Does Congress repeatedly re-voting on the same thing, knowing that it will never pass, just to score points against your opponent actually work?

Does this really make a difference in the real world? – Only to the extent that it keeps politicians occupied and limits how much real trouble they can cause.

If a politician says that his opponent voted against a measure three or four or fifty-two times who comes off looking stupid, the opponent or politician for proposing it so many times?- In my opinion, just about all of them have terrific stupid potential. But sometimes, the really stupid people are the constituents who believe the politicians.

Does repeatedly voting on the same thing over and over (and not even expecting different results) make you any more right in the eyes of those who agree with you or any less wrong in the eyes of those who don’t? Look at Congress’s public approval rating.

Is it not obvious to the electorate that it is/was only a political ploy? I think if it was universally obvious, they would not do it. Some idiot out there is buying it. Just not that many.

Is it ever going to sway someones vote or does it just mollify the base? In an election year, it just might influence a vote or two.

Is it just so much preaching to the choir? In an election year, yes.

As a citizen I only see it as a waste of time and money and as a stalling tactic to avoid other issues that need to be handled. I don’t think they honestly think it will change the minds or the votes in the future but they want to go on record as being against or for it.
I’m waiting in the future for others to simply get up and say, “we’ve been through this a million times, how about we forget the speeches and just go straight for the no vote like we always do.”
I think they don’t realize how many people could care less if they voted 100 times or 1 time. I’ll give you an idea. I just met a woman passing out flyers for a congressional candidate. She was so passionate. She could tell me about this one thing he was against and that should appeal to me. He was a republican. She told me that she met him and he was such a nice guy. But she couldn’t tell me other things he voted for or against.

These guys could color their butts red, white and blue and stand bare butt in the House and the majority of voters will never know they did it unless the media posted the pictures everywhere.
They are just delaying till the Next Government shut down coming in October. Which will be stupid. They will be handing over the Presidential Election for the Republicans to Donald Trump.

Well the fact that they keep doing this on issue after issue leads me to believe that constructive work on meaningful and necessary matters is being neglected. Though mine is a complaint repeated in every era since the founding of the country, I am certain that the quality of the people we send to the Congress has slid considerably in my lifetime, and in the last 20 years, nothing better demonstrates this than the evolution of conservative politics in the Congress. And though the undeniable idiocy on the right may be striking, the milquetoast supposed opposition from what passes for the left is nothing to brag about either.

The Iran deal is not a perfect solution, and has not been presented as perfect by anyone, anywhere.

That said, the Republicans are probably dooming the deal to failure. If the deal doesn’t fail at a great cost of American lives and money, the Republicans come off looking petty and obstructionist.

The Republicans are now fully invested in the failure of American policy and diplomacy in the Mideast. If that doesn’t scare you, it should.

The ACA is still in place, so I would guess that it does not work. Personally, I think it makes them look pretty silly.

@Pandora She could tell me about this one thing he was against and that should appeal to me.

This is a perfect example of what I call “tunnel-vision” or “one-issue” voters. Generally speaking, these voters are so passionate about one particular issue or agenda that they don’t realize (or possibly don’t even care) if a given candidate or elected official is acting against their best interest in other areas, just as long as the official (or candidate) is supporting the “main” issue.