319

McConnell: Democrats would end the filibuster if they sweep on Election Day "I don’t think they’re kidding. I think they’ll do it" (www.semafor.com)

submitted 10 hours ago by usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml to c/politics@lemmy.world

52 comments fedilink hide all child comments

“They’re all committed to it now, because Chuck has made them take a public position. Every Democratic challenger, I’m told, running for the Senate is taking the same position,” McConnell said. “I think they fully intend to do it if they can.”

Thanks for advocating for a good reason to have democratic control of the senate

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] cybersandwich@lemmy.world 14 points 1 hour ago

The issue with the filibuster,now, is that it's too easy. It needs to be hard like the old days.

Ironically, because it's so easy we actually don't even see filibusters often anymore. It's usually the threat of a filibuster that stops legislation in its tracks. If it was harder, where you stood for days, then it might not actually stop legislation. At least it would be brought to force the issue.

You should have to earn it.

I'm sure the geriatric core of our Congress will thrilled to have to stand for hours to prove their points.

[-] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 2 points 8 minutes ago

I respectfully disagree for the reason you stated at the end. Grueling filibusters are ableist - they're unfair to representatives with disabilities and their constituents.

Congress is not convincing each other of anything. They can make their point concisely for the C-SPAN viewers. Filibusters are a complete waste of time.

Say goodbye to the next FDR if you demand standing.

[-] MyOpinion@lemm.ee 6 points 1 hour ago

Sounds good to me. Also add DC and Puerto Rico as states and then we will never see another Republican in the white house again.

[-] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 minutes ago

Puerto Rico shows every sign of being a classic swing state.

[-] Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world 5 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Republicans are just waiting for the opportunity to do it themselves. They literally do not care. They just like the idea of the democrats doing it so they can sqwak about decorum.

[-] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 13 points 1 hour ago

So afraid of majority rule. They put rules in place to stop it.

[-] TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee 1 points 1 hour ago

"Oh no! Where will the practice of avoiding doing our job while getting paid for filling it with nonsense go? We totally need this desperate tactic, not addressing or facing the issues that force us to use it!"

[-] EmpireInDecay@lemmy.ml 8 points 3 hours ago

Cue Lucy VanPelt holding football meme

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 21 points 4 hours ago

Just once, I wish the Dem leadership would be anywhere near as based as Republican demagogues always pretend they are 😮‍💨

[-] taiyang@lemmy.world 37 points 5 hours ago

Pleeeease, don't threaten us with a good time.

Seriously, we don't need a extra layer of inaction on top of a government already designed to move slowly. That's the whole point of having three branches of government, you already have to compromise even without the filibuster unless you sweep (and at this point a sweep is well deserved!).

Although I guess I'm ok with the talking version. It'd be fun to watch those old assholes suffer an all nighter speaking non stop. Wouldn't ever pull it off.

[-] eran_morad@lemmy.world 14 points 4 hours ago

Fucking die already. Russian stooge.

[-] PorradaVFR@lemmy.world 137 points 9 hours ago

Ok, sounds great. Require an actual speaking filibuster if desired. No more procedural bullshit that enabled McConnell to appoint dozens of judges when Schumer foolishly agreed to kill the judicial filibuster.

Flip the House, hold the Senate and dump the obstructionist tool. Also the filibuster.

[-] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 29 points 6 hours ago

I don't always side with either Republicans or Democrats. I just want good government. And I am 100% in favor of repealing the procedural filibuster. I think the filibuster is a valuable tool that is important for defeating certain bad legislation, but it should not exist as a way to make sure any and every contentious legislation requires 60 votes.

If someone feels that strongly about something, let them get up there and read the phone book into the record for six hours.

[-] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 4 hours ago

I think the filibuster is a valuable tool that is important for defeating certain bad legislation

What might be bad for you might be good for someone else.

I agree with getting rid of the procedural filibuster. I suspect the reason it exists in the first place is because Senators are getting old and don't want to actually do it.

So, for good and bad, make them actually stand and deliver. If they feel so strongly that a bill needs to be killed, then let them fucking earn it.

[-] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago

It was supposedly created in the 70s because Senators were gumming up Senate business trying to grandstans for the TV using filibusters.

Personally, I think that's not a bad thing. Make Senators want to stand on a podium and give an impassioned speech about their beliefs, like they did in Athens.

[-] alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 7 hours ago

That would be more in line with the actual American tradition.

But personally, I would recommend to only allow filibusters in the House, which has a more proportional representation, and to not allow it in the Senate, which has the least proportional representation, even less than the electoral college.

[-] archonet@lemy.lol 84 points 9 hours ago

God, wouldn't that be amazing? Things actually getting done instead of our legislators sitting with their thumb up their asses.

Well, less of them sitting with their thumb up their asses.

[-] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 9 points 8 hours ago

New rule. Every politician needs a heat signature based gps monitored butt plug inside them at all times.

That way their thumbs are always free.

[-] takeda@lemmy.world 4 points 8 hours ago

It worked both ways though. But in the end, did it actually do much? The times I remember when fill buster was used ultimately the majority still managed to pass the legislation.

I think what would be better is that when there's a stalemate it would trigger a new election like it is done in some countries.

[-] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 7 points 6 hours ago

The times I remember when fill buster was used ultimately the majority still managed to pass the legislation.

That's because if you know the opposition is serious about blocking a bill via filibuster, you won't propose it because it doesn't have enough support.

[-] Myxomatosis@lemmy.world 33 points 8 hours ago

Hope so. I want to watch Mitch’s legacy get destroyed as much as possible.

[-] JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.world 24 points 7 hours ago

Don't worry, he'll go down in history as "The hypocrite who screwed over Barrack Obama and Merrick Garland, and set the country back decades in social justice."

[-] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 10 points 5 hours ago

So... a champion of conservatism,then.

[-] JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.world 1 points 3 minutes ago

Yes, but I like to think that in a few decades our vision will be a little clearer, and we'll see this dirtdirtbag for who he really was.

Idk, maybe that's wishful thinking.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 45 points 9 hours ago

I would hope so, or at the very least go back to ye olden days of "You want a filibuster? Get your ass up there and hold the floor..."

[-] sxan@midwest.social 3 points 2 hours ago

This.

I think people tend to think about doing things while they're in control that fuck the other party, often forgetting that - at some point - power is going to flip and they'll be the underdogs. That said, Republicans tend to abuse these procedural instruments more.

But you have the right answer: the filibuster can be useful, if it's not easy to use and requires true dedication. Right now, it's just a spike strip (mostly) conservatives throw down whenever they want to throw a tantrum.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 21 points 9 hours ago

McConnell:

[-] TallonMetroid@lemmy.world 14 points 8 hours ago

Imagine him croaking from exhaustion because he has to actually get up there and stand for hours on end. A man can dream...

[-] Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 6 hours ago

Tuning into CSPAN like people tune in to NASCAR races to see if anyone’s going to die.

[-] JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world 6 points 8 hours ago

He's just do a mental freeze and his handlers will just forget to poke him every now and then.

[-] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 3 points 5 hours ago

If he freezes up too long, the filibuster fails. I would pop popcorn for that.

[-] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 60 points 9 hours ago

Don’t tempt me with a good time

[-] harrys_balzac@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 9 hours ago

Exactly! End another remnant of the North placating the South to get them to sign the Constitution

[-] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 17 points 8 hours ago

There’s nothing in the constitution about the filibuster. It’s just a Senate rule and the current version (where you don’t have to make long speeches in an ultimately doomed attempt to block legislation with majority support) dates to the 1970’s. They adopted it because in the TV era, Senators were filibustering just to get on the national news and make a name for themselves.

[-] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 hour ago

It’s just tradition at this point. And tradition is just peer pressure from dead people.

Also: we know Republicans don’t give a single flying fuck about tradition when the shoe is on the other foot and it’s getting in the way of their power grabs. The Supreme Court would be very different if they actually cared about respecting traditions in government (amongst many other things)

[-] tiefling@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 8 hours ago

Is that a promise?

[-] someguy3@lemmy.world 10 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 8 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Is that quote accurate?

I thought there would be 30 seconds worth of ellipses in between.

[-] unemployedclaquer@sopuli.xyz 2 points 8 hours ago

I'm all for it, given the current climate of stupid, but be careful what you wish for. Watch them dickheads.

load more comments

this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2024

319 points (97.6% liked)

politics

18928 readers

3730 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News