From 1789 Till 1917

[Billy_Kinetta]

The Senate had a simple majority rule.

The model is restored.

 

[FA_Q2]

To the detriment of the system as a whole. Now, the minority party has literally no say in anything - a majority can simply run roughshod over them. When the dems regain control, and regain control they will, those celebrating this change now will lament it.

 

[ptbw forever]

To the detriment of the system as a whole. Now, the minority party has literally no say in anything - a majority can simply run roughshod over them. When the dems regain control, and regain control they will, those celebrating this change now will lament it.

Now the nonsense about the 2 parties being the same will finally be put to rest.

If Democrats gain power again, this country is literally going to be destroyed in about a year.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

To the detriment of the system as a whole. Now, the minority party has literally no say in anything - a majority can simply run roughshod over them. When the dems regain control, and regain control they will, those celebrating this change now will lament it.

To the detriment of the system as a whole. Now, the minority party has literally no say in anything - a majority can simply run roughshod over them. When the dems regain control, and regain control they will, those celebrating this change now will lament it.

You're sorta right, recall the DEMS were first to play the nuclear card.

Media praised the ‘nuclear option’ when Democrats did it

The press showered praise upon the Senate for removing the filibuster for lower-court judicial nominees and executive appointments in 2013 in the effort spearheaded by then-Majority Leader Harry Reid.

MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow assured her viewers at the time that “judges can be blocked on an up-or-down vote, a majority vote, like always.

“But they cannot be blocked anymore by just a minority of votes,” Ms. Maddow said, reported the Media Research Center’s NewsBusters. “Republicans cannot force that anymore.”

 

[FA_Q2]

When the dems eliminated the filibuster out of political convenience it proved that they were willing to change the rules when it suited their agenda. The filibuster died that day. The dems will try and hide behind the fact they did not extend it to the SCOTUS but in the end they left the republicans with little choice - clearly the dems would ignore the 60 vote rule when they wanted and it would not behoove the right to tie one hand behind their back out of principal.

The filibuster remains for law as of today but that is in name only - it will be expelled the instant the majority party sees a gain in doing so. I said it was over when Reid pulled this idiocy the first time and the naysayers were determined to bleet that it only extended to appointments in lower courts. The inevitable outcome here should have been glaringly obvious.

 

[francoHFW]

To the detriment of the system as a whole. Now, the minority party has literally no say in anything - a majority can simply run roughshod over them. When the dems regain control, and regain control they will, those celebrating this change now will lament it.

Good, GOP disfunction was pathetic. This will mean gov't can work again. Go Trump! Do some research, learning real facts and growing. 50% GOP, 50% Dem...Dump the dupes.

 

[Truth2Know]

To the detriment of the system as a whole. Now, the minority party has literally no say in anything - a majority can simply run roughshod over them.

Not yet. The fifty-one vote threshold applies only to appointments, not legislation. Nuclear option - Wikipedia

In any case, if the requirement does go to fifty-one votes for legislation, it may be better. Action will be taken on critical issues, the American people will see the results of those actions, and vote accordingly.

Perhaps this would encourage our elected "leaders" to think for themselves and do what's in the best interest of the country instead of what's in the best interest of their party.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

To the detriment of the system as a whole. Now, the minority party has literally no say in anything - a majority can simply run roughshod over them. When the dems regain control, and regain control they will, those celebrating this change now will lament it.

So the current majority must run roughshod over the Democrats now and for the next eight years, so they are less likely to regain control.

Gawd knows I'll never vote for one again.

 

[NYcarbineer]

They need to get rid of the filibuster on regular legislation too,

since politics and demographics in the long term favor the country having Democratic president with a 50 something Democratic Senate majority.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

To the detriment of the system as a whole. Now, the minority party has literally no say in anything - a majority can simply run roughshod over them. When the dems regain control, and regain control they will, those celebrating this change now will lament it.

Elections have consequences. Get over it. The dems rode roughshod all over the Republicans for the last 8 years. The people said enough.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

They need to get rid of the filibuster on regular legislation too,

since politics and demographics in the long term favor the country having Democratic president with a 50 something Democratic Senate majority.

Don't count your chickens. There is no constitutional right to vote, and voting privileges may change.

After all, what logic is there in permitting those on the public dole the privilege of voting to increase their benefits?

 

[NYcarbineer]

They need to get rid of the filibuster on regular legislation too,

since politics and demographics in the long term favor the country having Democratic president with a 50 something Democratic Senate majority.

Don't count your chickens. There is no constitutional right to vote, and voting privileges may change.

After all, what logic is there in permitting those on the public dole the privilege of voting to increase their benefits?

There are multiple constitutional rights to vote.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

They need to get rid of the filibuster on regular legislation too,

since politics and demographics in the long term favor the country having Democratic president with a 50 something Democratic Senate majority.

Don't count your chickens. There is no constitutional right to vote, and voting privileges may change.

After all, what logic is there in permitting those on the public dole the privilege of voting to increase their benefits?

There are multiple constitutional rights to vote.

List them.

 

[task0778]

One thing about the nuclear option, you can't blame the other party any more for your own failures. Yeah, if the other side has the WH and/or the House you can point to them as the obstructionists, so if that is the case then there is still a need to negotiate. And if you control all 3 then it's on you and you alone to run the gov't.

 

[BluesLegend]

To the detriment of the system as a whole. Now, the minority party has literally no say in anything - a majority can simply run roughshod over them. When the dems regain control, and regain control they will, those celebrating this change now will lament it.

LOL the American people are fed up with your liberal BS, RIP Democratic party.

 

[FA_Q2]

To the detriment of the system as a whole. Now, the minority party has literally no say in anything - a majority can simply run roughshod over them. When the dems regain control, and regain control they will, those celebrating this change now will lament it.

LOL the American people are fed up with your liberal BS, RIP Democratic party.

Liberal?

Clearly you are a hack that must spew the same charge at anything you think disagrees with you.

 

[FA_Q2]

To the detriment of the system as a whole. Now, the minority party has literally no say in anything - a majority can simply run roughshod over them. When the dems regain control, and regain control they will, those celebrating this change now will lament it.

Elections have consequences. Get over it. The dems rode roughshod all over the Republicans for the last 8 years. The people said enough.

Yes, they do. Now those consequences have been magnified. Once the dems regain control you will see what those consequences look like when the republicans will not even need to show up - they will be irrelevant.

 

[FA_Q2]

To the detriment of the system as a whole. Now, the minority party has literally no say in anything - a majority can simply run roughshod over them.

Not yet. The fifty-one vote threshold applies only to appointments, not legislation. Nuclear option - Wikipedia

In any case, if the requirement does go to fifty-one votes for legislation, it may be better. Action will be taken on critical issues, the American people will see the results of those actions, and vote accordingly.

Perhaps this would encourage our elected "leaders" to think for themselves and do what's in the best interest of the country instead of what's in the best interest of their party.

Apparently you did not even bother to read my post.

 

[Anathema]

To the detriment of the system as a whole. Now, the minority party has literally no say in anything - a majority can simply run roughshod over them. When the dems regain control, and regain control they will, those celebrating this change now will lament it.

As it should be..... Majority Rule.

I believe it's your fucking monkey who said.... "Elections have consequences."

 

[NYcarbineer]

They need to get rid of the filibuster on regular legislation too,

since politics and demographics in the long term favor the country having Democratic president with a 50 something Democratic Senate majority.

Don't count your chickens. There is no constitutional right to vote, and voting privileges may change.

After all, what logic is there in permitting those on the public dole the privilege of voting to increase their benefits?

There are multiple constitutional rights to vote.

List them.

The right not to be denied the vote because of your race, because of your religion, because of your gender, for starters.

I can't believe your ignorance. lol, no wait, I can.