- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
The problem with the filibuster
Posted on 11/6/25 at 12:03 pm
Posted on 11/6/25 at 12:03 pm
Its intent was to force bipartisanship and to prevent growth of govt/too many laws.
This is a good thing. Except that we already have too big of a government and are running massive deficits and our entire nation is on the brink of a fiscal crisis. And it cannot be fixed due to filibuster. It is impossible to get 60 votes in favor of any legislation that would even begin to fix or reverse this mess. We are doing more harm by maintaining status quo than being able to pass meaningful legislation to attempt to reverse course.
And the idea that a minority party can obstruct legislation indefinitely through filibuster without actual debate on the floor is redundant and not the intent of filibuster originally. You might as well change the constitution requiring 60 votes to pass legislation. Cloture vote is to simply end debate. To do that, there needs to be debate. Make a filibuster require 60 votes in cloture but go back to requiring actual debate. If democrats are willing to speak on the floor and force Congress to remain in session for days then by all means go ahead. Won’t take long to get 60 votes to stop that bullshite
This is a good thing. Except that we already have too big of a government and are running massive deficits and our entire nation is on the brink of a fiscal crisis. And it cannot be fixed due to filibuster. It is impossible to get 60 votes in favor of any legislation that would even begin to fix or reverse this mess. We are doing more harm by maintaining status quo than being able to pass meaningful legislation to attempt to reverse course.
And the idea that a minority party can obstruct legislation indefinitely through filibuster without actual debate on the floor is redundant and not the intent of filibuster originally. You might as well change the constitution requiring 60 votes to pass legislation. Cloture vote is to simply end debate. To do that, there needs to be debate. Make a filibuster require 60 votes in cloture but go back to requiring actual debate. If democrats are willing to speak on the floor and force Congress to remain in session for days then by all means go ahead. Won’t take long to get 60 votes to stop that bullshite
Posted on 11/6/25 at 12:39 pm to deltaland
If the filibuster still required non stop talking we wouldn’t be having this issue
Posted on 11/6/25 at 1:24 pm to Nosevens
It was never intended to prevent legislation passing. It’s to give the minority party a voice and encourage debate particularly in close/contested legislation. A last chance effort to swing votes to your side to prevent passage
It was not intended to prevent passage altogether by simply saying you’re filibustering while you go on vacation.
It was not intended to prevent passage altogether by simply saying you’re filibustering while you go on vacation.
Posted on 11/6/25 at 1:35 pm to deltaland
I feel like Republicans will not use the nuclear option because of optics and democrats will absolutely use it if they get a chance because they do not care about optics. Look who just won elections. Mamdani and Jay Jones. Do you think democrats care about optics. I was on the fence about using the nuclear option but now I am all for it. We have 4 years to shove through what we can and there is a lot that needs to be done and a lot of people brought to justice. Just go ahead and do it and get to work.
Posted on 11/6/25 at 2:40 pm to MikkUGA
If roles were reversed, Dems would have already gotten rid of it, screw what happens in the future they would say. Reb are so weak to action...
Posted on 11/6/25 at 2:51 pm to Amblin
quote:
If roles were reversed
The roles were reversed just over a year ago.
Posted on 11/6/25 at 2:52 pm to MikkUGA
No chance Paul, Murkowski, Collins, McConnell, and probably Cassidy vote for the nuclear option.
Posted on 11/6/25 at 2:55 pm to deltaland
The whole system is broken. It has been co-opted to steal money from the American taxpayer under the guise of “representation.”
Posted on 11/6/25 at 2:56 pm to deltaland
Exactly.
Have a physical debate.
This virtual debate is B.S.
Posted on 11/6/25 at 2:58 pm to Nosevens
quote:
If the filibuster still required non stop talking we wouldn’t be having this issue
That is the interesting point in all of this
Nobody is getting rid of the filibuster all they are getting rid of is a lazy greedy SOB that don't want to do work and get paid and get rich
Popular
Back to top
4






