(06-24-2026 01:00 PM)UABFAN23 Wrote:  Either you shove the Save act into a reconciliation bill or you do the talking filibuster. If you can’t stand and out talk democrats until they give up, then you won’t stand up for America on anything else.

This is the most important bill in our lifetimes, besides the civil rights act that Republicans had no issues within its party about passing. Every course correcting and History making bill has been passed by republicans. No reason to balk now.

One other thing they *could* do is to amend the bill to address the giant gaping hole with regards to acceptable documents which would explicitly close off the main issue that is stacked against it -- that is the problem faced by married women.

If they allow for an easier path in that regard (that is *specifically* include the a change of name document as an allowable paper in the bill), the Repubs could flip the script entirely. If the Dems object to the bill after that step, then the stupid **** hooting and hollering about 'secure voter rolls' (with no objective evidence of any material problem with illegals on the rolls, mind you) might be more effective when the Dems cant produce a solid basis for opposing it.

But for some reason, the Repubs are hell bent on keeping that issue a viable problem. Why do you think that the Repubs dont want to amend the bill to address and close that problem?

I mean, keeping it open simply opens them up to the allegation that they are making it objectively much harder for married women to vote -- which is happening. That is the #1 issue against the bill. Yet the Repubs seem adamant about keeping that problem in. Simply opens them up to claims of misogyny. Yet they are adamant about not closing that issue. In the slightest.

Seems pretty stupid. If they arent trying to impede women voting, then they would amend the bill. Raises the odds substantially of it passing. Short circuits the 'repubs are simply misogynistic creeps' line that the issue creates. And if closed, makes it really hard for Dems to oppose the bill. If the wording is in error, it is a fix they can do with NO cost to them or their political assets, and a fix that would force the Dems who wish to oppose it into a really hard as hell position to defend. Kind of simple and obvious. Why dont they do just that?

Or, are the current MAGA actually that misogynistic that they simply refuse to address that issue because of that, and that is an intended effect?

(06-24-2026 03:45 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(06-24-2026 01:42 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(06-24-2026 01:23 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(06-24-2026 01:00 PM)UABFAN23 Wrote:  Either you shove the Save act into a reconciliation bill or you do the talking filibuster. If you can’t stand and out talk democrats until they give up, then you won’t stand up for America on anything else.

This is the most important bill in our lifetimes, besides the civil rights act that Republicans had no issues within its party about passing. Every course correcting and History making bill has been passed by republicans. No reason to balk now.

Shoving it into a recon bill is essentially killing the filibuster, as it's obviously outside the rules of reconciliation and doing that just forever opens the door to shoving anything in recon bills going forward whether it's connected to the budget or not. Trump is actually correct in just saying you have to nuke the filibuster to pass it, because all work arounds are de-facto nuking it and will be treated as such.

They could force an old school filibuster - but they do not want to yield the floor the Democrats

why ... that's XACLY! what they should want...

They wouldn't be able to take another vacation

The GOP Senate has no desire to pass the SAVE Act. They would rather lose and be back in the minority where they can leverage themselves to be the swing vote for Dem pet projects

(06-24-2026 05:38 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(06-24-2026 03:45 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(06-24-2026 01:42 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(06-24-2026 01:23 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(06-24-2026 01:00 PM)UABFAN23 Wrote:  Either you shove the Save act into a reconciliation bill or you do the talking filibuster. If you can’t stand and out talk democrats until they give up, then you won’t stand up for America on anything else.

This is the most important bill in our lifetimes, besides the civil rights act that Republicans had no issues within its party about passing. Every course correcting and History making bill has been passed by republicans. No reason to balk now.

Shoving it into a recon bill is essentially killing the filibuster, as it's obviously outside the rules of reconciliation and doing that just forever opens the door to shoving anything in recon bills going forward whether it's connected to the budget or not. Trump is actually correct in just saying you have to nuke the filibuster to pass it, because all work arounds are de-facto nuking it and will be treated as such.

They could force an old school filibuster - but they do not want to yield the floor the Democrats

why ... that's XACLY! what they should want...

They wouldn't be able to take another vacation

(06-24-2026 04:13 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(06-24-2026 01:00 PM)UABFAN23 Wrote:  Either you shove the Save act into a reconciliation bill or you do the talking filibuster. If you can’t stand and out talk democrats until they give up, then you won’t stand up for America on anything else.

This is the most important bill in our lifetimes, besides the civil rights act that Republicans had no issues within its party about passing. Every course correcting and History making bill has been passed by republicans. No reason to balk now.

One other thing they *could* do is to amend the bill to address the giant gaping hole with regards to acceptable documents which would explicitly close off the main issue that is stacked against it -- that is the problem faced by married women.

If they allow for an easier path in that regard (that is *specifically* include the a change of name document as an allowable paper in the bill), the Repubs could flip the script entirely. If the Dems object to the bill after that step, then the stupid **** hooting and hollering about 'secure voter rolls' (with no objective evidence of any material problem with illegals on the rolls, mind you) might be more effective when the Dems cant produce a solid basis for opposing it.

But for some reason, the Repubs are hell bent on keeping that issue a viable problem. Why do you think that the Repubs dont want to amend the bill to address and close that problem?

I mean, keeping it open simply opens them up to the allegation that they are making it objectively much harder for married women to vote -- which is happening. That is the #1 issue against the bill. Yet the Repubs seem adamant about keeping that problem in. Simply opens them up to claims of misogyny. Yet they are adamant about not closing that issue. In the slightest.

Seems pretty stupid. If they arent trying to impede women voting, then they would amend the bill. Raises the odds substantially of it passing. Short circuits the 'repubs are simply misogynistic creeps' line that the issue creates. And if closed, makes it really hard for Dems to oppose the bill. If the wording is in error, it is a fix they can do with NO cost to them or their political assets, and a fix that would force the Dems who wish to oppose it into a really hard as hell position to defend. Kind of simple and obvious. Why dont they do just that?

Or, are the current MAGA actually that misogynistic that they simply refuse to address that issue because of that, and that is an intended effect?

you're the only one whining about the specifics as they would most certainly evolve into a more agreeable version IF IT WERE TO EVER HIT THE FLOOR FOR DEBATE!!!

but keep on blah blah blah ble blah'n away, garcon...

The worst part about primarying guys like Tillis, Coryn, and Cassidy is the amount of damage they do on their way out

As a North Carolinian it's been wild to see how hostile Tillis has become towards Trump

Make the Senate Work Again

(06-24-2026 05:41 PM)solohawks Wrote:  The GOP Senate has no desire to pass the SAVE Act. They would rather lose and be back in the minority where they can leverage themselves to be the swing vote for Dem pet projects

I agree. Doesn't surprise me. The majority of Congress is a masquerade. They play the good guy, bad guy but most are all on the same team.

(06-24-2026 06:11 PM)solohawks Wrote:  The worst part about primarying guys like Tillis, Coryn, and Cassidy is the amount of damage they do on their way out

As a North Carolinian it's been wild to see how hostile Tillis has become towards Trump

to the rest of us, all we see is another flea that needed to be eradicated...

to wit (hatred for DJT), one could blame McCain for not repealing 0'bummer care ... and Murkowski and Collins are still there (they were the other two)!!!

at the end of the day, it's reason #303295098 why the SAVE Act is mission critical!!!

the pubs don't have a majority in the Senate when it really matters ... this is just another that proves why = 1

this one is an 85% mandate IN FAVOR across the aisle ... that's all I need to know...

(06-24-2026 06:19 PM)solohawks Wrote:  Make the Senate Work Again

XACLY!

the irony - being the other senator from Utah - is not lost upon thine...

apparently, others also think like stink...

Quote:Dwight Zimmerman
@dz19580701
Just got off Thune's page. He has not posted re the lunch or SAA. Clearly he is unmoved. You have 1 choice. Remove Thune as leader. Then we can talk about other choices.

Quote:

(06-24-2026 06:01 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  One other thing they *could* do is to amend the bill to address the giant gaping hole with regards to acceptable documents which would explicitly close off the main issue that is stacked against it -- that is the problem faced by married women.

If they allow for an easier path in that regard (that is *specifically* include the a change of name document as an allowable paper in the bill), the Repubs could flip the script entirely. If the Dems object to the bill after that step, then the stupid **** hooting and hollering about 'secure voter rolls' (with no objective evidence of any material problem with illegals on the rolls, mind you) might be more effective when the Dems cant produce a solid basis for opposing it.

But for some reason, the Repubs are hell bent on keeping that issue a viable problem. Why do you think that the Repubs dont want to amend the bill to address and close that problem?

I mean, keeping it open simply opens them up to the allegation that they are making it objectively much harder for married women to vote -- which is happening. That is the #1 issue against the bill. Yet the Repubs seem adamant about keeping that problem in. Simply opens them up to claims of misogyny. Yet they are adamant about not closing that issue. In the slightest.

Seems pretty stupid. If they arent trying to impede women voting, then they would amend the bill. Raises the odds substantially of it passing. Short circuits the 'repubs are simply misogynistic creeps' line that the issue creates. And if closed, makes it really hard for Dems to oppose the bill. If the wording is in error, it is a fix they can do with NO cost to them or their political assets, and a fix that would force the Dems who wish to oppose it into a really hard as hell position to defend. Kind of simple and obvious. Why dont they do just that?

Or, are the current MAGA actually that misogynistic that they simply refuse to address that issue because of that, and that is an intended effect?

you're the only one whining about the specifics as they would most certainly evolve into a more agreeable version IF IT WERE TO EVER HIT THE FLOOR FOR DEBATE!!!

but keep on blah blah blah ble blah'n away, garcon...

More than one way to amend, chico. I guess that didnt cross your talking points wire.

And honestly -- complete BS as to the 'most certainly evolve' pile of **** you slather out. You dont seem to understand that it is as easily amended in the House, then re-passed and re-sent to the Senate.

Im sorry *your* god-cult tried to jame it through via reconciliation. Im sorry your god-cult has is in that form.

*Nothing* prevents *your* god-cult from making changes to it, and re-introducing it in the manner that I describe. Im sorry you are uncomfortable about even thinking *why* they dont take those steps. Instead, you make up a load of empty excuses and deflections and toss it out. Cool.

Keep blah blah blahing yourself on your own stupid made up garbage excuse.

The Rs have every ability to amend it *right now* in the House, re-pass it in that manner. They havent, and they dont seem to want to.

The Rs have every ability to introduce a clean amended version in the Senate, with those changes. They havent, and they dont seem to want to.

The Rs have every ability to put in those simple changes. End of fing story.

Why havent they? Amended, it can get passed. Amended, it creates tons of problems for Dems to oppose it.

But in some odd fashion you simply *make up* some Santa Claus garbage above it would 'most certainly evolve'. Pure BS, stink. You know it.

So why havent they amended it, re-introduced it, and remove the pressure point the Dems have on it?

(06-24-2026 05:41 PM)solohawks Wrote:  The GOP Senate has no desire to pass the SAVE Act. They would rather lose and be back in the minority where they can leverage themselves to be the swing vote for Dem pet projects

tough to argue against that as a large portion to motive...

(06-24-2026 06:52 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

Quote:

(06-24-2026 06:01 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  One other thing they *could* do is to amend the bill to address the giant gaping hole with regards to acceptable documents which would explicitly close off the main issue that is stacked against it -- that is the problem faced by married women.

If they allow for an easier path in that regard (that is *specifically* include the a change of name document as an allowable paper in the bill), the Repubs could flip the script entirely. If the Dems object to the bill after that step, then the stupid **** hooting and hollering about 'secure voter rolls' (with no objective evidence of any material problem with illegals on the rolls, mind you) might be more effective when the Dems cant produce a solid basis for opposing it.

But for some reason, the Repubs are hell bent on keeping that issue a viable problem. Why do you think that the Repubs dont want to amend the bill to address and close that problem?

I mean, keeping it open simply opens them up to the allegation that they are making it objectively much harder for married women to vote -- which is happening. That is the #1 issue against the bill. Yet the Repubs seem adamant about keeping that problem in. Simply opens them up to claims of misogyny. Yet they are adamant about not closing that issue. In the slightest.

Seems pretty stupid. If they arent trying to impede women voting, then they would amend the bill. Raises the odds substantially of it passing. Short circuits the 'repubs are simply misogynistic creeps' line that the issue creates. And if closed, makes it really hard for Dems to oppose the bill. If the wording is in error, it is a fix they can do with NO cost to them or their political assets, and a fix that would force the Dems who wish to oppose it into a really hard as hell position to defend. Kind of simple and obvious. Why dont they do just that?

Or, are the current MAGA actually that misogynistic that they simply refuse to address that issue because of that, and that is an intended effect?

you're the only one whining about the specifics as they would most certainly evolve into a more agreeable version IF IT WERE TO EVER HIT THE FLOOR FOR DEBATE!!!

but keep on blah blah blah ble blah'n away, garcon...

More than one way to amend, chico. I guess that didnt cross your talking points wire.

And honestly -- complete BS as to the 'most certainly evolve' pile of **** you slather out. You dont seem to understand that it is as easily amended in the House, then re-passed and re-sent to the Senate.

Im sorry *your* god-cult tried to jame it through via reconciliation. Im sorry your god-cult has is in that form.

*Nothing* prevents *your* god-cult from making changes to it, and re-introducing it in the manner that I describe. Im sorry you are uncomfortable about even thinking *why* they dont take those steps. Instead, you make up a load of empty excuses and deflections and toss it out. Cool.

Keep blah blah blahing yourself on your own stupid made up garbage excuse.

The Rs have every ability to amend it *right now* in the House, re-pass it in that manner. They havent, and they dont seem to want to.

The Rs have every ability to introduce a clean amended version in the Senate, with those changes. They havent, and they dont seem to want to.

The Rs have every ability to put in those simple changes. End of fing story.

Why havent they? Amended, it can get passed. Amended, it creates tons of problems for Dems to oppose it.

But in some odd fashion you simply *make up* some Santa Claus garbage above it would 'most certainly evolve'. Pure BS, stink. You know it.

So why havent they amended it, re-introduced it, and remove the pressure point the Dems have on it?

if you would read thru things, you'd realize the 'whys' are littered throughout the thread .. but nah, you'd rather go on your long winded rants ... told ya I ain' playing that bs...

adios, amigo...

(06-24-2026 06:56 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(06-24-2026 06:52 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

Quote:

(06-24-2026 06:01 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  One other thing they *could* do is to amend the bill to address the giant gaping hole with regards to acceptable documents which would explicitly close off the main issue that is stacked against it -- that is the problem faced by married women.

If they allow for an easier path in that regard (that is *specifically* include the a change of name document as an allowable paper in the bill), the Repubs could flip the script entirely. If the Dems object to the bill after that step, then the stupid **** hooting and hollering about 'secure voter rolls' (with no objective evidence of any material problem with illegals on the rolls, mind you) might be more effective when the Dems cant produce a solid basis for opposing it.

But for some reason, the Repubs are hell bent on keeping that issue a viable problem. Why do you think that the Repubs dont want to amend the bill to address and close that problem?

I mean, keeping it open simply opens them up to the allegation that they are making it objectively much harder for married women to vote -- which is happening. That is the #1 issue against the bill. Yet the Repubs seem adamant about keeping that problem in. Simply opens them up to claims of misogyny. Yet they are adamant about not closing that issue. In the slightest.

Seems pretty stupid. If they arent trying to impede women voting, then they would amend the bill. Raises the odds substantially of it passing. Short circuits the 'repubs are simply misogynistic creeps' line that the issue creates. And if closed, makes it really hard for Dems to oppose the bill. If the wording is in error, it is a fix they can do with NO cost to them or their political assets, and a fix that would force the Dems who wish to oppose it into a really hard as hell position to defend. Kind of simple and obvious. Why dont they do just that?

Or, are the current MAGA actually that misogynistic that they simply refuse to address that issue because of that, and that is an intended effect?

you're the only one whining about the specifics as they would most certainly evolve into a more agreeable version IF IT WERE TO EVER HIT THE FLOOR FOR DEBATE!!!

but keep on blah blah blah ble blah'n away, garcon...

More than one way to amend, chico. I guess that didnt cross your talking points wire.

And honestly -- complete BS as to the 'most certainly evolve' pile of **** you slather out. You dont seem to understand that it is as easily amended in the House, then re-passed and re-sent to the Senate.

Im sorry *your* god-cult tried to jame it through via reconciliation. Im sorry your god-cult has is in that form.

*Nothing* prevents *your* god-cult from making changes to it, and re-introducing it in the manner that I describe. Im sorry you are uncomfortable about even thinking *why* they dont take those steps. Instead, you make up a load of empty excuses and deflections and toss it out. Cool.

Keep blah blah blahing yourself on your own stupid made up garbage excuse.

The Rs have every ability to amend it *right now* in the House, re-pass it in that manner. They havent, and they dont seem to want to.

The Rs have every ability to introduce a clean amended version in the Senate, with those changes. They havent, and they dont seem to want to.

The Rs have every ability to put in those simple changes. End of fing story.

Why havent they? Amended, it can get passed. Amended, it creates tons of problems for Dems to oppose it.

But in some odd fashion you simply *make up* some Santa Claus garbage above it would 'most certainly evolve'. Pure BS, stink. You know it.

So why havent they amended it, re-introduced it, and remove the pressure point the Dems have on it?

if you would read thru things, you'd realize the 'whys' are littered throughout the thread .. but nah, you'd rather go on your long winded rants ... told ya I ain' playing that bs...

adios, amigo...

Better than your whiny ass crap that calls objective numbers as, and I quote, "BS".

True profile in courage there.

WAAAAHHHHHH, Stink isnt getting his unedited SAVE Act!!!!! Waahhhhh!!!!

(06-24-2026 06:54 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(06-24-2026 05:41 PM)solohawks Wrote:  The GOP Senate has no desire to pass the SAVE Act. They would rather lose and be back in the minority where they can leverage themselves to be the swing vote for Dem pet projects

tough to argue against that as a large portion to motive...

All Trump is really asking for is the enforcement of existing laws about citizenship and the right to vote. The way the Dems act about it reflects a total disregard for those who bother to become citizens and for our election process. Show me a Republican Senator that can't get behind it and I'll show you someone who should be primaried. It's insane that we have to ask for it to be enforced. People want to know how far down the toilet bowl hole America has gone, and when it comes to this it's clear that the gunk in the trap is all that is keeping the flush from being complete.

(06-24-2026 07:02 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-24-2026 06:54 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(06-24-2026 05:41 PM)solohawks Wrote:  The GOP Senate has no desire to pass the SAVE Act. They would rather lose and be back in the minority where they can leverage themselves to be the swing vote for Dem pet projects

tough to argue against that as a large portion to motive...

All Trump is really asking for is the enforcement of existing laws about citizenship and the right to vote. The way the Dems act about it reflects a total disregard for those who bother to become citizens and for our election process. Show me a Republican Senator that can't get behind it and I'll show you someone who should be primaried. It's insane that we have to ask for it to be enforced. People want to know how far down the toilet bowl hole America has gone, and when it comes to this it's clear that the gunk in the trap is all that is keeping the flush from being complete.

just yep, yep, and yep...

unfortunately, there isn't a standard when it comes to fed elections ... that's the problem when it's left up to the states ran by the Slippin' Jimmies...

w/o clarification, it just turns into a runaway train like college atheltics and the NIL, or monopolies before anti-trust, or etc...

and the only ones that can resolve are the ones it impacts the most...

Ohio Governor just vetoed Voter ID on mail in ballots... He would fit right in with the GOP Senators
https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/loca...il-in-vote

Cornyn posted his list of excuses
1.Dems would drag it out
2. Tough votes
3. A lot of actual work and dedication
4. They would have to actually work in the Senate
5. It's not going to help 2026 anyways
6. Senate GOPers don't wanna secure voting by mail
7. Senate GOPers don't wanna pass this bill
8. Other things like the judges being left in lurch before another vacation would get delayed

Imagine how different the world would be if this Senate was around when the Civil Rights Filibuster was ongoing

https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-...rights-act

(06-24-2026 09:32 PM)solohawks Wrote:  Imagine how different the world would be if this Senate was around when the Civil Rights Filibuster was ongoing

https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-...rights-act

one thing is clear ... they are most definitely stealing the civil rights from the middle class that actually make up the bulk of this country...

THIS IS CIVIL WAR II!!! AND WE'RE HIP DEEP IN IT!!!