pgodbold
(953 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-17-10 07:28 PM
Original message |
Poll question: Will the Democrats get rid of the filibuster? |
|
Edited on Sun Oct-17-10 08:11 PM by pgodbold
This poll assumes the Democrats will hold at least 50 senate seats and so are able, by a simple majority, to kill the filibuster.
|
chimpymustgo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-17-10 07:29 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Why won't they make them actually fillibuster? |
Motown_Johnny
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-17-10 07:29 PM
Response to Original message |
2. how about lower the number of Senators needed to break the Filibuster? |
d_b
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-17-10 07:29 PM
Response to Original message |
virginia mountainman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-17-10 07:32 PM
Response to Original message |
4. Yea sure, get rid of it.. |
|
To do so, "assuames" that we Democrats will be a majority, forever....
I know many are in favor of just "getting rid of it" but, what about when the Repukes are in power??
Will you still support "getting rid of it then"??
|
pgodbold
(953 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-17-10 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
Motown_Johnny
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-17-10 07:42 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
7. we tend to compromise with them anyways.. so getting rid of it would hurt us less |
laughingliberal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-17-10 08:07 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
11. I guaran-damn-tee you the first thing the Republicans will do when they have a majority again is get |
|
...rid of the filibuster. Dems hanging onto it as a hedge against this boogeyman is worthless and counterproductive. Had we changed the rules a while back, we'd have passed some effective legislation that would have us in a far better position to retain our majority.
|
LynneSin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-17-10 07:40 PM
Response to Original message |
6. I am still against removing the filibuster. Maybe refining it but not removing it |
|
Because we have prevented more activist judges from being seated thanks to the filibuster.
|
LonePirate
(898 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-17-10 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
8. Fear of what the other side could do should never prevent us from doing something to help our causes |
|
Think of how much we could have actually accomplished without a filibuster. The filibuster has helped create the electoral nightmare we now face. Sure we may love the filibuster when the Rs are in control; but we cannot govern through fear and negativity.
|
pgodbold
(953 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-17-10 07:53 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
9. Hmm... the supremes have never been so far right. If it helped it sure didn't help much. |
laughingliberal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-17-10 08:33 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
LynneSin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-17-10 08:54 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
14. It's not just for the Supreme Court |
|
There was at least a dozen bush nominees that got filibustered
|
ManiacJoe
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-17-10 08:03 PM
Response to Original message |
10. Need to return to the real filibuster. |
|
The one where folks are required to constantly talk.
|
LiberalFighter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-17-10 08:33 PM
Response to Original message |
13. Republicans will fillibuster to prevent changes. |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 12:04 PM
Response to Original message |