Democratic Primaries

shanny

(6,709 posts)

4. If we had been willing to nuke

Fri Feb 22, 2019, 08:02 PM

Feb 2019

the profoundly anti-democratic filibuster in 2009 we could have had a stimulus package appropriate for the size of the financial crisis, we could have had a much stronger ACA with a public option, we could have passed card check and the DREAM act, Obama could have had the appointments he wanted--including but not limited to Merrick Garland and a great number of other things (rescinding tax credits for fossil fuels would have been a major bonus in my view).

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/12/05/17-bills-that-likely-would-have-passed-the-senate-if-it-didnt-have-the-filibuster/?utm_term=.37a76612d902

And maybe, if we had been able to deliver on more of our agenda, we wouldn't have lost the House in 2010.

Regardless, I have a problem with the rule of the minority in a democratic republic. There are too many chokepoints that can prevent the people from getting what they want/voted for, and the pukes are adept at using them all. The Senate is a BIG one, where 8% of the population can elect half of its members. Anything we can do to level the playing field is a good thing.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

46 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Ending the filibuster is critical. And only Liz Warren supports ending it. [View all] EndGOPPropaganda Feb 2019 OP

loss of the judicial filibuster is why R's are stacking all the courts right now and for decades... hlthe2b Feb 2019 #1

If we had been willing to nuke shanny Feb 2019 #4

Exactly how, with R's holding Senate & refusing Garland a hearing or vote, might we have prevailed? hlthe2b Feb 2019 #6

Why were Rs able to take the Senate? shanny Feb 2019 #12

Gerrymandering for the House, Voter Suppression for Senate. Perhaps you might want to google that... hlthe2b Feb 2019 #18

Very helpful in Senate races and governorships. shanny Feb 2019 #20

oh honey shanny Feb 2019 #24

Oh, honey, you STILL haven't answered why exactly Merrick Garland would have been confirmed hlthe2b Feb 2019 #25

See! You can do offense! I'm proud of you. shanny Feb 2019 #26

meh... you are not worth my Friday evening... Knock yourself out. hlthe2b Feb 2019 #27

Yes- bold! Exactly. nm EndGOPPropaganda Feb 2019 #23

Thank you! This is all well explained by Beutler in the article. EndGOPPropaganda Feb 2019 #8

Thank you too. shanny Feb 2019 #19

Sorry but this is naive: GOP was just waiting to nuke it EndGOPPropaganda Feb 2019 #13

That is NOT what I asked. I asked you to address YOUR claim that we could have gotten Garland hlthe2b Feb 2019 #16

That wasn't me, and I asked you to address Gorsuch and Kavanaugh EndGOPPropaganda Feb 2019 #21

Sorry but are you aware you are talking to-- shanny Feb 2019 #28

Your twin. hlthe2b Feb 2019 #30

Still waiting... Guess you don't actually have an answer to that, do you? hlthe2b Feb 2019 #22

I'm not convinced. That cuts both ways. mobeau69 Feb 2019 #2

Read this. The filibuster helps only Republicans at this time. EndGOPPropaganda Feb 2019 #10

I do not want the filibuster ended. Big Blue Marble Feb 2019 #3

Noooooooo!! Read the article! EndGOPPropaganda Feb 2019 #9

When one party holds the House and Senate it is wasupaloopa Feb 2019 #5

I'm with her. shanny Feb 2019 #7

Keep the filibuster. CrossingTheRubicon Feb 2019 #11

If you want Republicans to have control of America indefinitely, sure EndGOPPropaganda Feb 2019 #15

Nah, I want to be able to stop them. CrossingTheRubicon Feb 2019 #29

Really, read the article. Keeping the filibuster means submitting to minority GOP rule EndGOPPropaganda Feb 2019 #34

I have a degree in political science. I think I know what a filibuster means. CrossingTheRubicon Feb 2019 #35

Must end the filibuster if we want to avoid GOP control for decades. EndGOPPropaganda Feb 2019 #37

You certainly seem sure of yourself, but I'm not buying what you are selling. CrossingTheRubicon Feb 2019 #40

Republicans want the filibuster: they know. Please read these articles. EndGOPPropaganda Feb 2019 #43

Nope. The filibuster is why we still have the ACA Recursion Feb 2019 #14

Nope. The filibuster is why the ACA has been unpopular and therefore vulnerable. shanny Feb 2019 #31

I agree with this. Volaris Feb 2019 #17

Well said. shanny Feb 2019 #32

If we don't remove the filibuster, 90%-95% of the Democratic agenda is DOA. LonePirate Feb 2019 #33

Right. And the GOP judges are going nowhere then. EndGOPPropaganda Feb 2019 #36

If this happens, we better have the House, Senate, and the Presidency. WordsMatter Feb 2019 #38

Well yes- that's the only way to fix the country. EndGOPPropaganda Feb 2019 #39

Ya I know... WordsMatter Feb 2019 #41

not a fan of that idea by any means Tiggeroshii Feb 2019 #42

I agree completely. And nice article! Very well-reasoned. DSV Feb 2019 #44

Cannot rec this enough kcr Feb 2019 #45

End the Senate, where before long 2/3 of the population will be represented by 1/3 of the Senate. Garrett78 Feb 2019 #46