Jump to content

Abolish the filibuster!


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, immamac said:

You were always just team blue, you have no interest in real healthy policies only ones that you deem to be the true beacon of what America is. Your politics are what got us to an obstructionist and extremist state. Now your policies you support could be the same as ones that I do, but the way you are going about it is just as wrong as the Republicans. 

This is why they are elected officials. It's obvious that right now constituents in Kentucky and a few other places especially have been taken for a ride because they are in fact too stupid to realize what's good for them and keep voting against their own self-interest. 

There is not really local politics anymore. It's all national. Which is shitty, and sad, but I'm not sure it's ever going to reverse itself. So you have to take that into account when you consider how politics function if we're looking to make healthy changes. Sadly there's not many guys fighting for their districts anymore. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, immamac said:

The problem with the senate isn't the wrong bills passing. It's that legislators are legislating. Vote on every bill. 

The senate's job isn't to make you or me or a group of people happy. It's to legislate on behalf of the American people with their constituents in mind. 

I’m in favor of removing power entirely from the Senate and giving it to the House.  Why we have a branch of government with an undemocratic bait and switch built in might have been a good idea hundreds of years ago but now, now it’s just another abused veto for concentrated wealth and power. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, immamac said:

You were always just team blue, you have no interest in real healthy policies only ones that you deem to be the true beacon of what America is. Your politics are what got us to an obstructionist and extremist state. Now your policies you support could be the same as ones that I do, but the way you are going about it is just as wrong as the Republicans. 

 

I am not sure if you are more laughably na√Įve or more laughably ignorant. Hugo's politics (by which I can only assume you mean Democratic Party politics) are sure as shit not what got us to an obstructionist¬†and extremist state. The DP sure as shit sucks in many ways but comparing the way the GOP vs DP perform governance is night and day. The GOP does not act in good faith, and haven't acted in good faith for decades. For all it's faults, the DP at least tried to reach out on the ACA, you already see Biden trying to aim for Bi-Partisanship at least to a degree, etc.

It's like comparing a headache to pancreatic cancer. Yeah I'd rather not have a headache but I sure know which one I would prefer.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how you could vote on every bill, unless you are referring to only those that make it to the floor.   Most die in committees or get left in the majority leader's inbox right?   

There should be a simple way to get information out on bills so everyone can see what is being proposed, buried, delayed or championed and by whom.  Something akin to a lege twitter where each bill written gets its own @ and people can follow.    I'm sure something exists, but it's probably so staid and dry that no one uses it.  Which would be convenient for those in Washington and statehouses that don't want to be held accountable.  

Then maybe everybody actually sees the inner workings for themselves.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, immamac said:

You were always just team blue, you have no interest in real healthy policies only ones that you deem to be the true beacon of what America is. Your politics are what got us to an obstructionist and extremist state. Now your policies you support could be the same as ones that I do, but the way you are going about it is just as wrong as the Republicans. 

This makes absolutely no sense. I’m team blue because the red team is currently a fascist death cult and they have no ideas except cruelty. 

You don’t make changes in policy by merely having a good idea and praying everyone sees it your way.  You have to work in a concerted movement effort to actually get shit done. This is a reality. Removing the filibuster is a good idea IMO and there is currently a movement effort with the means to remove it so let’s do it. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Serak The Preparer said:

I am not sure if you are more laughably na√Įve or more laughably ignorant. Hugo's politics (by which I can only assume you mean Democratic Party politics) are sure as shit not what got us to an obstructionist¬†and extremist state. The DP sure as shit sucks in many ways but comparing the way the GOP vs DP perform governance is night and day. The GOP does not act in good faith, and haven't acted in good faith for decades. For all it's faults, the DP at least tried to reach out on the ACA, you already see Biden trying to aim for Bi-Partisanship at least to a degree, etc.

It's like comparing a headache to pancreatic cancer. Yeah I'd rather not have a headache but I sure know which one I would prefer.

Also, the arrogance of self-described "non-partisan" centrists is really something else. That argument  is equally political and not any more credible than "partisan" politics. FOH with that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm trying to parse what immamac is saying, but it's difficult.  It seems like he is wanting to have everyone follow the rules, even though the rules have been thrown out the fucking window by the Rs.  This shit is broken and it's not fixable by hoping the Rs start acting like rational adults.  Dems didn't start the war, but they do have to end it.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I'm trying to parse what immamac is saying, but it's difficult.  It seems like he is wanting to have everyone follow the rules, even though the rules have been thrown out the fucking window by the Rs.  This shit is broken and it's not fixable by hoping the Rs start acting like rational adults.  Dems didn't start the war, but they do have to end it.

I don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater, but I can see that angle as well. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, immamac said:

The problem isn't filibuster. Stop focusing on it please. 

They need to redo the Cloture rule which is intended for housekeeping purposes. 

https://www.senate.gov/reference/glossary_term/cloture.htm#:~:text=cloture - The only procedure by,and thereby overcome a filibuster.

So how do they rewrite the current cloture rule when ending debate on a resolution to change the Senate’s standing rules requires the support of two-thirds of the members present and voting? They will just filibuster the proposed move to get rid of the filibuster. I think you're misunderstanding the sisyphean reality of your own solution. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

This makes absolutely no sense. I’m team blue because the red team is currently a fascist death cult and they have no ideas except cruelty. 

You don’t make changes in policy by merely having a good idea and praying everyone sees it your way.  You have to work in a concerted movement effort to actually get shit done. This is a reality. Removing the filibuster is a good idea IMO and there is currently a movement effort with the means to remove it so let’s do it. 

You must brainwash everyone to think your way or they are not in it for the right reasons. It's just stupid, you preach all of this convincing work bla bla and you are missing the point of compromise. Compromise: an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions. Everyone has to give something up. Your bill isn't going to pass ever if you just try to teach people about it, unless it's small enough to not warrant compromise.

There are tons of bills that wouldn't need compromise to pass and that is the legislation we should focus on, or vote on them sans compromise and throw it away and let the constituents remove those from office who are repeatedly voting against legislation that will help them. Hold people fucking accountable to do their jobs instead of trying to get shitters to stop being shitters. 

29 minutes ago, Serak The Preparer said:

I am not sure if you are more laughably na√Įve or more laughably ignorant. Hugo's politics (by which I can only assume you mean Democratic Party politics) are sure as shit not what got us to an obstructionist¬†and extremist state. The DP sure as shit sucks in many ways but comparing the way the GOP vs DP perform governance is night and day. The GOP does not act in good faith, and haven't acted in good faith for decades. For all it's faults, the DP at least tried to reach out on the ACA, you already see Biden trying to aim for Bi-Partisanship at least to a degree, etc.

It's like comparing a headache to pancreatic cancer. Yeah I'd rather not have a headache but I sure know which one I would prefer.

Politics: the activities associated with the governance of a country or other area, especially the debate or conflict among individuals or parties having or hoping to achieve power.

You are confusing politics with policy. It's his politics that are alienating and making people more and more extreme. Instead of being inclusive it's divisive and "we are smarter than you and know best". It's the same way Democrats are obstuctionist for "noble" causes instead of selfish ones, as if that's any fucking better because the problem is the obstructionist behavior not the output of what's being blocked. 

26 minutes ago, pyrohornIII said:

I don't see how you could vote on every bill, unless you are referring to only those that make it to the floor.   Most die in committees or get left in the majority leader's inbox right?   

There should be a simple way to get information out on bills so everyone can see what is being proposed, buried, delayed or championed and by whom.  Something akin to a lege twitter where each bill written gets its own @ and people can follow.    I'm sure something exists, but it's probably so staid and dry that no one uses it.  Which would be convenient for those in Washington and statehouses that don't want to be held accountable.  

Then maybe everybody actually sees the inner workings for themselves.  

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/117/hr127 welcome to 2021

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, immamac said:

You must brainwash everyone to think your way or they are not in it for the right reasons. It's just stupid, you preach all of this convincing work bla bla and you are missing the point of compromise. Compromise: an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions. Everyone has to give something up. Your bill isn't going to pass ever if you just try to teach people about it, unless it's small enough to not warrant compromise.

You are assuming a world that no longer exists. One side just tried to neutralize the other side in a coup attempt because they couldn’t win power legally or democratically. How do you compromise with that?

 I’d love to live in a healthy democracy where all parties come to the table in good faith an negotiate out their differences peacefully but that shit isn’t possible without accountability and consequences for the behavior of bad actors.

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

You are assuming a world that no longer exists. One side just tried to neutralize the other side in a coup attempt because they couldn’t win power legally or democratically. How do you compromise with that?

 I’d love to live in a healthy democracy where all parties come to the table in good faith an negotiate out their differences peacefully but that shit isn’t possible without accountability and consequences for behavior of bad actors.

It's never actually existed. We pretended it did for awhile by simply having both political parties agree that black people weren't people, but we're not going back to that.

Democrats and Republicans have fundamentally opposite views of how our society should be structured and what role government should play in it. They think government exists to protect the social status and wealth of a specific subset of Americans, while we think government exists to improve conditions for everyone. It's not simply a case of the GOP sharing our ideals but having different ideas about how they should be accomplished. They've never been clearer in their fervent opposition to democracy. In their minds, the government exists to protect and serve those in society they deem to have merit (the wealthy). In their minds, the vast majority of Americans are leeches, takers, worthless, criminals, etc. and it's wrong and unnatural for government to serve the interests of leeches and criminals. 

Compromise with them isn't possible because they want the exact opposite of what we want.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

It's never actually existed. We pretended it did for awhile by simply having both political parties agree that black people weren't people, but we're not going back to that.

Democrats and Republicans have fundamentally opposite views of how our society should be structured and what role government should play in it. They think government exists to protect the social status and wealth of a specific subset of Americans, while we think government exists to improve conditions for everyone. It's not simply a case of the GOP sharing our ideals but having different ideas about how they should be accomplished. They've never been clearer in their fervent opposition to democracy. In their minds, the government exists to protect and serve those in society they deem to have merit (the wealthy). In their minds, the vast majority of Americans are leeches, takers, worthless, criminals, etc. and it's wrong and unnatural for government to serve the interests of leeches and criminals. 

Compromise with them isn't possible because they want the exact opposite of what we want.

The senate is not broken. The Senators are broken and morally bankrupt destroyers of our system of government for personal gain. 

The senate is not supposed to be an oligarchy it's supposed to be a constitutional democracy.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, immamac said:

The senate is not broken. The Senators are broken and morally bankrupt destroyers of our system of government for personal gain. 

The senate is not supposed to be an oligarchy it's supposed to be a constitutional democracy.

The Senate is fundamentally anti-democratic. It isn‚Äôt meant to be a ‚Äúconstitutional democracy‚ÄĚ whatever that means¬†

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

I really do think McConnell trying to filibuster the Democrats from taking over is going to piss off people like Manchin.  There's bullshit and then there's BULLSHIT. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Js1 said:

I really do think McConnell trying to filibuster the Democrats from taking over is going to piss off people like Manchin.  There's bullshit and then there's BULLSHIT. 

It really does seem like a dumb time for McConnell to be maximizing the obstruction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Manchin is already very pissed.  He has come out in favor of things that were unthinkable for him a couple of months ago.  This is only going to make it worse.

Edited by kevwun
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, kevwun said:

Manchin is already very pissed.  He has come out in favor of things that were unthinkable for him a couple of months ago.  This is only going to make it worse.

Care to give me some bullet points?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

I'm trying to parse what immamac is saying, but it's difficult.  It seems like he is wanting to have everyone follow the rules, even though the rules have been thrown out the fucking window by the Rs.  This shit is broken and it's not fixable by hoping the Rs start acting like rational adults.  Dems didn't start the war, but they do have to end it.

I don't get it either and to me it seems like he's making a big argument about a distinction without much of a difference. We're all talking about the end result and he's hyperfocused on changing the text of Rule 22. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Care to give me some bullet points?

He's open to throwing Cruz and Hawley out of the Senate and considering Puerto Rico and DC statehood.  I think the riot shoved him off the fence on a lot of issues.

 

Edited by kevwun
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, kevwun said:

He's open to throwing Cruz and Hawley out of the Senate and considering Puerto Rico and DC statehood.  I think the riot shoved him off the fence on a lot of issues.

 

Thanks. Good to know. Last I checked he was bellyaching about the cost of the stimulus package.

 

Too bad the last two are low on my list of shit to accomplish...not that I'm not in favor. But The dems need to abolish the filibuster, and then use statehood of those two areas as the stick to the carrot of cooperation. Not use the filibuster. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
I feel like the fear here is that if Dems get rid of the filibuster, if/when Rs take back over, they'll ram all sorts of crazy shit through.  Well guess what?  I think we have to take that risk.  If Dems were smart they would pass legislation that would stop Rs from doing that shit in the future.  Now is the time for action, not "healing".  You have the ball, now run it into the fucking endzone instead of going for a long field goal and doinking it off the upright.  

Get rid of it and in a total GOP move, reinstate it in a lame duck session if elections are lost.
  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep. I'm obviously historically a defender of our government's structure around here. Fortunately for my peace of mind that means I'm 100% in favor of getting rid of the need for a supermajority in the Senate. I still believe the Electoral College is good for various reasons, but the Senate filibuster is a horrible rule and needs to die. The existence of the Senate as a chamber of the States is fine. The supermajority requirement is not. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Thanks. Good to know. Last I checked he was bellyaching about the cost of the stimulus package.

 

Too bad the last two are low on my list of shit to accomplish...not that I'm not in favor. But The dems need to abolish the filibuster, and then use statehood of those two areas as the stick to the carrot of cooperation. Not use the filibuster. 

 

Pure politicking for more money to WV.

This is the same guy who also just came out and said he wants $4T for infrastructure. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, CooterBrown said:


Get rid of it and in a total GOP move, reinstate it in a lame duck session if elections are lost.

YES.  THIS IS WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.  You have to play by their standards.  That is EXACTLY what they would do.  Dems should do it first.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, immamac said:

The senate is not broken. The Senators are broken and morally bankrupt destroyers of our system of government for personal gain. 

The senate is not supposed to be an oligarchy it's supposed to be a constitutional democracy.

Lol wut? The senate was designed as an anti democratic governing body 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

It's never actually existed.

No joke.

We had a cowardly garbage Southern slavery apologist beat Charles Sumner near-to-death with a cane (Sumner got stuck on a fixed desk) on the floor of the Senate while everyone else just watched.

"WE MUST GET BACK TO INCLUSIVE POLITICS!!!"

lol

Also, the Founders were anti-Filibuster and Jefferson's original rules of the Senate allowed a motion to return to the previous question if some guy was being a douche and just running his mouth too long.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A word of advice to my fellow not-conservatives: If you are arguing the filibuster with a conservative, remind them that the Founders were against the ability of one man to hold up the work of government and that Thomas Jefferson's original rules for the Senate didn't allow one person to hold up the Senate through talking. The first filibuster was in the late 1830s and was made possible by a 19th century rules change.

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

No joke.

We had a cowardly garbage Southern slavery apologist beat Charles Sumner near-to-death with a cane (Sumner got stuck on a fixed desk) on the floor of the Senate while everyone else just watched.

"WE MUST GET BACK TO INCLUSIVE POLITICS!!!"

lol

Also, the Founders were anti-Filibuster and Jefferson's original rules of the Senate allowed a motion to return to the previous question if some guy was being a douche and just running his mouth too long.

I’m not opposed to Ted getting his ass beat on the senate floor 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree with the status quo filibuster rules but Dems need to be clear that eliminating the filibuster can come back at them in the future. The state demographics are currently setup well for GOP majorities in the Senate. Obviously not guaranteed but a strong likelihood.

Now if you remove the filibuster and then admit Puerto Rico and the residential area of DC as states, that lowers the chance of a GOP stranglehold on the Senate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I don't agree with the status quo filibuster rules but Dems need to be clear that eliminating the filibuster can come back at them in the future. The state demographics are currently setup well for GOP majorities in the Senate. Obviously not guaranteed but a strong likelihood.

Now if you remove the filibuster and then admit Puerto Rico and the residential area of DC as states, that lowers the chance of a GOP stranglehold on the Senate.

That's a false barrier, the fear to what Republicans might do. Because they could have and could do it at any point in the future when they have a simple majority. So lets make sure Democrats dont do it when they can get shit done so Pubs can do it later if they want to get their shit done without any barrier? Come on man..

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Don't change anything, get nothing done and lose the majority because they didn't accomplish anything.

2. Change the rules, actually pass laws and have a shot at keeping the majority.

 

There are no positives in the first option.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

That's a false barrier, the fear to what Republicans might do. Because they could have and could do it at any point in the future when they have a simple majority. So lets make sure Democrats dont do it when they can get shit done so Pubs can do it later if they want to get their shit done without any barrier? Come on man..

This.

You really think if the table was turned this morning and Mitch McConnell had Trump/Pence and a 50/50 Senate, he'd be licking Schumer's butt and talking about power sharing and keeping the filibuster? 

The filibuster would not only have been nuked 2 days ago, he would have somehow ruled that Bernie and King, as independents, can't caucus with any party so the Senate is 50-48-2 and therefore, they have sole majority, so cry more, libs. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

That's a false barrier, the fear to what Republicans might do. Because they could have and could do it at any point in the future when they have a simple majority. So lets make sure Democrats dont do it when they can get shit done so Pubs can do it later if they want to get their shit done without any barrier? Come on man..

Fucking this. Does anyone seriously think Mitch fucking McConnell refrained from eliminating the filibuster out of some respect for norms? That's the dumbest idea I've ever heard.

The GOP doesn't give a shit about passing legislation. Their entire goal is to sabotage the government's ability to function. Even David Brooks sees that now. Let's just nuke the damned thing and get it over with. In six months nobody will even remember the shitfit the GOP throws about it. 

  • Hook 'Em 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Js1 said:

This.

You really think if the table was turned this morning and Mitch McConnell had Trump/Pence and a 50/50 Senate, he'd be licking Schumer's butt and talking about power sharing and keeping the filibuster? 

The filibuster would not only have been nuked 2 days ago, he would have somehow ruled that Bernie and King, as independents, can't caucus with any party so the Senate is 50-48-2 and therefore, they have sole majority, so cry more, libs. 

he'd have everything he wants without having to get rid of the filibuster so he'd have no need to take that arrow out of the quiver.  tax cut is already a thing, dark money judges would still get on the judiciary, and trump would be taking a hacksaw to the regulatory state.  pass legislation?  why would he do that?

Edited by elfenix
Link to post
Share on other sites
√ó
√ó
  • Create New...