simple.

They are political animals, if nothing else. They know this would have been a losing issue for them. They did not need or want that before the elections in November.

Instead, they will take credit for passing financial reform. Even though, they will be voting mostly for a Democratic bill. They will say that they are not the Party of "No". In fact, when there are issues that they agree with, they are willing to vote with the Democrats.

The truth of the matter is that they are willing to vote with the Democrats when they know the Democrats have a winning issue. It doesn't matter if they agree or not. It's a simple political equation for the Republicans.

[liberal N proud]

1. They want to burn the candle at both ends

They know that this needs to be done, they just don't want to piss off the big bankers who throw parties for them and write big fat checks.

[havocmom]

4. And by 'being on board' they stand a better chance of getting in-put

and there-by mitigating some of the REAL reforms that might happen. The window dressing: REFORM, is about all most voters pay attention to. The nitty-gritty of the legislation and whether it does what needs to be done is fine print most don't notice.

Being on board the process is just a multi-faceted CYA tactic for the GOP (and probably, too many DEMs too)

[napi21]

2. I bet they all received a lot of calls from angry constituents too! nt

[CTyankee]

3. Correct! They will say they "improved" Obama's bill and then it was passed.

You see, it's all so simple...

[old mark]

5. The GOP is facing a mid term election this year - they are going into it

with less money than the Democrats, something they are not used to. They are being splintered by RW groups such as the teabaggers who are getting some of the money the GOP needs, and may be fielding their own candidates who will attract some GOP voters. The GOP is also purging many moderate republicans who are becoming Independents or even (gasp) Democrats. They GOP finds themselves with a smaller base, little money and getting bad media attention. They are thinking they may LOSE in November, when everybody was just saying how much they would WIN...
All of a sudden,real bipartisanship may not be so bad.
They still blocked all those Federal appointments the other day, too - don't count on a LOT of GOP reasonableness, not ever - they ain't got much.

m

[WilliamPitt]

6. And they want to save their political capital for the upcoming SCOTUS fight.

[Xenotime]

7. Maybe it's because we kicked their asses and know we will do it again.

[saltpoint]

8. Agree. They can occasionally remove their noggins from their

netherzones long eough to support a bill likely to have enormous public support.

They got them 'lections comin' up and god amighty the Repubs are keepin' their noses clean on this one.

Their reflexive response of course was to unite against it. But I imagine telephones began ringing in various Senate offices and the calculators came out and behold, they seem to be behaving a bit better. Voters out in voterland are already peeved. No sense making things worse.

McConnell and his people might want to give some thought also to soft-pedaling their opposition to the president's SCOTUS nominee, especially if it is a female nominee, since in the first place Obama would be carrying out the duties of his job by replacing a retiring Justice and half or so of the voting population is female and many of them, you know, vote.

[redqueen]

9. People wanted a public option, but they fought tooth and nail against it.

So I'm not so sure about that theory that it's because they'll vote with us if we have a winning issue.

[kentuck]

11. I think "we" wanted the public option ...

but the vast population were vulnerable to the Republican spin against it. They did not see it as a political loser, as they do with the financial reform. However, it could be that the Democrats were not as aggressive for the public option as they appear to be for financial reform.

[redqueen]

13. Polls seemed to say otherwise.

That most people (not just 'we') wanted health reform that went further, and included a public option.

I do agree that they are probably just scared that they won't be able to spin this away.

It's got nothing to do with getting behind winning ideas though, IMO... it's just fear about getting beat down in the next election.

[kentuck]

14. True, I think most polls showed support for the public option...

However, since the Democrats did not pursue it, it became easier for the Republicans to attack the entire idea of reform. It's always about the next election. You are correct.

[Gman2]

10. They arent trying to be agreeable. We are laughing at their impotent repeal and replace.

[Crystal Clarity]

12. Anyway the wind blows

You've got them pegged for the hypocrites they truly are

[Cresent City Kid]

15. It is harder for them to back Wall Street against Main Street

and get away with it. The details are complex, but the good guys and bad guys are easier to distiguish. Also, the Democratic message is more clear: the bill outlaws bailouts. The "wid us or agin us" strategy a la Bush has the gop backed into a corner.

[AlinPA]

16. The vote for cloture hasn't been taken yet. I'm not optimistic. nt

[Winterblues]

17. But now they have sided with Socialists and Commies and Fascists and Hitler and ....

How can they ever look another tea bagger in the eye again?