re: It's time for McConnell to go nuclear on the filibuster rule

quote:

---

This would open Pandora's box leading to too much radical policy on both sides every 4-8 years. Would cause extreme instability in the markets and politics.

---

Actually, quite the opposite would occur.

With a filibuster, the minority part has absolutely zero reason to engage the other party if they have less than 60 votes. Sure, that prevents the occasional radical legislation although cmon.......you STILL need the House AND the President too!

Meanwhile, what the filibuster DOES do is pretty much disincentives any and all working across party lines.

You can bet your arse that if Republicans or Democrats were about to pass significant legislation with 50 votes, several in the other party would SUDDENTLY want to be engaged in the process.

I think people underestimate the damage the filibuster has ALWAYS done.

I'm 100% fine with the reality that if a party manages to win ALL 3, they probably get to pass what they want.

And, I mean, how "radical" can that really be? Let's be honest here. If you own all 3, it probably ain't that "radical".

And don't bring up that Deem and Pass bull shite the Democrats did. That was a perversion and even they know it.