How I suspect the filibuster might finally be killed.

[Jeebo]

Right now the Republicons are the minority party, barely. The filibuster gives them a veto power over almost everything the Democrats try to do. Without the filibuster, they still have that power only by peeling away just one conservative Democratic senator. Two conservative Democratic senators are preventing the Democrats from blowing up the filibuster. That veto power is why the Republicons want to keep the filibuster rule intact and unchanged.

What happens if the Republicons are narrowly the majority party? Let's say Sen. Leahy suddenly keels over and the Republicon governor of Vermont appoints a Republicon to replace him. Then, suddenly, the Republicons are back in the majority, narrowly. So now, the Democrats are suddenly the beneficiaries and wielders of that veto power that the filibuster rule gives them. Do the Republicons want to keep it then? They might reason, "Well, the Democrats wanted to do away with the filibuster rule anyway, they almost did this time, so the next time they're in the majority, they're going to blow it up anyway and take that veto power away from us. So, we might as well go ahead and blow it up ourselves now, while doing so will benefit us and not them, and take that veto power away from them."

So then the Republicons ultimately are the ones who are going to kill the filibuster.

This is just my theory about how the filibuster rule might finally go away.

Thank you, Sen. Manchin and Sen. Sinema, for not letting us go ahead and do it now. One way or the other, the filibuster rule's days are numbered. I still hope the Democrats can benefit from that Senate rules change now.

-- Ron

[NurseJackie]

1. I'd heard/read (somewhere) that the Governor of Vermont would not appoint a Republican senator.

So there's that.

[brush]

5. Trusting a republican gov to appoint a Dem senator is kinda dicey.

I want Leahy to hold on.

[lagomorph777]

6. If that was coming from a Republican, you can take it to the

trash. Not worth the toilet paper it's written on.

[tritsofme]

2. It would make no strategic sense for them to blow up the filibuster while Democrats

still controlled the House and White House.

[PoliticAverse]

3. What would be the point of Republicans eliminating the filibuster if they are suddenly in charge?

Democrats still control the House so none of their bills will pass. If they wanted to do away with the filibuster the time to do it was when Trump came in and they had the House and a slim-majority in the Senate.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

7. It's almost always the RePuQ's that use it anyway, mainly cause they never try to do any big things

legislatively, so Democrat's are rarely given an opportunity to use it.

[PoliticAverse]

8. Yeah people are calling them the "party of NO" for a reason. They'd rather stop bills than pass them

[Walleye]

4. McConnell blames the rule change on supreme court justices on Harry Reid

But McConnell will change the rules whenever he wants to, it doesn’t matter what Harry Reid did. We really shouldn’t worry about what Republicans are going to do in reaction, when we do the right thing.They will always find some way to blame it on us.We need to stop playing by their childish playground rules.

[dutch777]

9. Your scenario is possible but given long term demographics going against Repubs, they may not

They aren't actually trying to rule and govern the way Dems do. Tax cuts and other nonsense where some Dems almost always go along makes them happy.