Abolish the filibuster!

[Bateshorn 9989]

6 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Flush the Democrats who oppose voting rights out. Make them cast a vote. They shouldn't get to hide behind extra-constitutional procedural rules.

Good luck with those MT and WV seats. 

[David Dennison 19441]

2 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

Good luck with those MT and WV seats. 

They have three and a half long years to worry about that.

Or they are free to become Republicans.

Call their bluff.

[elfenix 34661]

What if I told you the democrats don’t currently have 50 votes to do it?
Ive been onboard with ending the filibuster for years.  but blaming liz warren for its continued existence is stupid.  it’s not her fault. Publically it’s Manchin, Sinema, and Tester’s fault.  privately,  i think there’s another 3-5 democrats who aren’t convinced either.
If you move to the nuclear option, it does create a bunch of headaches associated with other procedural things that are rarely enforced in the senate. they can be overcome, but they will make everything messy.

Don't get mad at me just because you didn't know it was 50+1.

[Js1 86953]

Dp

Edited March 20, 2021 by Js1

[Js1 86953]

1 hour ago, Bateshorn said:

What if I told you the democrats don’t currently have 50 votes to do it?

Ive been onboard with ending the filibuster for years.  but blaming liz warren for its continued existence is stupid.  it’s not her fault. Publically it’s Manchin, Sinema, and Tester’s fault.  privately,  i think there’s another 3-5 democrats who aren’t convinced either.

If you move to the nuclear option, it does create a bunch of headaches associated with other procedural things that are rarely enforced in the senate. they can be overcome, but they will make everything messy.

Tester has been more open about it than any of the other moderate/red state Dem Senators. I wouldn’t lump him in with them. 

Manchin, Sinema, King and Feinstein, if she knows where she is. 

[Bateshorn 9989]

2 hours ago, Js1 said:

Tester has been more open about it than any of the other moderate/red state Dem Senators. I wouldn’t lump him in with them. 

Manchin, Sinema, King and Feinstein, if she knows where she is. 

I also secretly suspect Coons.

[Bateshorn 9989]

2 hours ago, elfenix said:

4 hours ago, Bateshorn said:

What if I told you the democrats don’t currently have 50 votes to do it?
Ive been onboard with ending the filibuster for years.  but blaming liz warren for its continued existence is stupid.  it’s not her fault. Publically it’s Manchin, Sinema, and Tester’s fault.  privately,  i think there’s another 3-5 democrats who aren’t convinced either.
If you move to the nuclear option, it does create a bunch of headaches associated with other procedural things that are rarely enforced in the senate. they can be overcome, but they will make everything messy.

Don't get mad at me just because you didn't know it was 50+1.

I didn't respond to your point because it's grossly reductive and not representative of the real process.  Because the previous question can not be moved, currently overcoming an objection to proceeding requires 3/5, which the presiding office will uphold, requiring the ruling of the chair to be overruled.  There's your 50+1, smart guy.  Warren cannot bring up measures before the Senate without Schumer or McConnell's express consent.  She couldn't force the issue unless Schumer wanted her to.

But it comes with a whole host of problems that gum up how the Senate actually functions.  For one, there's a host of ways the R's can drag out committee hearings or force adjournments that make the senate very dysfunctional.  Lots of things in the Senate are done according to either tradition or handshake agreement based on very arcane rules.  The body is not set up to run on majority rule the way the House is.  There's no equivalent Rules Committee to set the terms of debate and constrain floor shenanigans.

Edited March 20, 2021 by Bateshorn

[Bateshorn 9989]

3 hours ago, David Dennison said:

They have three and a half long years to worry about that.

Or they are free to become Republicans.

Call their bluff.

That's bold talk when you are sitting on a 50-50 senate.  You want a 7-3 Supreme Court or a potential 8-2? How about all those aging Clinton appellate justices that want to retire? What about stupid Hunter Biden Investigations 24/7.  How's the infrastructure bill going to work when McConnell has the gavel?

[bad_teammate 13481]

15 hours ago, Bateshorn said:

only schumer can offer a rules change, and without 60 votes, it would fail. 

I do genuinely appreciate how you said this and now you're just posting your way through it.

Respect.

I find your "wait for a more convenient season" attitude disgusting and your fear-mongering useless and ultimately harmful, but I absolutely respect your dedication to plowing ahead despite being so laughably wrong about a basic component of this.

[Js1 86953]

39 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

That's bold talk when you are sitting on a 50-50 senate.  You want a 7-3 Supreme Court or a potential 8-2? How about all those aging Clinton appellate justices that want to retire? What about stupid Hunter Biden Investigations 24/7.  How's the infrastructure bill going to work when McConnell has the gavel?

Fuck me I hope Breyer retires this summer and we replace him with a 40 year old 

[Bateshorn 9989]

3 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Fuck me I hope Breyer retires this summer and we replace him with a 40 year old 

40?  I'd replace him with the most liberal member of the Harvard Law Class of 2020.

[Bateshorn 9989]

35 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

I do genuinely appreciate how you said this and now you're just posting your way through it.

Respect.

I find your "wait for a more convenient season" attitude disgusting and your fear-mongering useless and ultimately harmful, but I absolutely respect your dedication to plowing ahead despite being so laughably wrong about a basic component of this.

A rules change takes 60.  Overruling the presiding officer interpretation of the existing rules takes 50+1.  It's pedantic, but it's true.    I'm literally telling what are the complications of doing it by this path. 

I noticed you chose not ton include my next sentence:

Quote

barring that, they are left with the nuclear option, which is effectively the 50+Harris dems just over ruling the gop on every motion based on a ruling of the chair . think of a horrible Robert’s rules of order slugfest.

How many times do I have to say I'm for this? Not only would I do it.  5 minutes after, I'd introduce a resolution to bring the District into the union so you can pick up 2 more democratic votes by the end of the spring. I've literally talked about this issue at an event with MD MOC as a constituent.

But I'm not Joe Manchin. So it's not my call. But go on with your bad self for putting this shit on me.  

Edited March 20, 2021 by Bateshorn

[David Dennison 19441]

1 minute ago, Bateshorn said:

A rules change takes 60.  Overruling the presiding officer interpretation of the existing rules takes 50+1.  It's pedantic, but it's true.    I'm literally telling what are the complications of doing it by this path.

How many times do I have to say I'm for this? Not only would I do it.  5 minutes after, I'd introduce a resolution to bring the District into the union so you can pick up 2 more democratic votes by the end of the spring. I've literally talked about this issue at an event with MD MOC as a constituent.

But I'm not Joe Manchin. So it's not my call. But go on with your bad self for putting this shit on me.  

Just disregard the rule. Completely. Act like it doesn't exist. 

 

[David Dennison 19441]

53 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

That's bold talk when you are sitting on a 50-50 senate.  You want a 7-3 Supreme Court or a potential 8-2? How about all those aging Clinton appellate justices that want to retire? What about stupid Hunter Biden Investigations 24/7.  How's the infrastructure bill going to work when McConnell has the gavel?

Passing overwhelmingly popular legislation is absolutely worth the risk.

Failing to pass that legislation will result in Republican majority in both Houses come 2023.

[Bateshorn 9989]

2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Passing overwhelmingly popular legislation is absolutely worth the risk.

Failing to pass that legislation will result in Republican majority in both Houses come 2023.

I don't disagree with this.  But I'm not the senior senator from West Virginia.

[David Dennison 19441]

3 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

I don't disagree with this.  But I'm not the senior senator from West Virginia.

He has his price. They all do. 

[Bateshorn 9989]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

He has his price. They all do. 

There's a joke on Hill meme sites that this is what west virginia is gonna look like by 2023:

[David Dennison 19441]

I hope this is part of a larger "well, we tried," strategy before they do what is necessary. There is no way they'll find ten Republicans to support this bill.

 

[wildcat09 29561]

@Bateshorn, what sense do you have that this is really an orchestrated campaign to show the public that the GOP will do nothing but obstruct (and use that messaging to get the few reluctant Dem senators to come around)?

On the one hand, I think this charade is kind of stupid and unnecessary. On the other hand, it seems like they might actually have a coherent messaging strategy and are actually competently carrying it out. While I don't love the strategy, the fact that they even seem to actually have one is pretty damned amazing. We're talking an upgrade in Dem political competence from F- to a solid B-, which would be an astronomical improvement. Please tell me I'm not just seeing something I want to see here.

[Js1 86953]

I mean, I think it's a great strategy.

If they just go whole hog abandon the filibuster after 2-3 months with the majority, they are going to get KILLED by screams of overreach and other bullshit by the GQP and their friendly media.  The Sunday show hacks like Chuck Todd are salivating at it too.

But if we have concrete evidence of GQP doing full on obstruction of popular legislation like infrastructure, voting rights, gun control (after another mass shooting), I think the public will be more supportive and Manchin and Sinema can save face by pointing to the obstruction. 

Remember, memories are short.  We need obstruction THIS TIME to make our case, not what happened years ago under Obama.  People don't remember that far back. 

[Biff Tannen 46063]

1 hour ago, Js1 said:

I mean, I think it's a great strategy.

If they just go whole hog abandon the filibuster after 2-3 months with the majority, they are going to get KILLED by screams of overreach and other bullshit by the GQP and their friendly media.  The Sunday show hacks like Chuck Todd are salivating at it too.

But if we have concrete evidence of GQP doing full on obstruction of popular legislation like infrastructure, voting rights, gun control (after another mass shooting), I think the public will be more supportive and Manchin and Sinema can save face by pointing to the obstruction. 

Remember, memories are short.  We need obstruction THIS TIME to make our case, not what happened years ago under Obama.  People don't remember that far back. 

I fucking hate that you are probably right.  Especially that last part.

[bad_teammate 13481]

Hopefully, if that's the strategy, we use something broadly popular like infrastructure.

[CooterBrown 18273]

2 hours ago, David Dennison said:

I hope this is part of a larger "well, we tried," strategy before they do what is necessary. There is no way they'll find ten Republicans to support this bill.

 

He's fucking senile.

 

[Neonmoon 38130]

2 hours ago, David Dennison said:

I hope this is part of a larger "well, we tried," strategy before they do what is necessary. There is no way they'll find ten Republicans to support this bill.

 

It is. The stupidity of our political system, like most things in this country, we have to play to the lowest common denominator. It's political theater. Instead of just abolishing it, we have to waste two months going through the motions in a turtle tic-tac-toe game. 

[Bruh Man 3160]

1 hour ago, Js1 said:

I mean, I think it's a great strategy.

If they just go whole hog abandon the filibuster after 2-3 months with the majority, they are going to get KILLED by screams of overreach and other bullshit by the GQP and their friendly media.  The Sunday show hacks like Chuck Todd are salivating at it too.

But if we have concrete evidence of GQP doing full on obstruction of popular legislation like infrastructure, voting rights, gun control (after another mass shooting), I think the public will be more supportive and Manchin and Sinema can save face by pointing to the obstruction. 

Remember, memories are short.  We need obstruction THIS TIME to make our case, not what happened years ago under Obama.  People don't remember that far back. 

Remember ACB? This is a three-day story once they do it. Dems are just pussies. Making a debate of this is the worst thing they can do. Jus rip the fucking bandaid. 

[wildcat09 29561]

2 hours ago, Js1 said:

I mean, I think it's a great strategy.

If they just go whole hog abandon the filibuster after 2-3 months with the majority, they are going to get KILLED by screams of overreach and other bullshit by the GQP and their friendly media.  The Sunday show hacks like Chuck Todd are salivating at it too.

But if we have concrete evidence of GQP doing full on obstruction of popular legislation like infrastructure, voting rights, gun control (after another mass shooting), I think the public will be more supportive and Manchin and Sinema can save face by pointing to the obstruction. 

Remember, memories are short.  We need obstruction THIS TIME to make our case, not what happened years ago under Obama.  People don't remember that far back. 

I think you're right on this, but this is why I think it wouldn't really matter if they just went ahead and abolished it today. Nobody will remember what Chuck Todd said about filibuster abolition in March of 2021 by November 2022, and I don't think process complaints move many people anyway.

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

I give up on this.  Democrats blowing it as always.  Filibuster should have been jettisoned immediately after zero republicans voted for the covid relief.  That was the best opportunity, politically speaking.  The cost goes up as time goes on and democrats are determined to suck. 

[Queen Bitch 1692]

Nuke the filibuster, so we can pass sensible gun reform rather than getting murdered exiting the pancetta 

Edited March 23, 2021 by Queen Bitch

[David Dennison 19441]

7 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I give up on this.  Democrats blowing it as always.  Filibuster should have been jettisoned immediately after zero republicans voted for the covid relief.  That was the best opportunity, politically speaking.  The cost goes up as time goes on and democrats are determined to suck. 

So they should have just blown off the rule?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Just now, David Dennison said:

So they should have just blown off the rule?

Yes

[David Dennison 19441]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Yes

Did you mention that in your letter to Chuck Schumer?

[bad_teammate 13481]

59 minutes ago, Bruh Man said:

Remember ACB? This is a three-day story once they do it. Dems are just pussies. Making a debate of this is the worst thing they can do. Jus rip the fucking bandaid. 

Especially tying it to something as racially charged as voting rights.

Good god, it's like they want to lose.

[David Dennison 19441]

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Especially tying it to something as racially charged as voting rights.

Good god, it's like they want to lose.

They are probably going to lose anyway. This way, they are going to get the voting rights bill passed before election season starts. They'll probably get some other things passed along the way. They have about a year to get it all done.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

[Bateshorn 9989]

4 hours ago, Js1 said:

I mean, I think it's a great strategy.

If they just go whole hog abandon the filibuster after 2-3 months with the majority, they are going to get KILLED by screams of overreach and other bullshit by the GQP and their friendly media.  The Sunday show hacks like Chuck Todd are salivating at it too.

But if we have concrete evidence of GQP doing full on obstruction of popular legislation like infrastructure, voting rights, gun control (after another mass shooting), I think the public will be more supportive and Manchin and Sinema can save face by pointing to the obstruction. 

Remember, memories are short.  We need obstruction THIS TIME to make our case, not what happened years ago under Obama.  People don't remember that far back. 

este

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[Satchel 6982]

3 hours ago, Bateshorn said:

este

Si. Este.

[Js1 86953]

 

 

[Biff Tannen 46063]

13 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

[Js1 86953]

I feel like the play is getting put out there now.  Angus King, who was seen as one of the 4 or 5 Dem vote obstacles to overturning the filibuster, wrote this for WaPo:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/03/24/angus-king-filibuster-republicans/

Quote

As we enter this new Congress with a new president and a new Senate majority (barely), the question for me is how Mitch McConnell and his Republican colleagues will play their hand; if they are willing to work to find compromise and consensus on important initiatives (infrastructure, voting rights or immigration reform, for example), the importance of getting rid of the filibuster diminishes. If, on the other hand, they just say no, the necessity — and likelihood — of filibuster reform would only increase. That is to say, in large measure the outcome is in their hands.

Definitely teeing up the "Republicans refuse to work with us and just want to obstruct - time to reform (or abolish) the filibuster" 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

What exactly are we waiting for here? The house has passed plenty of legislation for Senate republicans to obstruct. Schumer isn’t pushing floor debate yet because? I’m honestly embarrassed how many people believe there’s some 3D chess being played here. 

[Js1 86953]

I'm honestly embarrassed you still think its WHY NOT DONE in regards to this.

You want politics to move at the speed of light.  It does not.  It never does. 

[bad_teammate 13481]

17 minutes ago, Js1 said:

I'm honestly embarrassed you still think its WHY NOT DONE in regards to this.

Shut the hell up with this crap. Discuss the topic. Play the ball.

[TheStoicPaisano 9948]

40 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

What exactly are we waiting for here? The house has passed plenty of legislation for Senate republicans to obstruct. Schumer isn’t pushing floor debate yet because? I’m honestly embarrassed how many people believe there’s some 3D chess being played here. 

With S.1, they’re calling witnesses in committee. Can’t have floor debate when Schumer/Turtle/Cruz/Klobuchar are tied up there. CSPAN3 if you’re interested.

IIRC, we won’t see any votes until post-Easter. House was off this past week and Senate was committee-only.

Edited March 24, 2021 by TheStoicPaisano

[Js1 86953]

They also finally got the Cabinet confirmed.  Took a while. 

They also have a lot of judicial vacancies to start preparing for too.   7 Court of Appeals and 61 district court vacancies for Biden to start filling.  I'd also wager we are 3-4 months out from the first SCOTUS vacancy for Biden, as I think Breyer retires after this term ends. 

Plus the 3 new USPS Board of Governors nominations to get through.  Gotta fix that fucking clusterfuck. 

[bad_teammate 13481]

5 minutes ago, TheStoicPaisano said:

With S.1, they’re calling witnesses in committee. Can’t have floor debate when Schumer/Turtle/Cruz/Klobuchar are tied up there. CSPAN3 if you’re interested.

IIRC, we won’t see any votes until post-Easter. House was off this past week and Senate was committee-only.

Hey look an actual answer that isn't just personal attack posturing!

Much appreciated.

[elfenix 34661]

 

1 hour ago, Js1 said:

 

 

usually that's an extra thousand tokens on chaturbate

Edited March 24, 2021 by elfenix

[bad_teammate 13481]

Flattering an egomaniac to get what you want is classic stuff. Huge respect.

[406W30th 1111]

2 hours ago, Js1 said:

 

 

That article feels a bit like red meat and I don't want to get my hopes up, but this was certainly encouraging:

Quote

People close to Biden tell us he’s feeling bullish on what he can accomplish, and is fully prepared to support the dashing of the Senate’s filibuster rule to allow Democrats to pass voting rights and other trophy legislation for his party.

• He loves the growing narrative that he’s bolder and bigger-thinking than President Obama.
• This temptation to go even bigger, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell insists, will create such a fissure between the parties that he compared it this week to "nuclear winter."

But we're told Biden won’t hesitate. Just as he passed the $1.9 trillion COVID rescue package with zero Republican votes and zero regrets, his team sees little chance he's going to be able to rewire the government in his image if he plays by the rules of bringing in at least 10 Republicans.