https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5048...-democrats

McConnell has handicapped the Republicans for 4 years. Hopefully the Republicans will elect a new Senate leader in 2025.


"Democrats are stepping up talks about reforming or abolishing the filibuster if they win back the Senate and White House in November.

The renewed discussions are being spurred by Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), an outspoken liberal who has long championed revamping the procedural tactic that Democrats see as a serious obstacle to passing legislation and confirming nominees...."

(06-29-2020 10:00 AM)bullet Wrote:  McConnell has handicapped the Republicans for 4 years. Hopefully the Republicans will elect a new Senate leader in 2025.

McConnell has been the Senate Republican leader for almost 14 years. Was “4” a typo, or do you mean he suddenly became a liability 4 years ago? And if he is a liability now, why wait until 2025 to replace him?

They should go back to actually having to filibuster.

In practice its just an artificial 60 vote threshold allowing it to be abused.

Make people fillibuster

If they want to get rid of the filibuster does that mean they will stand by their principles (lol, yeah, I know... I laughed as I typed it) and voluntarily end their own filibuster efforts? You know, to demonstrate their integrity.


OK, I have no idea how I even made it through typing that stuff about dems, principles and integrity.

(06-29-2020 10:28 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  If they want to get rid of the filibuster does that mean they will stand by their principles (lol, yeah, I know... I laughed as I typed it) and voluntarily end their own filibuster efforts? You know, to demonstrate their integrity.


OK, I have no idea how I even made it through typing that stuff about dems, principles and integrity.

I mean they used it LAST WEEK to block a black (republican) senators bill on police reform. They don't want solutions, they want all encompassing power to do as they please.

(06-29-2020 10:36 AM)TigersOhMy Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 10:28 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  If they want to get rid of the filibuster does that mean they will stand by their principles (lol, yeah, I know... I laughed as I typed it) and voluntarily end their own filibuster efforts? You know, to demonstrate their integrity.


OK, I have no idea how I even made it through typing that stuff about dems, principles and integrity.

I mean they used it LAST WEEK to block a black (republican) senators bill on police reform. They don't want solutions, they want all encompassing power to do as they please.

Exactly. Are they going to stop using it to show us just how righteous they are?

(06-29-2020 10:37 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 10:36 AM)TigersOhMy Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 10:28 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  If they want to get rid of the filibuster does that mean they will stand by their principles (lol, yeah, I know... I laughed as I typed it) and voluntarily end their own filibuster efforts? You know, to demonstrate their integrity.


OK, I have no idea how I even made it through typing that stuff about dems, principles and integrity.

I mean they used it LAST WEEK to block a black (republican) senators bill on police reform. They don't want solutions, they want all encompassing power to do as they please.

Exactly. Are they going to stop using it to show us just how righteous they are?

Obviously a rhetorical question :)

(06-29-2020 10:14 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 10:00 AM)bullet Wrote:  McConnell has handicapped the Republicans for 4 years. Hopefully the Republicans will elect a new Senate leader in 2025.

McConnell has been the Senate Republican leader for almost 14 years. Was “4” a typo, or do you mean he suddenly became a liability 4 years ago? And if he is a liability now, why wait until 2025 to replace him?

Obama was president 4 years ago. The filibuster wasn't being massively abused until Trump was elected.

(06-29-2020 10:23 AM)solohawks Wrote:  They should go back to actually having to filibuster.

In practice its just an artificial 60 vote threshold allowing it to be abused.

Make people fillibuster

Yeah, its like pushing a button instead of having to stand up and talk.

Well I mean they can kill it, but be ready for the crying when it's reversed and used on them.

There is nothing in the Constitution about needing 60 votes. Get rid of it.

McConnell has effectively destroyed the Senate.

Democrats shouldn’t vote to end the filibuster, however, we’ve reached a point where brokered, bi-partisan legislation is a pipe dream. The Senate was never intended to be the House... yet that’s how it now operates. Hopefully, the next majority leader will be less focused on ideological purity.

The senate was never intended to be the house of representatives. In the first place, it was supposed to represent the states, whereas the HOR was supposed to be the people's house. The 17th Amendment killed that.

McConnell is next to useless. But if you are looking for a leader less focused on ideological purity, it ain't Chuckie Schumer. There is no such thing as a major US political leader who is NOT focused on ideological purity.

(06-29-2020 11:39 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  There is nothing in the Constitution about needing 60 votes. Get rid of it.

Would you be opposed to keeping it but making people actually filibuster like in Mr Smith Goes to Washington?

The Senate is for deliberation and the point of a fillibuster is to force people to listen to you not an artificially high vote threshold

https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/his...Saturdays.

Imagine if they didnt actually make the opponents of the Civil Rights Act fillibuster. How long would it have taken to get 67 votes?

The filibuster against the bill backfired as America got tired of the crap and Senator's switched their votes out of fear of voter backlash.

Make Senator's filibuster and let the public decide if it's a worthwhile cause