4 ms·

No it was a wise and practical decision. And the fillibuster has always been a stupid accident of the rules. It delayed civil rights bills by over a decade Eve

by rat87 4y ago

No it was a wise and practical decision. And the fillibuster has always been a stupid accident of the rules. It delayed civil rights bills by over a decade Everyone knew that McConnell was lying and would have overturned the fillibuster on judges the second a supreme court fillibuster started. And we would have gotten the same extremist supreme court that laughs at restaint and takes away fundamental rights

pclmulqdq 4y ago
Apparently he had the option to do it under Bush when Democrats were obstructing Bush's nominees to the federal courts, and he chose not to, so the evidence suggests that he would not have just removed the filibuster for the fun of it.
- guelo 4y ago
  Imagine McConell blaming Democrats for his own unpopular actions.
Clubber 4y ago
>No it was a wise and practical decision. Well the Democrats just lost all chance of any new gun control and will probably have some gun control repealed. Not only that, they lost the power of Democrat controlled states to enact gun control at the state level and will have much of state gun control repealed. They completely lost the right to abortion at the federal/constitutional level as well. What did they gain for that immense cost? Some federal judges back in 2013. If you think that was wise and in no way short sighted, I really don't know what to say.
- res0nat0r 4y ago
  The GOP in two years from now if they control Congress will ignore the filibuster and pass a national abortion ban at the federal level at the first opportunity. Anyone believing these folks haven't been lying or won't be complete hypocrites by now are living in an alternate reality.
  - pclmulqdq 4y ago
    You literally don't know that though. All signs point to them not doing that, because allowing abortions is actually popular. The only people telling you that Republicans will do that are Democrats. Also, even if they take a majority, they won't have a veto-proof majority, so there is no reason to go nuclear in the Senate when Biden is going to veto everything they do.
    - res0nat0r 4y ago
      If they cared about popular will, almost every GOP controlled state in the USA wouldn't be as we speak trying to implement the most extreme abortion bans they can. Mitch has said a national ban is a possibility: https://twitter.com/foxnews/status/1523246341173952517 https://twitter.com/foxnews/status/1523246341173952517 Pence has said this should happen: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/24/abortion-supreme-court-trump-pence-republicans-roe/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/24/abortion-... Popular will doesn't matter when you don't need to listen to popular will to keep power. If your insane, extreme base is all you have to pander to to keep power, the GOP is doing just that.
anjbe 4y ago
The Democrats could have been smarter tactically. Trump’s first SC nominee was Gorsuch, certainly conservative but a stellar jurist, and an uncharacteristically good pick from Trump (compare to the other names on his 2016 shortlist). The Democrats had no cards besides obstruction, which would certainly lead McConnell to kill the filibuster. If they had made the reasonable guess that Trump’s next pick would be easier to beat, saved their powder, and reluctantly let Gorsuch through, McConnell would have had to kill the filibuster for Kavanaugh. For Kavanaugh, a far more controversial pick than Gorsuch, he wouldn’t have had the votes.

by rat87 4y ago

pclmulqdq 4y ago

Apparently he had the option to do it under Bush when Democrats were obstructing Bush's nominees to the federal courts, and he chose not to, so the evidence suggests that he would not have just removed the filibuster for the fun of it.

guelo 4y ago
Imagine McConell blaming Democrats for his own unpopular actions.

Clubber 4y ago

>No it was a wise and practical decision. Well the Democrats just lost all chance of any new gun control and will probably have some gun control repealed. Not only that, they lost the power of Democrat controlled states to enact gun control at the state level and will have much of state gun control repealed. They completely lost the right to abortion at the federal/constitutional level as well. What did they gain for that immense cost? Some federal judges back in 2013. If you think that was wise and in no way short sighted, I really don't know what to say.

res0nat0r 4y ago
The GOP in two years from now if they control Congress will ignore the filibuster and pass a national abortion ban at the federal level at the first opportunity. Anyone believing these folks haven't been lying or won't be complete hypocrites by now are living in an alternate reality.
- pclmulqdq 4y ago
  You literally don't know that though. All signs point to them not doing that, because allowing abortions is actually popular. The only people telling you that Republicans will do that are Democrats. Also, even if they take a majority, they won't have a veto-proof majority, so there is no reason to go nuclear in the Senate when Biden is going to veto everything they do.
  - res0nat0r 4y ago
    If they cared about popular will, almost every GOP controlled state in the USA wouldn't be as we speak trying to implement the most extreme abortion bans they can. Mitch has said a national ban is a possibility: https://twitter.com/foxnews/status/1523246341173952517 https://twitter.com/foxnews/status/1523246341173952517 Pence has said this should happen: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/24/abortion-supreme-court-trump-pence-republicans-roe/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/24/abortion-... Popular will doesn't matter when you don't need to listen to popular will to keep power. If your insane, extreme base is all you have to pander to to keep power, the GOP is doing just that.

anjbe 4y ago

The Democrats could have been smarter tactically. Trump’s first SC nominee was Gorsuch, certainly conservative but a stellar jurist, and an uncharacteristically good pick from Trump (compare to the other names on his 2016 shortlist). The Democrats had no cards besides obstruction, which would certainly lead McConnell to kill the filibuster. If they had made the reasonable guess that Trump’s next pick would be easier to beat, saved their powder, and reluctantly let Gorsuch through, McConnell would have had to kill the filibuster for Kavanaugh. For Kavanaugh, a far more controversial pick than Gorsuch, he wouldn’t have had the votes.