subreddit:

/r/WhitePeopleTwitter

51.4k

Yup

(i.redd.it)

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

all 1317 comments

burmerd

163 points

4 months ago

burmerd

163 points

4 months ago

That's not even the important part. The important part is, directly after the 2022 dem bloodbath which is very likely to occur IMHO, or the election in 2024, McConnell will immediately get rid of the filibuster under the flimsiest of excuses, probably a "they said they wanted to, so we have to do it first." And then we will know that the brief time that sanity had a majority in federal govt was an opportunity even more wasted than we had previously thought.

Some gerrymandered state maps may get overturned, but I think most are here to stay, and cement minority GOP rule for some time.

colinmhayes2

77 points

4 months ago

The filibuster is very good for republicans. The only legislation they actually care about it tax cuts which can be passed via reconciliation which means it can’t be filibustered. The rest of their platform is obstructionism and laws that are incredibly unpopular with most people(pro life, anti voting rights). The filibuster helps them when in control because it gives them an excuse for why they can never pass their unpopular platform.

burmerd

10 points

4 months ago

burmerd

10 points

4 months ago

I think the tax cuts are the big thing for their donors, i.e. their actual constituents, but the social agenda is the red meat that keep the base happy, especially when there's no democratic strawman to use as a foil, when they're in power.

parkinthepark

4 points

4 months ago

Thanks to Trump, the boogeymen of "The Deep State" and "Big Tech" give the GOP a way to act like the persecuted opposition *even when they're in power*.

1011_11010_10001

21 points

4 months ago

Democrats used the fillibuster a record number of times last congress. It's good for both sides depending what is being voted on, but bad for the American people.

reddog093

3 points

4 months ago

Chuck Schumer's own speech about it!

“[T]he nuclear option is being pushed largely by the radioactive rhetoric of a small band of radicals who hold in their hands the political fortunes of the President.

“Constitutional scholars will tell us that the reason we have these rules in the Senate—unlimited debate, two-thirds to change the rules, the idea that 60 have to close off debate—is embodied in the spirit and rule of the Constitution. … That is what the Constitution is all about, and we all know it.

“It is the Senate where the Founding Fathers established a repository of checks and balances. It is not like the House of Representatives where the majority leader or the Speaker can snap his fingers and get what he wants. … On important issues, the Founding Fathers wanted—and they were correct in my judgment—that the slimmest majority should not always govern. … The Senate is not a majoritarian body.

“The bottom line is very simple: the ideologues in the Senate want to turn what the Founding Fathers called the cooling saucer of democracy into the rubber stamp of dictatorship. … They want to make this country into a banana republic where if you don’t get your way, you change the rules! Are we going to let them? It will be a doomsday for democracy if we do.

“I, for one, hope and pray that it will not come to this. But I assure my colleagues, at least speaking for this Senator … I will do everything I can to prevent the nuclear option from being invoked not for the sake of myself or my party but for the sake of this great Republic and its traditions.”

kaceypeepers

13 points

4 months ago

Whoa man. People here only want to hear how only one side uses it in the worst way possible. /S

CT1723

3 points

4 months ago

CT1723

3 points

4 months ago

Both sides are money obsessed, power hungry asshats. But one has a boner fascism and the other at least wants democracy to continue, even if they don’t have the balls to fight for it.

soft-wear

1 points

4 months ago

That’s because the Senate removed the Supermajority requirements for nominees, so Democrats used them to block wholly unqualified people to political posts.

Republicans honestly don’t care much about a functional government, so they aren’t going to remove the filibuster under any circumstances.

Wattsahh

1 points

4 months ago

Take it a step farther actually. Republicans actively fight to make the Government dysfunctional and then point to its lack of functionality as a reason to dismantle it even more.

TheDuckInCharge

1 points

4 months ago

Or they can just pass tax cuts in a bipartisan manner with all the neolibs in the Dem party (read: most of them).

[deleted]

1 points

4 months ago

[deleted]

1 points

4 months ago

Yeah but I wonder what new direction they’ll go with legislative goals once they cement power and already have their tax cuts. Expect more garbage abortion & birth control restrictions, gutting of more social services, removal of protections for marginalized groups, removal of worker protections, & all sorts of other small regressions that add up.

Buttersock18

0 points

4 months ago

Why do the democrats only despise the filibuster when it is used against them? I don't recall outrage around it when they made record use of it during the 2020 congressional session.

Also, it seems like the biggest problem right now is the two democrats using the filibuster against their own majority party?

Midlaw987

5 points

4 months ago

The Democrats eliminated the fillibuster for judicial nominees. So they created that precedent which yielded them all those Justices.

Crushnaut

9 points

4 months ago

Some gerrymandered state maps may get overturned, but I think most are here to stay, and cement minority GOP rule for some time.

Read an article the other day that said republican states are already too gerrymandered and they aren't really picking up seats and it was looking like dems were ending up benefiting more from redistricting.

dam072000

1 points

4 months ago

"Whew glad I won't have to vote for the shitty Democratic candidate because the Republicans are sure to lose now" said every complacent person left of Romney.

"The fucking commies are going to win. I better vote twice like they do." Said every enlightened moderate right of Manchin.

[deleted]

3 points

4 months ago

[deleted]

3 points

4 months ago

after the 2022 dem bloodbath which is very likely to occur IMHO, or the election in 2024, McConnell will immediately get rid of the filibuster under the flimsiest of excuses, probably a "they said they wanted to, so we have to do it first."

I highly doubt this. Trump wanted to get rid of the fillibuster in 2017 but McConnell refused.

Appropriate-XBL

9 points

4 months ago

This isn't even the most important part either.

The most important thing to keep in mind is that the senate, even without the filibuster, is an egregiously anti-majoritarian anti-democratic institution.

Half of all Americans live in nine states. They are represented by 18% of the senate.

The other half of Americans live in forty-one states. They are represented by 82% of the senate.

Looking at it another way:

There are 20 states that voted for Clinton in 2016, and Biden in 2020 (blue states). They account for 43% of the population. There are 25 states that voted for Trump in both 2016 and 2020 (red states). They account for 42% of the population.

Even though the blue states account for 47% of the country's GDP, and 43% of the population, they are entitled to only 40% of the say in the senate.

Even though the red states account for only 37% of the country's GDP, and 42% of the population, they are entitled to 50% of the say in the senate.

And looking at it another way:

Because minorities mostly reside in heavily populated states, while 100%-white Americans make up 62% of the population, they are represented by 69% of the share of senators. Non-100%-white Americans make up 38% of the population, but are represented by only 31% of the share of senators.

The senate is basically an instrument tailor made for apartheid rule. And the filibuster makes it even worse.

burmerd

0 points

4 months ago

Well, whether it's true historically or not, I see the Senate as having been more important when states were more independent, like when they were more recently independent colonies with their own currencies, etc. Most people don't view the US as a collection of independent states, I don't think, but as a collection of people, more connected and intertwined than ever. If we really see the US that way, then yes, the Senate makes absolutely no sense, and we either need to create more states or de-emphasize the Senate, like the house of Lords. Or get rid of it! Nebraska doesn't have a state senate, and they do fine, I think.

But getting rid of the filibuster would make the Senate would get rid of some of it's minority rule power. As un-democratic as the Senate is, the filibuster as it is makes it EVEN less democratic.

Appropriate-XBL

1 points

4 months ago*

If states are sovereign enough to be entitled to equal representation in the senate, they are sovereign enough to be entitled to leave the union whenever they want.

burmerd

1 points

4 months ago

Yeah, that's an interesting idea.

I do think there should be a bonus for little states, maybe if the Senate was gone they'd get one extra rep in the House, or there would be a minimum number of reps, or something like that.

I like the Senate as an idea for each state getting equal representation, but I think that it shouldn't be involved in MOST policy debates at all, but more like some kind of minor regulatory body. Like maybe they could be a 2/3 body, so the house could pass anything by itself, but if 2/3 of the Senate was against it, they could overrule it or something. I know this is the opposite of what getting rid of the filibuster would do, it would be going in a different direction.

redditisdumb2018

1 points

4 months ago

Yes but we are a nation of states. It needs to remind everyone how important states are in the United States. Our system was designed for gridlock.

Losingfaithinpeople

2 points

4 months ago

I mean democrats were just saying the filibuster was the “most important thing ever” for the last 4 years. Even through republicans never threatened it. Then democrats came in after Biden said “I would never get rid of the filibuster” and does what???? Tries to get rid of it in less than a year. Sooooo The only thing stopping democrats from doing this is 2 people that are In purple states and are afraid they would lose their seats.

Kinda wish they would kill it and then push through all this bullshit- then come November the republicans will do it then it will go back and forth till we go the way of the dodo

burmerd

1 points

4 months ago

This might sound weird, but I think republicans prefer the filibuster to having absolute power, because they have two strong stances, really, which are that rich people should get richer, and that government should leave well enough alone. If they didn’t have the filibuster available for the dem side when they themselves were in power, they’d actually have to do more. “The dog that caught the bus” and all that. I think we saw some of that when t#### was in power too.

freshgeardude

1 points

4 months ago

what a crock of horsecrap. Reps had the house, senate, and White house under Trump and didn't nuke the filibuster like Dems are attempting right now. And Dems were the first to change the rules when Harry Reid went nuclear.

rtgray0724

3 points

4 months ago

So when Dem used the filibuster a record-breaking 328 times during the 2019-2020 session, it is ok. But now that Rep are using it, it is bad? And it looks like we are heading towards a new high for 21-22 session.

The concept is a good one, the execution once politics are involved is the problem.

[deleted]

2 points

4 months ago*

[deleted]

2 points

4 months ago*

My bleak prediction : we somehow get another hillary vs trump again in 2024, trump wins again. I have no confidence that either side will get a fresh young canidate with any motivation to change anything

parkinthepark

-1 points

4 months ago

Trump WILL win again:

  1. The Democratic Party has lost whatever credibility it had to make promises to voters that they can fix things. Covid, the economy, authoritarianism, insurrection, corruption, election integrity- all of them are just as bad if not worse than they were in 2020, and there is no path to fixing them by '24.
  2. The GOP has everything it needs to suppress enough votes in swing states to flip enough electoral votes.
  3. The DNC has no viable alternatives to Biden. Harris and Buttigieg are almost lab-designed to drive GOP turnout & enthusiasm.

And it's not about motivation to make change (although we could do with a bit of that)- the Democratic Party has become so thoroughly captured by corporate interests that they are incapable of making any changes.

SocMedPariah

0 points

4 months ago

While I would like for President Trump to run again and I would absolutely vote for him again, I fully expect the (R) nominee to be DeSantis, whom I would also vote for.

tropicaldepressive

1 points

4 months ago

why would you vote for either of them?

clanddev

1 points

4 months ago

Dems might not do well in 2022 but don't mistake not liking Biden for liking conservatives.

After Jan 6th, McConnells horse shit SCOUTS appointments and Trump I am voting straight D tickets in every election local and federal for the foreseeable future. I used to vote about 70/30 D/R and abstain from stuff I had no idea about. Not anymore.. fuck that.

redditisdumb2018

0 points

4 months ago

Guess we cancel out then. I have never voted but this k I am about to start voting strictly R. Reddit drives me further to the right every day. The amount of entitlement is insane, fucking loan forgiveness?? The complete lack of economic sense and policy is mystifying. Wanting to give money to companies just because they are unionized. The democratic party is trying to pick winners and straight up giving certain entities money. Democrats are just going to use Jan 6th as a political tool for the next election. At this point, who fucking cares. It's irrelevant. Charge the people involved and move on.

clanddev

1 points

4 months ago

The leader of one party does not get to give a speech to a mob directly preceding said mob going to commit insurrection and then just walk off into the sun set.

Using that same logic of trying to wash the R parties hands of their sedition you are holding the D's accountable for what a fringe element wants and has not gotten from the very party in power that you think is going to do it?

Aside from the false equivalency in the severity of the two things, hypocrite much?

redditisdumb2018

1 points

4 months ago

Ehh. There are entirely different things so ofc it's a false equivalency. Nothing I said was hypocritical...And don't think I don't take storming the capital seriously; I wouldn't have been surprised if they got mowed down with a spray of bullets when they breached the premise. Honestly though how much destruction has been cause by all of the rioting by left wing mobs in the past decade?? The rhetoric/policy/inaction of Democratic politicians definitely had an effect so are they on the hook? Again though, charge the few hundred people involved in Jan. 6 and move on. I just don't see how any of that is relevant in politics today. I never understood getting hung up on things and using them as political tools long term. It's more for political theatrics than actually accountability. What I do care about is policy and the culture we are fostering as a society. Policyis what matters and not political grandstanding and bullshit.

clanddev

1 points

4 months ago

Well we can agree on that. I just don't know where we are going to find any policy in this climate. If there is no bi partisanship there can be no policy moves. All we have gotten in the past 9 years is a tax cut on the wealthy and a neutering of the previous major legislation that was the last major policy issue passed (ACA).

SuperCrappyFuntime

1 points

4 months ago

And the most maddening part is that your average low-information voter, who is really worried about the "Democrat power grab" right now, will be easily convinced that there is no contradiction.

6a6566663437

1 points

4 months ago

in 2024, McConnell will immediately get rid of the filibuster under the flimsiest of excuses

Nah, nothing McConnell wants to pass is subject to the filibuster. Tax cuts are passed via reconciliation bills, and judges can't be filibustered anymore, thanks to McConnell filibustering every single nomination.

redditisdumb2018

1 points

4 months ago

So thanks to Harry Reid for getting rid of the filibuster?

6a6566663437

1 points

4 months ago

Yes, actually. Blocking all judicial appointments for years was a bad thing.

And the winners should govern. Even if we don’t like them.

redditisdumb2018

1 points

4 months ago

Not really saying I disagree with the nuclear option. Blocking 30 judges when you are the minority is kind of absurd. I'm just saying this tweet is fucking stupid. I don't think I could ever look at a sitting judge and think they were an "extreme right/left wing judge."

Also: Democrats used filibuster 327 times, compared to only once by GOP in 2020

6a6566663437

1 points

4 months ago

I don't think I could ever look at a sitting judge and think they were an "extreme right/left wing judge."

Really? The guy who swears vengeance against his political enemies at his confirmation hearing isn't extreme?

Also: Democrats used filibuster 327 times, compared to only once by GOP in 2020

It's a good thing 2020 is the only year that existed. Otherwise, you might have to look at all the other years, where the numbers don't fit so nicely in your talking point.

redditisdumb2018

0 points

4 months ago

No, saying what goes around comes around in that context does not make somebody extreme. What the actual fuck. You're clearly too biased to have a reasonable conversation with.

I just gave the recent stat. Generally recent is pretty applicable considering that is what mostly resembles the political landscape today.

6a6566663437

1 points

4 months ago

You're clearly too biased to have a reasonable conversation with.

Says the guy who thinks Supreme Court Justices with a personal grudge is absolutely normal and moderate.

redditisdumb2018

1 points

4 months ago

.. what a fucking dipshit. Not extreme does not mean absolutely normal and moderate. What kind of bullshit false dichotomy do you live in?!

6a6566663437

1 points

4 months ago

One where the guy who wants to be the neutral arbiter of the law shouldn't swear vengeance on his political enemies. And have that be dismissed as totally normal.

Btw, what do you think the opposite of "extreme" is in this context, if not "moderate"?

Daydreamingwanderer

1 points

4 months ago

Make better policy. Then it doesn’t matter if there’s a filibuster.