US Senate goes Nuclear to approve Trump's nominees, good idea or bad idea? (Poll)

[RetiredGySgt]

He is a ******* unqualified nutjob

And everyone but you seems to understand that

No, he isn't and you are the nutjob

 

[kyzr]

Crimes for which he was indicted according to statutes cited by Jack Smith. You should read the indictment.

1. LOL, Taylor Swift has more legal authority than Jack Smith. You should read this...

 

[kyzr]

Getting passed out of committee is NOT in the constitution nor is good enough, the Constitution says all of the senators in the Senate vote to give consent on each of the president's nominees. If they vote the nominee down of the president's, then the president has to choose another nominee. They want to skip their required constitutional duty....of being the CHECK on the presidential nominees....imo.

They are doing their constitutional duty, just voting for them in blocks.

 

[BackAgain]

Honestly, there is no point to the Senate anymore.

The Senate used to represent the respective STATES. Now, however, they get elected by the popular vote of the various States.

This effectively makes them statewide representatives. Why they get to confirm Presidential nominations or treaties, anymore, is left unsaid.

It used to be a deliberative body with different rules from the House. The Senate through the filibuster gave substantial rights to the minority. The filibuster is now headed out the door. The Senate is now headed to be like the House where majority controls and the minority has zero power.

Is this bad?

it is no different really than a parliamentary style government where the majority rules and the minority can do nothing but scream into the wind.

The Senate was the last bastion of minority rights…well not for very much longer.

 

[kyzr]

That's a horseshit opinion held by the regime to justify illegal acts.

Confirmed by the USSC. District judges need to stay in their lanes/districts.

Supreme Court Rules Federal District Courts Likely Lack Authority for Universal Injunctions

On June 27, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States held that federal district courts likely lack the authority to issue universal injunctions blocking presidential actions nationwide, a ruling that is likely to allow the Trump administration to continue enforcing executive orders (EO) or...

natlawreview.com

 

[Lesh]

They are doing their constitutional duty, just voting for them in blocks.

Which means that none get vetted

Just dump a bucket of names on the table and push em through

 

[kyzr]

Which means that none get vetted
Just dump a bucket of names on the table and push em through

They all get vetted in committee. That's why Schumer's obstruction is nonsense. Enjoy the nuclear option.

 

[Foxfyre]

Democrats have blocked most of Trump's nominees, Thune and the Republicans tried to negotiate, in vain, going nuclear is the only option, thank you!!

All 53 Republicans voted for the rules change, a pleasant surprise, that shows how unreasonable the democrats have been.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5499527-senate-republicans-nuclear-option-rules-trump-nominees/

Senate Republicans invoke ‘nuclear option’ to change rules to confirm Trump nominees​

The 53-43 party-line vote came after negotiations intensified earlier Wednesday on a bipartisan deal to speed the nominations, but it failed to get enough Democratic support and Republicans moved forward with the partisan rule change.

Thune needs to change the rules for appropriations bills, and rescissions.

When the Democrats refuse to negotiate or operate in good faith, I don't see any other alternative for a Republican majority, however narrow that majority is.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Shit people?
Democrat presidential stage candidates RFK & Tulsi Gabbard? Rejected by democrats? WTF?
How about these Biden picks?
View attachment 1161568

As I recall Republicans used the Biden Rule to block Merrick Garland:
View attachment 1161569

RFK is about as shit as they come.

 

[Robert W]

RFK is about as shit as they come.

Nobody has proved he is wrong.

 

[Care4all]

They are doing their constitutional duty, just voting for them in blocks.

It's not really doing their job if they don't spend the time to discuss and debate each nominee on the senate floor before they cast their vote...

To me it is pure laziness... not doing the jobs they are suppose to do, and shutting out what little voice the minority is suppose to have in the Senate, vs the House....

And really, why have the rule, only to take it away when it is inconvenient to the majority side of the aisle? There was a purpose for the rule to be set up in a way that it wasn't easy peasy to push nominees forward, if you had sizeable minority with concerns on a nominee.... It was a step in the process to purposely slow things down and not jam bad laws or bad nominees down our throats with no debate or discussion...

Every nominee could be fine or good and likely to get everyone's vote, but I still wouldn't want to see the Senate taking short cuts...

...then it would only be fair for the next president to have the Senate take the same short cuts as the previous president had the senate take,

and from there on out... all nominees will never be vetted by the whole senate... as the Constitution states the Senators must do.

It's just a slippery slope shortcut that'll lead to no good....imo.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

It's not really doing their job if they don't spend the time to discuss and debate each nominee on the senate floor before they cast their vote...

To me it is pure laziness... not doing the jobs they are suppose to do, and shutting out what little voice the minority is suppose to have in the Senate, vs the House....

And really, why have the rule, only to take it away when it is inconvenient to the majority side of the aisle? There was a purpose for the rule to be set up in a way that it wasn't easy peasy to push nominees forward, if you had sizeable minority with concerns on a nominee.... It was a step in the process to purposely slow things down and not jam bad laws or bad nominees down our throats with no debate or discussion...

Every nominee could be fine or good and likely to get everyone's vote, but I still wouldn't want to see the Senate taking short cuts...

...then it would only be fair for the next president to have the Senate take the same short cuts as the previous president had the senate take,

and from there on out... all nominees will never be vetted by the whole senate... as the Constitution states the Senators must do.

It's just a slippery slope shortcut that'll lead to no good....imo.

absolute horse shit. EVERY nominee gets vetted in committee. and almost none every got discussed on the floor of the senate in the past. what the dems have done is purposefully obstruct the running of the Government for political reasons, and not because they think the nominees need vetting.
there is NO damn way that every single nominee for every single position needs a day's long hearing on the senate floor.

 

[eagle1462010]

This is Not a pillow fight with the left.

We must play to Win and not be psyo op downed by them.

They DO NOT PLAY BY THE RULES. WE MUST RESPOND ACCORDINGLY

 

[Lesh]

They all get vetted in committee. That's why Schumer's obstruction is nonsense. Enjoy the nuclear option.

In committee means that like four people “vet” them from each party

That’s bullshit and you know it

 

[kyzr]

It's not really doing their job if they don't spend the time to discuss and debate each nominee on the senate floor before they cast their vote...
To me it is pure laziness... not doing the jobs they are suppose to do, and shutting out what little voice the minority is suppose to have in the Senate, vs the House....
And really, why have the rule, only to take it away when it is inconvenient to the majority side of the aisle? There was a purpose for the rule to be set up in a way that it wasn't easy peasy to push nominees forward, if you had sizeable minority with concerns on a nominee.... It was a step in the process to purposely slow things down and not jam bad laws or bad nominees down our throats with no debate or discussion...
Every nominee could be fine or good and likely to get everyone's vote, but I still wouldn't want to see the Senate taking short cuts..
...then it would only be fair for the next president to have the Senate take the same short cuts as the previous president had the senate take,
and from there on out... all nominees will never be vetted by the whole senate... as the Constitution states the Senators must do.
It's just a slippery slope shortcut that'll lead to no good....imo.

1. The nominees are interviewed in committee.
2. The floor vote is just a formality, no way can they discuss a hundred nominees.
3. You need to look at the last several presidents at how they generally sailed thru without wasting precious senate time.
4. That's how it works, if the rule is changed now, its changed going forward.
5. Obstruction can't be tolerated, the senate needs to pass appropriations bills.

 

[kyzr]

In committee means that like four people “vet” them from each party
That’s bullshit and you know it

More like 10, but thats the way the process has always worked. If approved by the committee, they should be approved.
Schumer is obstructing, so Thune is going nuclear, no big deal.

 

[Lesh]

1. The nominees are interviewed in committee.
2. The floor vote is just a formality, no way can they discuss a hundred nominees.
3. You need to look at the last several presidents at how they generally sailed thru without wasting precious senate time.
4. That's how it works, if the rule is changed now, its changed going forward.
5. Obstruction can't be tolerated, the senate needs to pass appropriations bills.

Thanks for your opinion

It’s worthless but thanks anyway

 

[Lesh]

More like 10, but thats the way the process has always worked. If approved by the committee, they should be approved.
Schumer is obstructing, so Thune is going nuclear, no big deal.

How “it’s always worked” is they have to pass through the committee and then face the full Senate individually

 

[kyzr]

Thanks for your opinion

It’s worthless but thanks anyway

Thanks for your post, its worthless, but thanks anyway.

 

[kyzr]

How “it’s always worked” is they have to pass through the committee and then face the full Senate individually

Bullshit. LIAR.
They don't face the senate individually. They can be debated, or they can be approved by voice votes or unanimous consent.