Brawly Likes to Brawl
Member
Yes, let's remove the filibuster over a vote for an unpopular bill where the filibuster didn't apply, this is intelligent.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
- Thread starter aspiegamer
- Start date
- Status
Basileus777
Member
Orrin Hatch
PantherLotus
Professional Schmuck
I never said so but every time I see this thread title it brings me immense joy. Thank you, OP.
balladofwindfishes
Member
Maybe Murkowski should try for majority leader
He won't, he knows no party is in control forever and the damage an unopposed Dem Senate could do to the GOP is much worse than what they could do.
As absurd as it sounds, the Dems would progress the country socially, which is very dangerous for the GOP. Once you progress to something, it's hard to go back.
Poodlestrike
Banned
As evidenced by this titanic throwdown over Obamacare (which, let's remember, still isn't actually all that popular; it's not far above water!), once you give people stuff they're loath to let you take it back.
S'why we need to nuke the filibuster from orbit day 1. If we can demonstrate that government can work for people, Republicans lose bigly.
nature boy
Member
balladofwindfishes
Member
Don't get too excited about Democrats ending the filibuster when they take control again
McConnell has no regard for senate norms at all and even he's hesitant to get rid of it. I don't really see Schumer doing it
McConnell has no regard for senate norms at all and even he's hesitant to get rid of it. I don't really see Schumer doing it
Brawly Likes to Brawl
Member
Good. It shouldn't be removed.
I'm not gonna be a hypocrite and say it should be when it's the side I support in control. It's there for a reason. A simple majority being able to do whatever they want is not democratic at all.
The problem is not in the rules, it's in the fact that the GOP do nothing but obstruct just for the sake of harming the other party and only care about being reelected.
Basileus777
Member
It's explicitly democratic. Requiring a near 2/3rds majority to get anything done is just a mechanism to block change, one that barely even applies to the Republicans anymore as they've shown the willingness to disregard the Parliamentarian anyway.
Maybe he should get good at his job then.
The norms are effectively dead (see: this last HC vote.)
Box of Kittens
Banned
The filibuster didn't even exist originally, and it was created entirely by accident. The current cloture procedure wasn't created until the 20th century, and even then it used to be a 67-vote threshold instead of the current 60. This isn't some sacred check that the Founding Fathers wrote into the Constitution, more just a tradition that's built up over time, and a pretty stupid one at that. Requiring a supermajority in an already unrepresentative body to get almost anything done is undemocratic. Maybe if there were some cost to a filibuster or it took an extraordinary amount of organization it would be one thing, but as it is the filibuster is far too painless. It really should go.
Host Samurai
Member
What I wanna know is how the fuck is McConnell top Republican? Do people actually like this asshole?
https://twitter.com/GlennThrush/status/891306603890266113
So he's going to need to replace his CIA director too?
This is a cluster fuck.
You mean Vince
Probably has dirt on people and looks like he would host creepy parties for all those do as I say not as I do people.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Can we talk about badly Heller fucked up this vote? He staked out such a strong stance against BCRA and now he looks like a total idiot for voting for skinny repeal, going against the much more popular Sandoval in the process. His approval ratings are such shit because he takes two-sided stances like this, so he has neither support from his base nor good will from Democrats.
ShadowSwordmaster
Banned
Heller is a dead man now. He was bought off and now is going to face the consequences.
balladofwindfishes
Member
Heller realized he lost his election between the first vote and the final vote.
Knowing that he was going to no longer have a job, he's making sure he still has friends on the outside to get him a nice position
It's a text book revolving door case
Knowing that he was going to no longer have a job, he's making sure he still has friends on the outside to get him a nice position
It's a text book revolving door case
A Serious Man
Member
Because he's the ultimate partisan, completely devoid of shame or morality. He would let the country burn to the ground if he thought it would help his party pick up a seat.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Generally I don't think any incumbent senator ever realizes they've lost their reelection. Heller going "fuck it YOLO" would be pretty unusual.
That makes sense. Trump hasn't liked McMaster from almost the beginning, and Pompeo is at the White House all the time as it is (think I read somewhere Trump makes him drive from Langley to DC nearly every day).
I'm not sure it's all that different from all House Democrats who voted for the ACA knowing full well it would cost them their seats in 2010.
When it came out that Heller's approvals were like 29 percent now, I knew he was going to take a fuck-it, true-believer vote on this. When you're that far underwater, consequences don't matter.
He's massively underwater with what appears to be a wave election on its way. He knows he's toast, so there's two options - vote your conscience, or vote what you think gets you a high paying job.
GoldenEye 007
Member
"Would be a shame if that exec position at my casino goes away."
Musical cabinet
At some point Kushner will be in at AG and Trump is hoping everyone buys that it was just part of a shakeup.
AntraxSuicide
Banned
The filibuster also insulates the public from the consequences of their votes. I'm not gonna look a gift horse in the mouth, but the American people should have to square what RRR governance looks like. That way they also get to square what DDD governance looks like.
BTW, regarding his military transgender "ban", when Trump said "after consulting my generals"; has anyone asked him or his staff/spokespeople which actual generals he consulted with about this, and has there been any followup with those generals?
And if he hasn't "consulted" anyone, why not keep hammering away at him asking why he would say that if he hadn't done so?
And if he hasn't "consulted" anyone, why not keep hammering away at him asking why he would say that if he hadn't done so?
GoldenEye 007
Member
Given the reactions, it was likely just Mattis. And it was more like, "Hey, I'm tweeting this now. Ok, bye."
IAmAnAgnostic
Member
Trump is clearly very pissed about Obamacare repeal not passing.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/891332290474848257
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/891332290474848257
Remember that PAC they're funding to primary Senators?
nature boy
Member
Plus Tillerson isn't going to be around for long.
ShadowSwordmaster
Banned
The insurance companies would've imploded if it was passed you motherfucker.
ShadowSwordmaster
Banned
To many people wanted to hate watch that movie. Also, Dunkirk is a better movie than Atomic Blond.
StormBrute
Member
Yes! It is so absurdly loud. That was the first movie I ever watched where I just had a headache from being bombarded with noise and bass for the entire length of the film.
But he said "generlaS", plural - why don't they ask about other generals?
ShadowSwordmaster
Banned
There are no other generals. People didn't know shit about what happened.
- Status