Support NeoGAF

[nintendoman58]

Yes.

This was how it was going to happen from the start, what were you expecting?

I thought the process for getting to the vote again took time. Even if they did nuke the filibuster, wouldn't they have to wait a while to vote again?

Yes, where they only need a majority (51 votes) to confirm.

It basically means moving forward that if you're the president and you have a majority in the senate, you can put in whatever crazy-ass ideologues you want without any system in place to stop their confirmation.

Really not good overall, but this is where we're heading as a government. And you partially have right wing media to thank for this, since they've convinced most of the country that liberals hate America and freedom, and if you work with them you should be hung for treason.

I thought this was just for Supreme Court judges? Not legislation?

 

[dramatis]

It would be nice of them to remember how doing something like this fucked over the Dems.

These are the Republicans we're talking about

 

[Maxim726X]

I thought the process for getting to the vote again took time. Even if they did nuke the filibuster, wouldn't they have to wait a while to vote again?




I thought this was just for Supreme Court judges? Not legislation?

For now, yes.

How long will that last? We'll have to wait and see.

 

[jtb]

This is a fair argument, but of course the next logical question to ask is what exactly would the minority party even do without any institutional procedure to exert some modicum of power? Why even be there? Just stay home.

Eh. Elections have consequences.

 

[whyamihere]

(((Jared)))

 

[Pandora012]

These are the Republicans we're talking about

I know wishful thinking.

 

[whyamihere]

Spoiler

The filibuster is stupid.

 

[Holmes]

McCain said voting to end the filibuster was tough. He has concerns!

 

[BoogieWoogie]

Imagine being in the army and this fucking guy walks onto the base:

 

[RustyNails]

Trump domestic agenda has been an unmitigated disaster. Cant pass own healthcare. Cant confirm own judge.

 

[OmniOne]

Spoiler

The filibuster is stupid.

I agree in the long run, the constitution states majority rules the chamber.

Yes short term it hurts, but then again we did not win the senate.

It also creates confusion, by making a majority look inept when in reality it's minority shenanigans.

 

[Maxim726X]

Eh. Elections have consequences.

I get that, but this also could theoretically lead to an extremely volatile system where laws change drastically depending on who is in control... Although, I guess it would have to be complete control over every branch which is rare.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

Parliaments require simple majorities and can pass laws relatively quickly without exploding, I think our terrible system should be fine if it can pass laws a little faster.

 

[kirblar]

The guy in the black hat is prime reaction image material.

Parliaments require simple majorities and can pass laws relatively quickly without exploding, I think our terrible system should be fine if it can pass laws a little faster.

Yup, the Fillibuster is actually awful, considering what it did to us in '09.

 

[OmniOne]

Parliaments require simple majorities and can pass laws relatively quickly without exploding, I think our terrible system should be fine if it can pass laws a little faster.

.

 

[IggyChooChoo]

Parliaments require simple majorities and can pass laws relatively quickly without exploding, I think our terrible system should be fine if it can pass laws a little faster.

Exactly. One big problem with our current system is that there are so many veto points for legislation, people get confused about who is responsible for what. This will help simplify blame and credit. I think we would have had a safety net more in line with those of other developed countries if it weren't for the filibuster/senate.

 

[Dan]

Imagine being in the army and this fucking guy walks onto the base:

As someone on Twitter noted, he looks like the Max Fischer character from Rushmore.

Or really, Max Fischer crossed with Patrick Bateman.

 

[jtb]

Parliaments require simple majorities and can pass laws relatively quickly without exploding, I think our terrible system should be fine if it can pass laws a little faster.

I'm inclined to agree, and the Senate is also insulated from sudden back and forth swings because of the six year terms.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Parliaments require simple majorities and can pass laws relatively quickly without exploding, I think our terrible system should be fine if it can pass laws a little faster.

Technically, the senate is supposed to move slowly, by design. It's a check to make sure ideologue populist waves in the House don't destroy the entire government

But that doesn't appear to actually be working as intended so idunno

 

[OmniOne]

https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/850035553357713408

@daveweigel Hatch: Dems blew chance to use the filibuster if a liberal justice retires. I asked if he’d haven broken such a filibuster.

“Well, yeah!"

The filibuster was never a real thing.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

Technically, the senate is supposed to move slowly, by design. It's a check to make sure ideologue populist waves in the House don't destroy the entire government

But that doesn't appear to actually be working as intended so idunno

That's true, but that doesn't necessitate a filibuster and also the Senate shouldn't exist in an ideal world.

 

[kirblar]

That's true, but that doesn't necessitate a filibuster and also the Senate shouldn't exist in an ideal world.

The Senate existing is a good thing. The ratio of representatives in it though, that's what's terrible.

 

[Maxim726X]

Technically, the senate is supposed to move slowly, by design. It's a check to make sure ideologue populist waves in the House don't destroy the entire government

But that doesn't appear to actually be working as intended so idunno

Right, the issue was that it was abused during the last administration... So, again, it's clear that we're moving toward it being destroyed entirely.

You could make arguments for either side of the debate. Huge legislation that has withstood the test of time at least gets some bipartisan support. It also makes attacking the bill more difficult in the future, if you helped sign off on it.

 

[Chumley]

Imagine being in the army and this fucking guy walks onto the base:

How the fuck are any of them taking him seriously

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

The Senate existing is a good thing. The ratio of representatives in it though, that's what's terrible.

functionally unicameral parliament or bust

Also get rid of districts and implement closed list PR

 

[balladofwindfishes]

That's true, but that doesn't necessitate a filibuster and also the Senate shouldn't exist in an ideal world.

I wonder how different it would be if Senators were appointed, not elected, as they were originally intended.

 

[Pandora012]

Imagine being in the army and this fucking guy walks onto the base:

He looks like some posh villain.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

I wonder how different it would be if Senators were appointed, not elected, as they were originally intended.

the system would be even less democratic and more prone to ignoring constituents

Direct election of senators is actually pretty new, it was one of the Progressive era reforms along with stuff like the ballot initiative, referendum, and recall.

 

[whyamihere]

Even more:

Spoiler

Presidential systems are terrible and we should abolish the constitution and set up a parliamentary system.

 

[Fenderputty]

Democrats won't (and shouldn't) reinstate the filibuster.

"Now that we're in power again, let's make it harder to get anything done."

Theoretically the SCOTUS nomination should require bipartisan senate support removing politics from the equation. I think I was hearing that at one point in time it required 67 votes for confirmation. Polarization has really blown

 

[B-Dubs]

He looks like some posh villain.

He looks like the guy Bond kills in act 2.

 

[Box of Kittens]

It wasn't some great outrage when Democrats got rid of the filibuster for nominees other than Supreme Court and it's not some great outrage now that Republicans got rid of it for Supreme Court nominees.

 

[kirblar]

Even more:

Spoiler

Presidential systems are terrible and we should abolish the constitution and set up a parliamentary system.

After seeing the UK im good.

 

[timetokill]

I don't understand that picture, Nay won so the motion to appeal (nuke the filibuster) didn't pass?

They had to word it that way to make sure that Republicans would vote the right way. They are so used to reflexively voting nay.

 

[Ogodei]

This is a fair argument, but of course the next logical question to ask is what exactly would the minority party even do without any institutional procedure to exert some modicum of power? Why even be there? Just stay home.

It does beg the question of why even have a Senate. Though that question would only be proper after the legislative one gets got too.

 

[Goodstyle]

@RichLowry

There's been one consistent strategic & tactical force from the blockade of Garland to the looming confirmation of Gorsuch--Mitch McConnell

McConnel...

HE PLAYED US LIKE A DAMN FIDDLE!!!

 

[Slacker]

Imagine being in the army and this fucking guy walks onto the base:

Probably a slim chance, but if any of the soldiers there are looking to pick up a 7-figure investment property in Manhattan when they get back from active duty, Jared's the man to talk to.

In case you missed it, this picture is fun too. That's lil Jared with Donald's longtime bodyguard meeting with top Kurdish officials. Trump's bodyguard wore his finest Addidas jacket to mark the special occasion. Not pictured are the thought bubbles above the Kurdish leaders' heads saying stuff like, "They sent us a 36 year old real estate agent? Was the handbag designer too busy setting up her new office to swing by?"

 

[daedalius]

lol Bannon called Kushner a cuck and a (((globalist)))

I thought this was hyperbole.

This just keeps happening, I think something is a joke and can't possibly be true, but it is.

 

[Barzul]

Honestly I'm good with the legislative filibuster getting nuked too. For one thing senators would have to deal even more with the consequences of each vote. I'm sick of this current system where the party line is toed every time because the know the filibuster shields them from having to deal with the electoral consequence of dumb votes.

 

[Box of Kittens]

This is a fair argument, but of course the next logical question to ask is what exactly would the minority party even do without any institutional procedure to exert some modicum of power? Why even be there? Just stay home.

I mean there are many legislative bodies which don't really grant any power to the minority. Generally the minority's role is mostly to keep their party's positions visible and perhaps passing policy along with a portion of the majority party depending on the dynamics of the chamber.

 

[studyguy]

Legislative filibuster will never die specifically because legislators are too chickenshit to have their feet held to the fire when in the majority. It's not even a debate.

 

[Slacker]

I wonder if Daily Beast writer Asawin Suebsaeng ever thought he'd use the words 'cuckservative' and 'portmanteau' together in a sentence.

 

[Ogodei]

Legislative filibuster will never die specifically because legislators are too chickenshit to have their feet held to the fire when in the majority. It's not even a debate.

I think McConnell could get goaded into it, but only if there was a landmark piece of legislation that the Democrats wanted to stop. Until then, i concur with your reasoning.

 

[jtb]

Legislative filibuster will never die specifically because legislators are too chickenshit to have their feet held to the fire when in the majority. It's not even a debate.

But I think this argument is disproportionately more important for the GOP than for the Dems.

The Dems have paid a very steep price during Obama's presidency due to legislative inaction. Because the filibuster is a tool of obstructionism and status-quo preservation, it disproportionately benefits the Republicans' policy agenda (to the extent that there is one).

 

[Barzul]

But I think this argument is disproportionately more important for the GOP than for the Dems.

The Dems have paid a very steep price during Obama's presidency due to legislative inaction. Because the filibuster is a tool of obstructionism and status-quo preservation, it disproportionately benefits the Republicans' policy agenda (to the extent that there is one).

I certainly agree with this. Democrats seem way capable of agreeing on bills than Republicans can. The party agenda is way more cohesive. If somehow Democrats get back both houses of congress, I'd nuke it. Think we'd see way more independence in the way Senators vote as a result.

 

[Maxim726X]

Legislative filibuster will never die specifically because legislators are too chickenshit to have their feet held to the fire when in the majority. It's not even a debate.

I would have said a few months ago that Trump could have strong-armed him into it... But at this rate, you have to wonder if he has any pull at all. He's heading for the low 30's.

I certainly agree with this. Democrats seem way capable of agreeing on bills than Republicans can. The party agenda is way more cohesive. If somehow Democrats get back both houses of congress, I'd nuke it. Think we'd see way more independence in the way Senators vote as a result.

Just a question of when, not if.

Could be 2020 if this joke of an administration continues to flounder.

 

[kirblar]

I would have said a few months ago that Trump could have strong-armed him into it... But at this rate, you have to wonder if he has any pull at all. He's heading for the low 30's.

Reps know what's coming in 2018. It's only going to get harder to pass anything.

 

[Vladimir Putin]

https://twitter.com/DavidWright_CNN/status/850014810758623232

 

[Fenderputty]

I would have said a few months ago that Trump could have strong-armed him into it... But at this rate, you have to wonder if he has any pull at all. He's heading for the low 30's.

This echos my thoughts. His negotiations with the HFC probably didn't help either


Edit: I honestly think he'll have to do something regarding Syria. He can't continue on doing noting while blaming the previous admin for doing nothing.

 

[studyguy]

But I think this argument is disproportionately more important for the GOP than for the Dems.

The Dems have paid a very steep price during Obama's presidency due to legislative inaction. Because the filibuster is a tool of obstructionism and status-quo preservation, it disproportionately benefits the Republicans' policy agenda (to the extent that there is one).

I can see Dems getting impatient and pulling the trigger over frustration, sure. It absolutely applies to the GOP at the moment though as they are no stranger to pushing toothless legislation meant to fail.

All the same, the majority party will always look for an easy out. It's easier to convince a few people to work across the aisle and lose some of your own reps than it is to twist arms in your own party and still run the chance of it blowing up in your face ala the AHCA. Intra-party fractures just end up making bills impossible and thus the majority look like a bunch of incompetent fools.