General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Dems do have a nuclear counter strike, and all it takes is one Dem Senator.
One Dem Senator can object to every call for unanimous consent, forcing multiple votes throughout what would be ordinary Senate procedure and slowing EVERYTHING in the Senate to a snail's crawl pace so slow that absolutely nothing could ever be accomplished in the Senate ever again.
Basically, any one Senator can shut down the Senate pretty much by themselves with this procedural move.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
caroldansen
(725 posts)
shraby
(21,946 posts)Put a hold on everything.
Bettie
(19,446 posts)I would hope so, but I fear that the answer is no.
I get the impulse to play fair, but at some point, someone needs to say enough and get their hands dirty.
onenote
(46,056 posts)Last edited Thu Apr 6, 2017, 09:51 AM - Edit history (1)
and would be politically foolish.
The repubs are having a devil of a time getting anything done (and the things they are doing are energizing Democrats). Shutting down the Senate would allow the repubs to shift the narrative from their own failures to the Democrats "blockade". Why would we do that? Why make every story start with "overcoming Democratic blockade, the Republicans in the Senate passed a bill to do etc. etc."
mopinko
(73,420 posts)nah, that cant be it.
ProfessorPlum
(11,461 posts)Democrats can't seem to understand that fighting against evil isn't rude. It's crucial
Frequent Ranter
(55 posts)We need some sharp, old-school Democratic elbowing here!
Oh, yeah, uh, I apologize for framing you in the Study with the Knife. 
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)Bettie
(19,446 posts)In what way?
Why can they do all of this stuff and for our side, we're supposed to simply suck it up and silently acquiesce to their agenda to avoid appearing foolish...obstructive...rude?
onenote
(46,056 posts)Assuming the Democrats pursued a strategy of blocking anything and everything -- what do you see as the end game?
I see the following two options for the repubs:
1. Capitulate and not pursue their agenda, which will anger their base no end and put their own re-election prospects at risk.
2. Let the Democrats slow things down, possibly even shut down the government, blame the Democrats (a message the media will latch onto if history is any guide) which will energize their base for 2018.
I prefer an energized Democrat base and a demoralized repub base. And I think the best way to do that is to oppose the repubs vigorously but not indiscriminately block votes on anything and everything. For some things, we will lose, like the privacy repeal, and that repeal not only energizes our base but gives us a great issue to campaign on in 2018. On other issues, like health care, the budget cuts, the Senate repubs themselves are likely to have trouble going along with Trump's agenda and whatever might come out of the House. The message of a repub-controlled legislature that can't get things done, not because of Democratic obstruction but because of their own ineptitude is a much better message going into 2018.
But, that being said, if you have a different idea of how a blockade strategy would play out over the next 20 months (leading up to Nov. 2018), I'm sincerely open to hearing and considering it.
Gothmog
(176,745 posts)beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)we deserve all that comes our way and can't complain about any of it
FBaggins
(28,670 posts)Nor is it the final point in the escalation. The majority necessarily has more power to hurt the minority than vice-versa.
What happens when the chair doesn't "hear" the objection? "Hearing no objection, it is so ordered"? Or trim the Senate budget by cutting the number and size of committees and committee staffing in a way that hurts us more? Or block Democratic amendments to legislation?