NYTimes Peter Baker, REALLY? This Senate filibuster misinformation disempowers Americans.

[egbertowillies]

New York Times correspondent Peter Baker should know better than to parrot GOP talking points. The filibuster is not constitutional. The Senate chose to slow itself down.

https://medium.egbertowillies.com/nytimes-peter-baker-really-this-senate-filibuster-misinformation-disempowers-americans-19a14ff92eac

[Bev54]

1. It is not the first time Baker has parroted repub talking points, I have had

to turn the channel a few times when he was on. He seems to be all over the place sometimes.

[Big Blue Marble]

2. Peter Baker is always happy to criticize Dems

and parrot Republican talking points. His biases always shows.

[padah513]

3. When people show you who they are, believe them.

[PoliticAverse]

4. The key point that is rarely specifically mentioned when discussing the filibuster is...

at any time any piece of legislation (not specifically requiring a 2/3rds vote according to the constitution) can be passed by 50+1 votes. That is to say the filibuster can be overridden at any time by 50+1 votes. We know this for a fact because it happened for legislation this past year even. If a piece of legislation fails in the Senate right now it is because there isn't 50 senators (+1 tie-breaking vote) that really want it to pass.