• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Could Senate Dems Nuke the Filibuster?

I have an even better idea: let's stop trying to mirror what the goddamn Europeans are doing. They've had a thousand years to get it right and still can't. That's the reason that United States even exists, because the Europeans were cocking up the works.

Number 1: I'm not the one who is defending the filibuster in case one political party controls the White House, the House of Representatives, and the Senate.

Number 2: The current political process that the UK Parliament has was vastly different from the British Parliament that the American colonies revolted against.

Number 3: The U.S. system isn't perfect either - if it was, we wouldn't be arguing about this type of thing.
 
Number 1: I'm not the one who is defending the filibuster in case one political party controls the White House, the House of Representatives, and the Senate.

Number 2: The current political process that the UK Parliament has was vastly different from the British Parliament that the American colonies revolted against.

Number 3: The U.S. system isn't perfect either - if it was, we wouldn't be arguing about this type of thing.

The Europeans system is far less perfect.

It's like this, the real go-gitters in Europe all came to America. That's why Americans are superior to every other country in the world.
 
Perhaps it would be best if you researched the answer to your question instead of waiting for me to post something you can dismiss, that way you get to understand it from them, rather then my repeat of it.

Oh, I have researched the answer. And my research concludes that the Founding Fathers didn't inherently cherish the procedure of filibusters. Which makes me wonder why you even mention the Founding Fathers with regards to the filibuster.



You are so close to answering your own question, and you don't even realize it! The HOUSE is allowed to be quicker, by design.

That is certainly the case. However, that does not defend the Senate's right to delay the passage of legislation using the filibuster.

And that's exactly why the Filibuster is needed, and should never be done away with.

So please explain to everyone here why it's a good thing for one Senator to be able to hold the rest of the Senate hostage.
 
The Europeans system is far less perfect.

It's like this, the real go-gitters in Europe all came to America. That's why Americans are superior to every other country in the world.

That is debatable. And while European systems may be far less perfect you've 1) admitted that the America system is not perfect either and 2) you have yet to explain how importing any procedure from Europe would inherently make the American system less perfect.
 
So please explain to everyone here why it's a good thing for one Senator to be able to hold the rest of the Senate hostage.

ask the millions of americans who voted on tsunami tuesday
 
That is debatable. And while European systems may be far less perfect you've 1) admitted that the America system is not perfect either and 2) you have yet to explain how importing any procedure from Europe would inherently make the American system less perfect.

How many countries in Europe are cocked up 9 ways from Sunday, right now?
 
ask the millions of americans who voted on tsunami tuesday

If that's really your belief, then a more exact thing to do would be to determine the issue of the filibuster via referendum.
 
How many countries in Europe are cocked up 9 ways from Sunday, right now?

Okay.

So Europeans have popular elections in their countries.

So does that mean you want to get rid of popular elections here in the U.S.?
 
Okay.

So Europeans have popular elections in their countries.

So does that mean you want to get rid of popular elections here in the U.S.?

Gee, where did that come from?
 
a more exact thing to do would be to determine the issue of the filibuster via referendum.

i don't deal in fantasies

the voters were clear---they LIKED the filibusterers

sorry
 
i don't deal in fantasies

the voters were clear---they LIKED the filibusterers

sorry

Oh really? And how many candidates who ran in the last election campaigned on the filibuster?
 
the voters LIKED the filibusterers, overwhelmingly, gave em the most house pickups since '38, the most state reps and legs in modern history, 10 gubs, 6 senators...

sorry
 
the voters LIKED the filibusterers, overwhelmingly, gave em the most house pickups since '38, the most state reps and legs in modern history, 10 gubs, 6 senators...

sorry

Thank you for not answering the question I asked.
 
republicans ran on OUSTING NANCY PELOSI

on REPEALING OBAMACARE

on dealing with SPENDING, DEBT, even TAXES (did you see barack hussein obama ENDORSE the bush tax cuts---LOL!)

you're actually asking ME what comprised the campaign?

where were you?

meanwhile, the voters LIKED the filibusterers, we were RICHLY REWARDED for all the NO's

maybe you should ASK YOURSELF why

sorry
 
Oh really? And how many candidates who ran in the last election campaigned on the filibuster?

perhaps you have heard of a Republican named Scott Brown?

one of them northern states, i do believe :).
 
I was actually referring to other things the Progressives have done to undermine the founders without actually listing them. Take the 17th amendment for example.

Given how ardous the constitutional amendment process is, its a bit disingenuous to blame the passage of an amendment on a bunch of out of control progressives. Moreover, given that the founding fathers provided for a process to amend the constitution and that process was followed, I submit the result was, in fact, consistent with the founding fathers intentions
 
Given how ardous the constitutional amendment process is, its a bit disingenuous to blame the passage of an amendment on a bunch of out of control progressives. Moreover, given that the founding fathers provided for a process to amend the constitution and that process was followed, I submit the result was, in fact, consistent with the founding fathers intentions

The amendment was by the book, the issue isn't that the Founding Fathers would object to the Amendment, it's that their wisdom in not having said Amendment was correct.
 
the voters LIKED the filibusterers, overwhelmingly, gave em the most house pickups since '38, the most state reps and legs in modern history, 10 gubs, 6 senators...

sorry

Interesting analysis...... keep your day job. Your future as a political analyst has found its glass ceiling.
 
there's no analysis there, silly

just fact

the PARTY OF NO took 66 house seats, biggest turnover since 38

most state reps and legs in modern history

10 gubs, 6 senate seats...

you need the links?

LOL!
 
The Founding Fathers intended to have a three-fifths supermajority in the Senate for every piece of banal legislation? Why didn't they write it into the Constitution, then?

The founding fathers intended for the States to pick the Senators and the Lobbyists to keep their grubby hands off our representatives. Everything since then has been a mockery of democracy and nudging closer to fascism. Until we have representation again I'm for anything that slows down the lobbyists.
 
there's no analysis there, silly

just fact

the PARTY OF NO took 66 house seats, biggest turnover since 38

most state reps and legs in modern history

10 gubs, 6 senate seats...

you need the links?

LOL!

And you can show what this has to do with the filibuster somehow? Bet you can't, since that is not among the reason people mentioned voting about.
 
The founding fathers intended for the States to pick the Senators and the Lobbyists to keep their grubby hands off our representatives. Everything since then has been a mockery of democracy and nudging closer to fascism. Until we have representation again I'm for anything that slows down the lobbyists.

Lobbyists are a fantastic tool for democracy. People are just too short-minded to consider all of the groups that agree with each individual issue who continue to bring awareness to their representatives the importance of a certain policy stance.
 
Back
Top Bottom