- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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

Sean Spicer said on his podcast that Trump might want the filibuster killed
Posted on 11/6/24 at 9:00 pm
Posted on 11/6/24 at 9:00 pm
The way he said it made it sound like it was something that he was hearing. He said he wouldn't be surprised if he says he'll back which ever Republican Senate Leader candidate that agrees to help him kill it.
I'm not sure how I would feel about that. I would prefer that the filibuster stay in place because it keep either side from passing something crazy (especially the dems). But the dems have said they will kill it the first chance they get anyways, so maybe we should just go ahead and do it first so that we can pass something like election integrity laws.
Starts at the 22:30 mark
I'm not sure how I would feel about that. I would prefer that the filibuster stay in place because it keep either side from passing something crazy (especially the dems). But the dems have said they will kill it the first chance they get anyways, so maybe we should just go ahead and do it first so that we can pass something like election integrity laws.
Starts at the 22:30 mark
This post was edited on 11/6/24 at 9:02 pm
Posted on 11/6/24 at 9:02 pm to Bamatab
It basically keeps anyone from passing anything controversial in any way unless they have 60 votes.
It needs to be removed and just deal with the flips back and forth.
It needs to be removed and just deal with the flips back and forth.
Posted on 11/6/24 at 9:03 pm to Bamatab
Sean Spicer does not know his arse from a hole in the ground.
Posted on 11/6/24 at 9:04 pm to FreddieMac
quote:
Sean Spicer does not know his arse from a hole in the ground.
Trump wouldn't be able to pass anything unless they do.
Posted on 11/6/24 at 9:05 pm to Bamatab
That would be monumentally stupid.
Posted on 11/6/24 at 9:05 pm to Bamatab
Good, Rinos have hidden behind it for years, let your yes be yes and no be no
Posted on 11/6/24 at 9:08 pm to Padme
If the democrats had house, senate, presidency and SC would we as conservatives want the filibuster removed? I would not; I think it’s in place for a reason.
Posted on 11/6/24 at 9:23 pm to Bamatab
Not in favor of this at all. This is the kind of shite that Democrats fricking pull. Remember when Dingy Harry invoked the nuclear option to pack the DC circuit. Well, they got away with it. However, it came back to bite them in the a$$.
Same thing with packing the Supreme Court. It’s just a scumbag move that will have reverberations for a very long time. I’m all in favor of putting the Democrat court packing bill up before the Senate, but I’d want every Republican to vote it down as a show of decency and morality.
If we end the filibuster, I guaranf*ckingtee you it will come back to bite us in the a$$ one day. It just sends a really, really bad precedent.
Same thing with packing the Supreme Court. It’s just a scumbag move that will have reverberations for a very long time. I’m all in favor of putting the Democrat court packing bill up before the Senate, but I’d want every Republican to vote it down as a show of decency and morality.
If we end the filibuster, I guaranf*ckingtee you it will come back to bite us in the a$$ one day. It just sends a really, really bad precedent.
Posted on 11/6/24 at 9:27 pm to Bamatab
There is no need. If we have all three houses then we have 2 years to pass stuff without it.
Posted on 11/6/24 at 9:30 pm to OU Guy
You can't pass legistalture outside of financial shite without the 60 votes in Senate.
Trump wants voter/anti-fraud laws on the books, immigration law in the books, etc.
Trump wants voter/anti-fraud laws on the books, immigration law in the books, etc.
Posted on 11/6/24 at 9:36 pm to Bamatab
Bad move. Really bad move.
One of those "ok you're happy now BUT if the other guy uses it..." moves.
One of those "ok you're happy now BUT if the other guy uses it..." moves.
Posted on 11/6/24 at 9:40 pm to Srbtiger06
This would be a horrible idea.
Just like it was a bad idea for the liberals to start political prosecution. Because the other side will get power back again.
Just like it was a bad idea for the liberals to start political prosecution. Because the other side will get power back again.
Posted on 11/6/24 at 9:41 pm to Bamatab
Bring back the original version of the filibuster. If you are really passionate against a resolution then set your arse up in the Senate chamber and don’t stop talking until the Senate relents. That’s the real filibuster. Not this modern parliamentary cloture rule filibuster.
Posted on 11/6/24 at 9:49 pm to Jack Ruby
quote:
You can't pass legislature outside of financial shite without the 60 votes in Senate.
True but it works both ways. In 2 years if Dems take Senate they would take our guns away (try). You have to look at bigger picture. Trump can put pressure on some Dems in Pub areas to help pass bills.
Don’t forget, its rare to have all 3 houses at once and people usually like it split. In 2 years they might want some balance and install Dems in one or both houses.
Then they could pass all kinds of crazy shite. Even of we used it for good, they would use it for bad.
Posted on 11/6/24 at 9:50 pm to GumboPot
quote:
Bring back the original version of the filibuster. If you are really passionate against a resolution then set your arse up in the Senate chamber and don’t stop talking until the Senate relents. That’s the real filibuster. Not this modern parliamentary cloture rule filibuster.
No that I can get behind.
Posted on 11/6/24 at 10:02 pm to Bamatab
The filibuster started with Aaron Burr. Then it morphed into a senate parliamentary rule requiring cloture. The talking filibuster was never an overt but an implied part of the senate rules of the founders.
This post was edited on 11/6/24 at 10:07 pm
Posted on 11/6/24 at 10:08 pm to Bamatab
Hell, I think the dems were on to something regarding expanding the Supreme Court. I think, now that the democrats showed such bravery bringing that issue into the light, it’s time to pack the court, just as democrats have suggested.
Posted on 11/6/24 at 10:08 pm to Bamatab
Would be a horrible idea and almost guarantee the Dems take back Congress in 2 years. They will run non-stop on claiming eliminating the filibuster is Trump destroying democracy (forget that a lot of Dems wanted to do the same thing 6 months ago). And it’lo definitely come back to bite us in the arse when there’s a Dem president and Dem congress in the future.
Posted on 11/6/24 at 10:48 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:
It basically keeps anyone from passing anything controversial in any way unless they have 60 votes.
It needs to be removed and just deal with the flips back and forth.
Why are you guys down voting this? Remember, I am good at solving riddles, playing Chess, seeing into things what others miss.
I will prove 100% The Filibuster is a scheme used by the Elites to screw the average joe and to fleece us the American Taxpayer.. Now of course in the early 1800s they used the 2/3 rule instead of the 60 percent rule 60 out of 100. But they actually used this to create debate and compromise between parties who were usually pretty close on a bill to start with, but these Elitist Senators from both parties have allowed this Filibuster rule to become a prop for hiding from both graft, and responsibility, which is why we now have a UNI-PARTY.
You see, the Public voted the Republicans to have all three Branches of Gov. (It seems like that will be the case) but Schumer and his boys can get their regular GRAFT by simply holding up bills and mandating their pork is in the bill, or there will be no bill. Likewise, if there is something the Republican base really, really want and the Deep State & Elites are against it, they can just say, we don't have 60 votes. That's why it is seem as a UNI-PARTY, they are both working hand in hand no mater who is in control, and they can blame it on the 60 vote rule !!
Used to be that way for Supreme Court Justices until the Dems changed it, but notice, the Republicans usually got played when they had to have 60 votes, Souter was a Liberal, and a lot of the R picks turned out t be really bad. That's because the UNI-PARTY did not want Justices in that would do what the Supreme Court just did recently, dismantling the Deep State in one of its recent rulings about these DC Deep State Workers setting policies that were never passed into law.
Both sides use this 60 vote rule in order so that they are NEVER held accountable unto their bases. That's why the House does the Continuing Resolutions, they know the Senate will never get the 60 votes, so they have to sell out on spending,
Could you see a Big Business having a rule that 75 percent of a board has to agree on any deals they make? The Board votes in a President or Chairman, who hires the right guy and turns him loose. With a 50 vote rule Johnson nor McConnel (are WHOEVER) would have no excuses not to pass legislation their bases wants. BUT WITH THE STUPID 60 VOTE RULE, they never have to own up to this out of control spending, they just say, we couldn't get 60 votes so we had to compromise.
They are PLAYING US FOR SUCKER & FOOLS.
Popular
Back to top


12








