General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsLaelth
(32,017 posts)The state of the nation will require it.
Then we can roll!
-Laelth
NewJeffCT
(56,828 posts)when they get rid of it, since it was essentially gone in regards to appointees (judicial & executive branches)
Laelth
(32,017 posts)... then they will be welcome to reinstate it when they control the Senate.
Will they? Of course not, and that just proves that the filibuster has outlived its usefulness.
-Laelth
dalton99a
(81,455 posts)Buckeyeblue
(5,499 posts)Democrats want to come across as being responsible. Eliminating a long Senate tradition like the filibuster could come across as impulsive.
In principle I'm not necessarily against eliminating it. It just needs to come across as a responsible move.
To me having the Senate and the House means comprehensive investigations into the 2016 elections. I want it proven that Trump was an illegitimate president. And then I want public pressure put on judges he appointed to resign.
An illegitimate President's lifetime appointees have a duty to the country to resign.