- 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
re: Trump urges Senate Republicans to eliminate the filibuster using the nuclear option
Posted on 10/31/25 at 6:37 am to UncleFestersLegs
Posted on 10/31/25 at 6:37 am to UncleFestersLegs
quote:
so they did.
We're specifically talking about the filibuster on legislation in this threat. So no, they did not
Your dishonesty is noted and expected as usual
1
Posted on 10/31/25 at 6:38 am to SlowFlowPro
stfu and go chase a ambulance 
Posted on 10/31/25 at 6:39 am to STEVED00
quote:
Dude. You said it never happened under Obama
No, I said the legislator filibuster was not modified under Biden or Obama
What you're now pointing out is they did not respond relevantly or substantively to my comments and I agree. I still responded to that irrelevant diversion with an honest argument. You mischaracterize that argument and failed to realize where the baton switch occurred. That's not my fault but hopefully you understand the issues in your rhetoric now
Posted on 10/31/25 at 6:41 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
No, I said the legislator filibuster was not modified under Biden or Obama
No.. you said
quote:
Did they eliminate the filibuster under Biden or Obama? No.
Take the L
Posted on 10/31/25 at 6:43 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
That's not really a relevant question. Probably not, but it means nothing because they're always going to be against what the Republicans want for basic political reasons. That's a completely different thing than having a sincere attempt to engage in the policy we're actually discussing.
It’s literally at the heart of what we are discussing. If the filibuster is so important THEN don’t allow the Senate to drop it at a moments notice. If Thune proposes something to codify the filibuster and Schumer and company reject then that it a clear signal that they will kill if it they need to when they are back in power.
This post was edited on 10/31/25 at 6:43 am
Posted on 10/31/25 at 6:45 am to SallysHuman
quote:
No.. you said
We are discussing the legislative filibuster, not the advice/consent regulations.
You're trying to focus on an irrelevant digression to attempt a bait and switch "gotcha" instead of discussing anything relevant to the discussion in OP.
And I even responded honestly to that diversion, pointing out why the DEMs learned their lesson in that non-relevant example and why they would not be likely to do it again (I specifically described it as a "MAD" situation).
Posted on 10/31/25 at 6:47 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:you've already redug your trenches twice to get to your standard "that's not what we are talking about in this thread".
We're specifically talking about the filibuster on legislation in this threat
quote:
Your dishonesty is noted
Posted on 10/31/25 at 6:47 am to STEVED00
quote:
It’s literally at the heart of what we are discussing
No. Republicans creating symbolic puffery that means nothing is not what we are discussing. Hence why it's not relevant.
You created an irrelevant hypothetical framed with an intended binary response to dishonestly attempt a gotcha.
quote:
If the filibuster is so important THEN don’t allow the Senate to drop it at a moments notice.
That would require a Constitutional Amendment.
Again, not relevant to this discussion.
Posted on 10/31/25 at 6:48 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Again, not relevant to this discussion.
Who made you arbiter of relevance?
Posted on 10/31/25 at 6:48 am to UncleFestersLegs
quote:
you've already redug
No. Me correcting dishonesty is not this.
This is your typical BS. Promote a strawman or irrelevant arguments. When the nature of those dishonest arguments is pointed out, you mislabel it as me changing my position.
This is the only way you can engage. Pure dishonesty.
Posted on 10/31/25 at 6:49 am to NC_Tigah
The whole thing has gotten silly.
They say they need 60 votes to end debates that aren't even happening.
Unless a Senator is physically in the chamber speaking, there is no debate to shut down.
Force the to physically debate with only restroom breaks allowed. These "debates" won't last forever.
They say they need 60 votes to end debates that aren't even happening.
Unless a Senator is physically in the chamber speaking, there is no debate to shut down.
Force the to physically debate with only restroom breaks allowed. These "debates" won't last forever.
Posted on 10/31/25 at 6:50 am to TrueTiger
I think Rand is the last guy to actually do that
Posted on 10/31/25 at 6:51 am to TrueTiger
quote:
They say they need 60 votes to end debates that aren't even happening. Unless a Senator is physically in the chamber speaking, there is no debate to shut down.
This is something I don't understand... if there isn't debate ongoing, then how are they filibustering?
Posted on 10/31/25 at 6:52 am to SlowFlowPro
Trump wants Election Reform as he knows that Dems will not win POTUS minus rigging the vote. Throw in nixing gerrymandered Districts and they are done.
He can ride in as ‘savior’ by forcing Republicans to open Government and feed the poor folk while giving the RINOS zero excuse not to clean up the vote. He will do this as bellies growl and the pressure mounts.
He can ride in as ‘savior’ by forcing Republicans to open Government and feed the poor folk while giving the RINOS zero excuse not to clean up the vote. He will do this as bellies growl and the pressure mounts.
Posted on 10/31/25 at 6:54 am to SallysHuman
quote:
if there isn't debate ongoing, then how are they filibustering?
That's the thing.
These debates are imaginary.
The government is shut down because we pretend that debates are happening.
Posted on 10/31/25 at 6:54 am to RCDfan1950
quote:
Trump wants Election Reform as he knows that Dems will not win POTUS minus rigging the vote.
Dude, even with close to the worst case scenario unfolding for DEMs in 2024, Trump and Kamala were basically 50/50 in terms of the popular vote. The GOP holds a very small advantage in the Senate and House.
You're being way overconfident with your belief about the GOP being so strong nationally.
This post was edited on 10/31/25 at 6:55 am
Posted on 10/31/25 at 6:54 am to SlowFlowPro
The relevancy of the discussion is that you said eliminating the filibuster is bad (which I agree). You say Rs would be stupid to do it bc that’s what Ds want yet ignoring the fact the Ds can easily do it (and have done it) when they are in power and it suits their needs.
Durbin did it for Presidential nominations outside of SCOTUS.
Turtle did it for SCOTUS
It has been done. The question is just who will do it next? Do you actually think Schumer or his eventual replacement will have more or less restraint than his predecessors?
Durbin did it for Presidential nominations outside of SCOTUS.
Turtle did it for SCOTUS
It has been done. The question is just who will do it next? Do you actually think Schumer or his eventual replacement will have more or less restraint than his predecessors?
This post was edited on 10/31/25 at 6:55 am
Posted on 10/31/25 at 6:55 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Trump and Kamala were basically 50/50 in terms of the popular vote.
Yes but this isn't the metric and since Bidens election every county went more Republican
Posted on 10/31/25 at 6:56 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
You're being way overconfident with your belief about the GOP being so strong nationally.
However I agree with this as well
Posted on 10/31/25 at 6:57 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:#1
quote:
you've already redug
No.
quote:#2
And how did that work out for them?
quote:
We're specifically talking about the filibuster on legislation
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News