I am against the TPP. But I do not favor Senate filibusters.

[bluestateguy]

Were I a Senator I would vote to open up debate, vote for cloture and then vote against the actual bill.

I do not favor filibusters and use of procedural votes to block bills. I favor debate and then straight up or down votes.

That said, TPP is a bad deal.

[bigwillq]

1. I am with you.

Not for all the BS and drama. Debate, vote for cloture and vote on the damn bill.

[Aerows]

2. I believe there is a place for them.

They prevent the mob of the majority from running over a significant minority. I'll admit - I hated them when Republicans used them, but it is just as valid when Democrats use them now.

[Agnosticsherbet]

3. The purpose of the filibuster is to make sure th minority is heard

And understood. We have had a filibuster since 1806. I think this fits well with the purpose.

[DCBob]

4. Even though I am pro-TPA I loved seeing the Republicans getting a taste of their own medicine.

I saw Orin Hatch on CSPAN just seething with contempt. Yet he had no problem blocking all sorts of reasonable Democratic legislation in the past.

[cali]

5. OK, but this is about so much more than the TPP

The TPA has a 6 year life span. It's about much, much more than locking Congress into an or down vote. It governs how we'll deal with trade and the 17+ proposed trade agreements the USTR is working on.