Chuck Schumer is going to force Democrats to go on record on trashing the filibuster.

[postman]

Don’t even talk about hypocrisy when you have McConnell and Graham and many others flip flopping all over the place

Like McConnell on confirming a supreme court justice during a presidential election year?

 

[Nostra]

Like McConnell on confirming a supreme court justice during a presidential election year?

Gee....................more whataboutism.

What a bunch of lazy fuckwits.

 

[postman]

More whataboutism. It's as if that is all Dimtards have.

Sad, really.

When has "Turtle" McConnell every held the same position after the party of the presidency changed.

 

[Nostra]

When has "Turtle" McConnell every held the same position after the party of the presidency changed.

You tell us, Ms. Whataboutism.

 

[postman]

Gee....................more whataboutism.

What a bunch of lazy fuckwits.

What whataboutism, but what's with that ism.
McConnell's position is whichever way the political wind is blowing.

 

[Nostra]

What whataboutism, but what's with that ism.
McConnell's position is whichever way the political wind is blowing.

You should go start a McConnell thread, Potsy.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Why are you lying?

You said this:

cherry picking a year doesn't make a point.

It most certainly does make the point, quite well. Dimtards are being hypocritical asshats.

Like Gerrymandering, which is called Redistricting when democrats do it, it's only good when it benefits the Commies

 

[postman]

You tell us, Ms. Whataboutism.

Nevah…..

 

[iceberg]

Yes he said that in the past. Graham said that votes on Supreme Court justices shouldn't be voted on in election years also. The two parties are nothing but hypocritical but that does not back your predictions for the future.

it is not a prediction.

Schumer Threatens to Nuke Filibuster If GOP Stands Ground on Voting Bill

Chuck Schumer announced Monday that the chamber would debate eliminating the filibuster if Republicans refuse to join Democrats in passing sweeping voting legislation.

news.yahoo.com

he's threatening to nuke it because he's not getting his way; totally counter to what he said about "if you can't get 60 votes".

this is hypocrisy. i have zero idea what you are going on about but my apathy is overwhelming me now.

 

[iceberg]

You should go start a McConnell thread, Potsy.

heh - DREN.

 

[iceberg]

Don’t even talk about hypocrisy when you have McConnell and Graham and many others flip flopping all over the place

yet here you are - calling out ONE SIDE to dismiss the other. doing the very thing you are bitching about.

irritating as all fucksticks.

 

[pknopp]

it is not a prediction.

Schumer Threatens to Nuke Filibuster If GOP Stands Ground on Voting Bill

Chuck Schumer announced Monday that the chamber would debate eliminating the filibuster if Republicans refuse to join Democrats in passing sweeping voting legislation.

news.yahoo.com

he's threatening to nuke it because he's not getting his way; totally counter to what he said about "if you can't get 60 votes".

this is hypocrisy. i have zero idea what you are going on about but my apathy is overwhelming me now.

You continued to argue they would want to change it back and asked me to address that. I note that both parties are nothing but hypocritical but that's not what you are looking for.

 

[Independentthinker]

What is Chucky smoking? Several Dems have been very evasive on their position because they know supporting this would be toxic with voters at home. The filibuster isn't going anywhere. He doesn't have the votes in his own party. He knows this.

So why is he forcing Dem Senators to expose how they would vote? Dumbest political move in quite a while, and Republicans are loving every second of it.

Schumer tells Democrats reluctant to nuke filibuster: 'We are all going to go on the record'

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer Tuesday turned up the heat on Democrats reluctant to nuke the chamber's 60-vote filibuster.

www.foxnews.com

He wants to expose both Manchin and Sinema publicly because, apparently, Schumer feels that they have not been public about how they would vote. And, you're right. This will do more harm to Senators from purple states in blindly following the Borg collective than to the two Senators who they are trying to attack, particularly in Manchin's case because he is from a red state, not a purple state. The way I see it, Democrats see the handwriting on the wall when it comes to the midterms and are flailing around trying to find something, anything, to reverse that handwriting on the wall. I predict that this will indeed help Senators from blue states who were going to win anyway.

 

[Turtlesoup]

What is Chucky smoking? Several Dems have been very evasive on their position because they know supporting this would be toxic with voters at home. The filibuster isn't going anywhere. He doesn't have the votes in his own party. He knows this.

So why is he forcing Dem Senators to expose how they would vote? Dumbest political move in quite a while, and Republicans are loving every second of it.

Schumer tells Democrats reluctant to nuke filibuster: 'We are all going to go on the record'

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer Tuesday turned up the heat on Democrats reluctant to nuke the chamber's 60-vote filibuster.

www.foxnews.com

He's a bully----he is punishing them so they are less likely to stand up to him on the next item and because likely he can't stop himself from lashing out.

 

[iceberg]

You continued to argue they would want to change it back and asked me to address that. I note that both parties are nothing but hypocritical but that's not what you are looking for.

they have already argued it needs to stay.

they used it 300+ times under Trump.

they want it changed now because it blocks their goals.

when it's time to block others, we have a long established history of tactics used. this is most certainly one to dust off

it's a pretty good educated guess.

 

[pknopp]

they have already argued it needs to stay.

they used it 300+ times under Trump.

they want it changed now because it blocks their goals.

when it's time to block others, we have a long established history of tactics used. this is most certainly one to dust off

it's a pretty good educated guess.

Doing something to push your goals while blocking it for others is bad?

 

[iceberg]

Doing something to push your goals while blocking it for others is bad?

to me, yes. the foundation we all agree to live upon has a set decorum of behavior. the constitution isn't here for one side to dominate, over the other.

you are basically saying it's always OK to change rules you've agreed to play by for, one, sides, gain over the other.

I want our gov to work together, bot see each other as Nazis all the time.

 

[DGS49]

The fun part will come next year, when the Republicans have a 2 or 3 vote majority, and the Democrats use the filibuster to thwart them. Their votes from this year will be shoved right up their duplicitous asses.

 

[iceberg]

The fun part will come next year, when the Republicans have a 2 or 3 vote majority, and the Democrats use the filibuster to thwart them. Their votes from this year will be shoved right up their duplicitous asses.

it already is now.

they don't care.

 

[pknopp]

to me, yes. the foundation we all agree to live upon has a set decorum of behavior. the constitution isn't here for one side to dominate, over the other.

you are basically saying it's always OK to change rules you've agreed to play by for, one, sides, gain over the other.

I want our gov to work together, bot see each other as Nazis all the time.

It gets so old discussing things with lazy people such as yourself. My opinion on this all along is that the Democrats would regret it. Just because I wouldn't support your future predictions only means that. I'm not going to condemn people for something that hasn't happened.