Most Democrats Do Not Want To Safeguard Our Democracy

Most Democrats are in favor of getting rid of Democracy while a select few understand that “Eliminating the 60-vote threshold will simply guarantee that we lose a critical tool that we need to safeguard our democracy from threats in the years to come”. Thank you Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin (and a few others lurking in the shadows) for truly wanting to protect our democracy and from having to endure endless policy and law flip flops every single time the balance of power changes. Thank you Kyrsten and Joe for trying to save us from ourselves and fighting for true bipartisanship instead of the one party take all rule Democrats favor. And, for some reason I can't even fathom, Democrats should be but aren't thanking them from saving the Democratic party from what would happen after the midterms. With Democrats jumping off the Titanic in record numbers knowing themselves that they will be going back to being the minority party soon, you'd think they wouldn't want to be eliminating the filibuster right now as Harry Reid had gone nuclear years ago and it came back to bite them in the ass.


https://news.yahoo.com/president-biden-speak-democrats-voting-164404152.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

 

If the filibuster is removed then there will be no reason for anyone in the minority party to even show up. What they say will not matter. This applies to any and all parties. Independents need not even apply.

 

Yes. Thank you Joe and Krysten.

Joe Biden Appears Visibly Flustered, Defeated in Post-Sinema Speech Interview

​

So how did Rantin' Joe's Hateful speech work?

He's uncovered himself as very small mean nasty man who can't close a deal because he's mean, angry and a name-caller. He thinks deal making is like his bribery schemes, all leverage and payoffs. That's how people lie and cheat, it's not how we come together and accomplish big things.

 

Same with doing away with the Electoral Collage as the Left want to do. That really makes us a Republic and not a Democracy. To do away with that, the Left only has to have two or three big states voting Democrat and they could control the elections for decades.

 

lol there will always be enough democrats to support war and tax cuts, and never enough to pass serious progressive legislation.

when did any republican become interested in democracy in this 'republic?" oh, that right, you guys are now all about "mob rule"



on a more serious note. the filibuster has nothing to do with democracy, and is nowhere mentioned in the constitition.

 

So you have a picture to post of a few people on The Fringe, and a hyperbolic claim.


Do you agree with the premise of the op and a couple of sane Democrats?

Remember never Grant yourself power that you're not also willing to Grant your quote unquote enemy!

 

i think doing away with the filibuster is unwise, the senate could turn repub in a moment (how old is leahey? for example)

what would you think of returning the filibuster to a pre 1970 form? make the bastards talk.

in any case, the premise od the op that by opposing the filibuster dome dems oppose democracy, which other democracy, anywhere in the world or in history, has a filibuster rule?

 

No, the 60 vote threshold has become the tool for right wing obstructionism, anti-democracy and tyranny of the minority.

The opposite is true. And Sinema is a hypocrite, because in 2010 she was criticizing it.

We are not the minority party. The constituency of 50 Democratic Senators consists of 40,000,000 more people than the constituency of 50 Republican senators. It's very similar of the house.

 

Tyranny of the majority is no more likable, in fact it's usually worse.

 

Wow, we're all about mob rule? Who was it that kept the police back in Oregon, Washington State and etc? Police were chased out of their own police station. Parts of a city was blocked off for months and no one tried to break it up. Who was bailing out rioters as soon as they were booked? Buildings burned down to the ground and stores looted and Federal Court houses attacked and no one arrested. The Democratic Party for the last several years has shown they are anti police and pro mob rule. Republicans had one mob invading the Capital and they are for mob rule? Were any of those people bailed out by Trump or Republicans like the Dems did?

 

I have no problem returning it to where they have to sit there and talk. PROVIDED everyone in the Senate also has to sit and listen, with the same restrictions about not being able to go to the bathroom, take a break or anything like that. If not then I don't support returning it to that.

 

I would rather have a "tyranny of the minority" than a "tyranny of the majority". At least the tyranny of the minority can't vote things in that are detrimental to our Liberty and Rights unless they have help from the majority.

 

Ummmmmmmmmm, don't you get it? Get rid of the filibuster now and Republicans then use that to their advantage after the midterms, then being able to run roughshod over everything and the Democrats would be unable to stop it because the filibuster would be gone. Don't you want to avoid that? Even Democrats realize that the midterms are already history. Manchin and Sinema are actually saving Democrats from their own stupidity.

 

Actually I have to ask....Tell me, do you wish to do away with "States"? Completely and utterly? If yes, why? If no, why?

 

So the minority’s constituency should have no voice? Interesting. Let’s see if you still hold that view after the 2022 midterms. Something tells me your tune will change.

 

Your full throated endorsement of the plantation duly noted. Pravda would be proud.

 

Democracy means that who gets the most votes, wins.

Democracy is the antithesis of Tyranny. With Tyranny, you don't get to vote.

If you want minorities to win, go with the popular vote, because minorities are often voting with the larger voting block.

 

Yes they can, that's why its called tyranny.

 

So you support Republicans jamming their agenda down our throats unobstructed?

 

Democracy means he who gets the most votes wins.

That's just the way it is.

 

Better to have both sides able to get their agendas through the legislature, because that is why they are voted into office, than to allow the current obstructionism to continue, and no one wins. The filibuster means we don't get nothing done, nor do republicans, and that doesn't serve the electorate. Once upon a time, when the filibuster was first created, that never happened, now it is being abused and has become the tool for obstructionism, which doesn't serve the needs of the electorate.

There was a time when the filibuster was used appropriately, but when republicans are using it to filibuster even putting a bill on the floor for debate, a procedural vote, then it is time to get rid of it.

Because of the filibuster, one side won't get nothing done, and the reason they are voted out of office is because they couldn't get anything done so the electorate will try the other party, will not be able to get anything done, and back and forth we go into perpetuity until the system collapses because public distrust of congress. This is happening now.

THe public's low opinion of Congress is directly proportionate to the increase abuse of the filibuster.

 

The problem is that the Republicans have been relentlessly obstructionist since at least 2008, when Obama was elected. Among other things, they simply refused to grant many of his nominees a hearing or a vote.
They did it right up to the last year of his presidency with Garland.
And they have a huge advantage in the Senate in that they can have a majority in the Senate that represents only a small fraction of the population of the country.
Although I am in favor of the 60-vote rule, a change to simple majority would not actually signal the end of democracy, it would be a return to it. One that the Democrats would regret almost immediately.

 

Who said I wanted to do that?

 

Really ?? You can speak for MOST DEMOCRATS???? BULLSHIT!!!!!!

 

The point of the filibuster 60-vote rule is to promote and foster cooperation, bipartisanship and to reduce extremism.

instead, its used by the Republicans to stop ALL democratic bills, even if they agree with them 100%

hell, during Obama's years, the GOP admitted to filibustering bills that were sponsored by Democrats, EVEN if they totally supported the bill, just cause the Democrats sponsored it.