If the Dems win in Georgia today

[task0778]

What does it mean? Well, for starters it means the seats in the Senate would be split 50-50 and VP Kamala Harris would cast the deciding vote. But what it really means is that the democrats could change our gov't forever if they have the votes to abolish the filibuster, which as you no doubt know means the majority party in the Senate could pass any bill with only a simple majority. The Senate currently requires 60 votes to stop the debate on a given bill, and you can't vote on any bill until that vote (called cloture) passes.

There is a reason for that requirement. The 60 votes for cloture is there to prevent what is called the "tyranny of the majority". It was feared that the minority party would have no say at all in the Senate, as it currently doesn't in the House. They can squawk all they want but they cannot do anything of substance in the House. Not so in the Senate, up to now at least; these days there is no appetite in either party to cooperate and compromise, it' all obstruction to politically hurt the majority and hopefully get them voted out of office in the next election. And it works too at least sometimes. Hence, no working together on just about anything.

There are 2 Senate seats up for grabs today; if the GOP takes one or both of them then the controversy is over and the filibuster lives for at least 2 more years. But if the democrats take both seats, well..

I believe that if the democrats take both seats they will abolish the filibuster in some way that tries to avoid looking like a power grab but fools no one. The intense pressure from their base will be too hard to ignore IMHO. And if that happens then compromise and cooperation will forever be gone. When one side does that, the other side will follow suit when they take over, and they eventually will. Maybe that will spur the rise of a 3rd political party that would require some kind of coalition; I think that would be a good thing with or without the filibuster. Otherwise, it's a one-party gov't if you can manage to control everything.

 

[bodecea]

You make that sound like a bad thing.

 

[Augustine_]

What does it mean? Well, for starters it means the seats in the Senate would be split 50-50 and VP Kamala Harris would cast the deciding vote. But what it really means is that the democrats could change our gov't forever if they have the votes to abolish the filibuster, which as you know doubt know means the majority party in the Senate could pass any bill with only a simple majority. The Senate currently requires 60 votes to stop the debate on a given bill, and you can't vote on any bill until that vote (called cloture) passes.

There is a reason for that requirement. The 60 votes for cloture is there to prevent what is called the "tyranny of the majority". It was feared that the minority party would have no say at all in the Senate, as it currently doesn't in the House. They can squawk all they want but they cannot do anything of substance in the House. Not so in the Senate, up to now at least; these days there is no appetite in either party to cooperate and compromise, it' all obstruction to politically hurt the majority and hopefully get them voted out of office in the next election. And it work too at least sometimes.

There are 2 Senate seats up for grabs today; if the GOP takes one or both of them then the controversy is over and the filibuster lives for at least 2 more years. But i the democrats take both seats, well..

I believe that if the democrats take both seats they will abolish the filibuster in some way that tries to avoid looking like a power grab but fools no one. The intense pressure from their base will be too hard to ignore IMHO. And if that happens then compromise and cooperation will forever be gone. When one side does that, the other side will follow suit when they take over, and they eventually will. Maybe that will spur the rise of a 3rd political party that would require some kind of coalition,; I think that would be a good thing with or without the filibuster. Otherwise, it's a one-party gov't if you can manage to control everything.

Why should Democrats care about that after Republicans killed the 60 vote requirement for Supreme Court Justices?

 

[Rambunctious]

It will mean the people have had it with RINO politicians that never got into the fight until their butt was on the line....the GOP sat back and allowed the dems and the media to commit treason aimed at Trump.....for 4 years!!! one baseless accusation after another....did McConnell ever defend Trump?....not once that I can remember...how about McCarthy?....sits in his CA office and hides under his desk....

 

[G.T.]

The filibuster is a terrible procedure. If you don't want your Senators voting a certain way, Vote them our or shut the fuck up

 

[Mac-7]

You make that sound like a bad thing.

Its very bad if you like centrist government

 

[rightwinger]

What does it mean? Well, for starters it means the seats in the Senate would be split 50-50 and VP Kamala Harris would cast the deciding vote. But what it really means is that the democrats could change our gov't forever if they have the votes to abolish the filibuster, which as you no doubt know means the majority party in the Senate could pass any bill with only a simple majority. The Senate currently requires 60 votes to stop the debate on a given bill, and you can't vote on any bill until that vote (called cloture) passes.

There is a reason for that requirement. The 60 votes for cloture is there to prevent what is called the "tyranny of the majority". It was feared that the minority party would have no say at all in the Senate, as it currently doesn't in the House. They can squawk all they want but they cannot do anything of substance in the House. Not so in the Senate, up to now at least; these days there is no appetite in either party to cooperate and compromise, it' all obstruction to politically hurt the majority and hopefully get them voted out of office in the next election. And it works too at least sometimes. Hence, no working together on just about anything.

There are 2 Senate seats up for grabs today; if the GOP takes one or both of them then the controversy is over and the filibuster lives for at least 2 more years. But if the democrats take both seats, well..

I believe that if the democrats take both seats they will abolish the filibuster in some way that tries to avoid looking like a power grab but fools no one. The intense pressure from their base will be too hard to ignore IMHO. And if that happens then compromise and cooperation will forever be gone. When one side does that, the other side will follow suit when they take over, and they eventually will. Maybe that will spur the rise of a 3rd political party that would require some kind of coalition; I think that would be a good thing with or without the filibuster. Otherwise, it's a one-party gov't if you can manage to control everything.

Mitch changed established rules, why shouldn’t Democrats?

 

[Rambunctious]

One main thing the republicans in office are missing about Trump voters...they can go either way...many of them are democrats...if the GOP has no fight left in them they will go with the party that fights...whether they fight fairly or not.....

 

[rightwinger]

The filibuster is a terrible procedure. If you don't want your Senators voting a certain way, Vote them our or shut the fuck up

Filibuster was meant to be rarely used except on extremely controversial legislation

Mitch applied it to all legislation and Gridlocked the Senate.
Time to move to majority rules

 

[LordBrownTrout]

If a bill proposed in the house is so good for the country, it should never have a problem passing with 80 percent of the house and 75 percent percent of the senate. However, that never occurs and we're always given bills that are passed into worthless laws.

 

[Papageorgio]

Democrats and Republicans in Congress need to remember, what goes around, comes around. I have talked about how making rule changes can bite people in the ass and in the future, you can count on it.

Remember Reid tabling all the bills from the Republican House, then everyone was outraged that McConnell did the same?

Wait for the Republican House and a Democratic President, we could see another round of endless investigations and impeachment hearings.

Too bad politicians never think ahead.

 

[White 6]

You make that sound like a bad thing.

Its very bad if you like centrist government

Had no chance for centrist government under trump and trump republicans.

 

[BlindBoo]

But what it really means is that the democrats could change our gov't forever if they have the votes to abolish the filibuster, which as you no doubt know means the majority party in the Senate could pass any bill with only a simple majority.

Where is the filibuster or cloture in the Constitution? How would changing a Senate rule change the fundamentals of our Constitutional Republic?

Frankly, I don't think they could get all 50 senators (assuming the Dems pick up the two in Ga.) on board either. It's a sword that cuts both ways.

 

[Flash]

Events in the next 72 hours will probably determine the future of the United States.

Are we going to be America, land of the free and home of the brave, or are we going to be a Socialist shithole like most of the rest of the world?

 

[Obama2020]

If Dems win today....
Well there is a schism in the ReTrumplican party. Some senators will split (Mitt Romney, Lisa, Susan... ) and create a new party and will hold a massive amount of power.

To be blunt: Flushing out the fascists will take some time but it will be done.
Mussolini pretenders will be exposed as such... I figure an early retirement for them

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

You make that sound like a bad thing.

Let the republicans rule with a one party government and see how you feel about it.

 

[Meister]

What does it mean? Well, for starters it means the seats in the Senate would be split 50-50 and VP Kamala Harris would cast the deciding vote. But what it really means is that the democrats could change our gov't forever if they have the votes to abolish the filibuster, which as you know doubt know means the majority party in the Senate could pass any bill with only a simple majority. The Senate currently requires 60 votes to stop the debate on a given bill, and you can't vote on any bill until that vote (called cloture) passes.

There is a reason for that requirement. The 60 votes for cloture is there to prevent what is called the "tyranny of the majority". It was feared that the minority party would have no say at all in the Senate, as it currently doesn't in the House. They can squawk all they want but they cannot do anything of substance in the House. Not so in the Senate, up to now at least; these days there is no appetite in either party to cooperate and compromise, it' all obstruction to politically hurt the majority and hopefully get them voted out of office in the next election. And it work too at least sometimes.

There are 2 Senate seats up for grabs today; if the GOP takes one or both of them then the controversy is over and the filibuster lives for at least 2 more years. But i the democrats take both seats, well..

I believe that if the democrats take both seats they will abolish the filibuster in some way that tries to avoid looking like a power grab but fools no one. The intense pressure from their base will be too hard to ignore IMHO. And if that happens then compromise and cooperation will forever be gone. When one side does that, the other side will follow suit when they take over, and they eventually will. Maybe that will spur the rise of a 3rd political party that would require some kind of coalition,; I think that would be a good thing with or without the filibuster. Otherwise, it's a one-party gov't if you can manage to control everything.

Why should Democrats care about that after Republicans killed the 60 vote requirement for Supreme Court Justices?

Where did it all start? It wasn't the republicans, and it wasn't with the Justices.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Where is the filibuster or cloture in the Constitution? How would changing a Senate rule change the fundamentals of our Constitutional Republic?

Frankly, I don't think they could get all 50 senators (assuming the Dems pick up the two in Ga.) on board either. It's a sword that cuts both ways.

Show me the last time that any democrat dared to defy the party.

 

[g5000]

It will mean the people have had it with RINO politicians that never got into the fight until their butt was on the line....the GOP sat back and allowed the dems and the media to commit treason aimed at Trump.....for 4 years!!! one baseless accusation after another....did McConnell ever defend Trump?....not once that I can remember...how about McCarthy?....sits in his CA office and hides under his desk....

If someone is shitting on the furniture, you don't defend them.

Trump shit all over the furniture.

Only the weakminded grabbed a spoon to eat it up.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Fox News just announced dems won both seats by 4 million votes! 7 million homeless voters went for the dems

“As president, I have no higher duty than to defend the laws and the Constitution of the United States,” which - along with the election system - is under “coordinated assault and siege,” President Trump