- 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
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
STEVED00
| Favorite team: | North Carolina St.  |
| Location: | |
| Biography: | |
| Interests: | |
| Occupation: | |
| Number of Posts: | 23032 |
| Registered on: | 5/4/2007 |
| Online Status: | Not Online |
Recent Posts
Message
Didn’t “Let’s Go Brandon” start at a sporting event? NASCAR maybe?
0
Well CR was only until 11/21 (10 days from me).
re: So Dems just caused all this bs for pretty much nothing
Posted by STEVED00 on 11/10/25 at 6:36 am to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
As I understand it, the Democrats got the Republicans to agree to vote on ACA subsidies in one year. Looks like a strategy to get them on record prior to the midterms next year.
I believe the vote will be in one month, December 2025, before the ACA subsidies expire on 1/1/26.
The House CR fully funded SNAP and maintained the spending levels from the previous year’s budget which was from the previous administration. The fight was over ACA subsidies that the previous administration added and put a sunset date of 12/31/25 because it was supposed to be a temporary deal.
Path Forward to Ending Shutdown. What comes next? Is this correct?
Posted by STEVED00 on 11/10/25 at 5:37 am
My understanding of path forward to ending shutdown after Senate moved past the filibuster is:
1. Senate now votes on the 3 bills they put forth yesterday. These will pass/fail based on simple majority.
2. This will go back to House where they can choose to adopt via simple majority vote or send back to Senate with amendments (and Senate would vote again to adopt via simple majority vote).
3. If House approves what Senate approved then goes to Trump to sign. If he signs then shutdown over.
Is this basically correct?
1. Senate now votes on the 3 bills they put forth yesterday. These will pass/fail based on simple majority.
2. This will go back to House where they can choose to adopt via simple majority vote or send back to Senate with amendments (and Senate would vote again to adopt via simple majority vote).
3. If House approves what Senate approved then goes to Trump to sign. If he signs then shutdown over.
Is this basically correct?
re: Ending the filibuster is a MISTAKE- BIGLY
Posted by STEVED00 on 11/5/25 at 8:45 am to Covingtontiger77
Correct me if I’m wrong but my memory is that the Ds tried to kill it in Biden Administration but Manchin and maybe Sinema killed it (both of whom are now gone).
Outside of Fetterman now, who in the Dem ranks would be against removing it?
Outside of Fetterman now, who in the Dem ranks would be against removing it?
quote:
Democrats are hoping Thune goes nuclear. This would open the door for them to push shite through once they return to power
They would be able to open the door themselves if they get the power. If my memory serves me correctly, they tried before and the reason it failed was bc of Manchin (who is gone now) not voting with 49 other D senators
re: Cuomo: Trump will try to take over if Zohran wins…
Posted by STEVED00 on 11/4/25 at 1:44 pm to 14&Counting
To be fair, Trump endorsement of Cuomo was way more about how disastrous in Trump’s opinion Zohran would be. Trump said as much in his statement.
re: Trump urges Senate Republicans to eliminate the filibuster using the nuclear option
Posted by STEVED00 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?
re: Trump urges Senate Republicans to eliminate the filibuster using the nuclear option
Posted by STEVED00 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.
re: Trump urges Senate Republicans to eliminate the filibuster using the nuclear option
Posted by STEVED00 on 10/31/25 at 6:37 am to UncleFestersLegs
quote:
you don't seem to understand. Dis dude is NEVER wrong even when he is
Oh I understand.
re: Trump urges Senate Republicans to eliminate the filibuster using the nuclear option
Posted by STEVED00 on 10/31/25 at 6:31 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
That is specifically not what I posted, scholar.
Dude. You said it never happened under Obama yet it literally happened (and started) under Obama. Take your L
re: Trump urges Senate Republicans to eliminate the filibuster using the nuclear option
Posted by STEVED00 on 10/31/25 at 6:30 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I expected ART OF THE DEAL nonsense to effectively argue Trump is just lying to try to gain leverage. I was wrong. What we actually have is the retards taking over sincerely promoting removing the filibuster now.
So if the Rs put up legislation making solidifying the filibuster, the Ds would all be on board? Let’s just stop dancing around the bush here. If the filibuster is so important then make it where it can’t be removed.
re: Trump urges Senate Republicans to eliminate the filibuster using the nuclear option
Posted by STEVED00 on 10/31/25 at 6:27 am to UncleFestersLegs
quote:
They eliminated it for all appointees except for SC Justices.
I’m sure the response will be “Well that was different blah blah blah straw man”
ETA: and there it is.
re: Trump urges Senate Republicans to eliminate the filibuster using the nuclear option
Posted by STEVED00 on 10/31/25 at 6:23 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Did they eliminate the filibuster under Biden or Obama? No.
They started chipping away at it in different situations yes. Also you think the Dem party is the same now as it was under Obama?
re: Trump urges Senate Republicans to eliminate the filibuster using the nuclear option
Posted by STEVED00 on 10/31/25 at 6:17 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Trump is showing major weakness here. That would be a complete "win the battle, lose the war" move. I can't believe this story is true it's so dumb. I'm sure people are going to pull the ART OF THE DEAL card, though, to blindly support Trump no matter what.
So you feel the Democrats when back in power will show the same restraint and not go with the nuclear option? I like that it exists; however, it literally can be killed at any moment. If it is so revered than put it into law that it can’t be quickly tossed to the side.
re: Headed to Normandy
Posted by STEVED00 on 10/30/25 at 1:58 pm to Hoovertigah
quote:
Have you ever been and I would be grateful if you could share your “must do’s”. Thanks
Yes. Visit the beaches and take in the history. It is really quite moving walking in the area and visualizing what went down.
re: Idea for preventing intentional walks
Posted by STEVED00 on 10/29/25 at 5:16 am to SirWinston
Just make it one intentional walk per player per game. That seems pretty reasonable.
re: Dems hoping to lower filibuster or claim policy concessions
Posted by STEVED00 on 10/23/25 at 3:39 pm to hansenthered1
quote:
The biggest victory we could give them would be to lower the number to 50 and then pass a clean CR. They'd then be free to do whatever they want the next time they had power.
Ok but what would stop them from just changing the filibuster rule when they get back in power?
re: 14 more days to break the previous shutdown record
Posted by STEVED00 on 10/22/25 at 6:28 pm to beaux duke
How of the previous shutdowns had a “clean” CR approved by the House and not approved by the Senate. I’m actually curious?
Popular
81
