Biden signs order on abortion access, urges women to vote in November

[Valcazar]

Remember that the Republicans used the "Nuclear Option" to drop the filibuster that actually resulted in Trump's 3 Supreme Court Judges being nominated.

Yes, they had the votes to do that and they did.
Just like all the other things over time that people have exempted from the filibuster.

The issue is both Sinema and Manchin are not on board with this "Nuclear Option" despite if being used by the Republicans twice as many times as the Democrats in the past.

Right.
They don't have the votes to exempt it.
I don't see what you're arguing here.
If Manchin and Sinema don't want to make this an exemption, and neither do Collins and Murkowski, then neither version of the bill will pass.
"The Democrats" can't wave a magic wand and drop the exemption unless they can get 50 votes to do that.
Even if you think they can get 50 votes for a bill, there is no evidence they can get 50 votes for dropping the filibuster.

But what I had subsequently stated is what you are repeating:

Yes, if they do drop the filibuster with the "Nuclear Option" then this will set a dangerous precedence for Mitch, as he had no problem doing so with the 3 Supreme Court Appointees of Trump.

It sets no precedent for Mitch.
Mitch dropping the filibuster for what he does or does not want does not depend on the Democrats doing it first.
The only reason he has for keeping it is that it hurts the dems more than him. If he ever has something he feels he needs to get through, he will push for it getting dropped. And unless he has something like a 50-50 split or maybe 51-49, he will get it through because his caucus is far narrower ideologically and also doesn't have a bunch of people who are sentimental about the filibuster as a tradition.

There is NO reason to think that Reid dropping it in 2013 for bench appointments is why Mitch dropped it later for Justice appointments.
There is absolutely NO way McConnel or the GOP would not have done that anyway to get a Justice seated, let alone to get three. It's just crazy to think otherwise.

He also has several other extremist bills that he wants to pass in the Senate, even without the prior approval of the House of Representatives. One that would benefit the only elitists like himself and the rest of the cronies in the USA!!

Yes, and if he has 51 votes he will pass them if he has the House and the Presidency.
The filibuster will last exactly as long as it gets in the way of something he really wants passed.
But most of his agenda is budget and judges, and those are already exempt.
Since he isn't much of a culture warrior, he won't necessarily remove the filibuster for banning abortion federally because he doesn't care about that.
Mind you, he is old and when he dies the next person to take over as majority leader may be much happier tossing the filibuster to pass everything he wants to.

I know that Schumer would drop the filibuster for the Abortion Rights as the majority of Americans are definitely in favour of it. But he knows that he won't even get Manchin's or Sinema's backing in this respect.

Oh, if you are just arguing "Schumer would get rid of it if it was up to him alone" then I agree. It really does look like he has reached the point where not being able to pass anything has pissed him off enough that he is willing to carve out more and more. That's the position of most Democrats now - just not enough currently sitting in the Senate.

If the Republicans can exert the Nuclear Option just to please Trump, then remember that the Democrats could have done the same for Obama's nominees but choose not to do so then.

When did this happen?
They did do exactly that.
Reid changed the rules because the GOP were blocking all the lower court judges.
He had a majority and the majority agreed that this was bullshit so they changed the rules.
Reid never had a chance to appoint a Supreme Court Justice.
If the GOP had blocked Merrick Garland's appointment as a filibuster move from the minority, do you think they wouldn't have eventually just done the same thing Mitch did and removed the filibuster for Supreme Court Justices?

But Butler knows that it is not what the Democrats want to do, but cannot as they have two rogue Senators who are not on board with something that the majority of Americans want. That is why he blames the Democrats although we all know that the Republican appointed Supreme Court Judges are 100% RESPONSIBLE for the Roe v Wade overturning!!

This we agree on.

 

[Butler1000]

Remember that the Republicans used the "Nuclear Option" to drop the filibuster that actually resulted in Trump's 3 Supreme Court Judges being nominated.
The issue is both Sinema and Manchin are not on board with this "Nuclear Option" despite if being used by the Republicans twice as many times as the Democrats in the past.
But what I had subsequently stated is what you are repeating:



Yes, if they do drop the filibuster with the "Nuclear Option" then this will set a dangerous precedence for Mitch, as he had no problem doing so with the 3 Supreme Court Appointees of Trump. He also has several other extremist bills that he wants to pass in the Senate, even without the prior approval of the House of Representatives. One that would benefit the only elitists like himself and the rest of the cronies in the USA!!
I know that Schumer would drop the filibuster for the Abortion Rights as the majority of Americans are definitely in favour of it. But he knows that he won't even get Manchin's or Sinema's backing in this respect. If the Republicans can exert the Nuclear Option just to please Trump, then remember that the Democrats could have done the same for Obama's nominees but choose not to do so then. But Butler knows that it is not what the Democrats want to do, but cannot as they have two rogue Senators who are not on board with something that the majority of Americans want. That is why he blames the Democrats although we all know that the Republican appointed Supreme Court Judges are 100% RESPONSIBLE for the Roe v Wade overturning!!

And so it will stay overturned. Because what else can be done?

 

[Butler1000]

And once again Butler throws his support to the Republicans.
Or is this you announcing you are going to start arguing for real decades-long work into a third party or multiparty system that might be viable in 2050?

Nope. Change the leadership of the Dems.

What else can be done? You still haven't presented a viable solution. Just excuses.

 

[bver_hunter]

Nope. Change the leadership of the Dems.

What else can be done? You still haven't presented a viable solution. Just excuses.

Butler the fact is that the Democrats need to win more seats in the Senate with individuals that are true Democrats and not right wing leaning Republican aligned ones like Manchin or Sinema. They are the ones that are preventing any series of Legislation from going through the Senate in a concise manner. Many pieces of Trump legislations were blocked from the likes of McCain, Murkowski and Collins and it happens all the time in that kind of a Congress setup. You just do not want to point the 100% blame at the Republicans in the first place for overturning Roe v Wade. But just keep on blaming the Democrats for the fault of the Republicans. Any high school student will tell you who is to blame for it in the first place!!

 

[bver_hunter]

I don't see what you're arguing here.

This we agree on.

Yes the Butler point is an easy one to agree on.

But remember that you started the argument in the first place. The filibuster rules can be dropped by both parties if they even have the VP to break the deadlock.
Manchin and Sinema have always thrown the roadblocks and that is why I mentioned that if they had the majority of votes in a Bipartisan Bill with all the 4 critical Republicans and Democrats on Board who see this Bill as a cause for concern then it would have been possible to drop the filibuster to accelerate it into Legislation. In fact if there were two other Sanders type of Senators instead of both Sinema and Manchin then no doubt this Bill would have been accelerated through the Senate with the urgent need to curtail what the Red States are implementing!!

 

[Butler1000]

Butler the fact is that the Democrats need to win more seats in the Senate with individuals that are true Democrats and not right wing leaning Republican aligned ones like Manchin or Sinema. They are the ones that are preventing any series of Legislation from going through the Senate in a concise manner. Many pieces of Trump legislations were blocked from the likes of McCain, Murkowski and Collins and it happens all the time in that kind of a Congress setup. You just do not want to point the 100% blame at the Republicans in the first place for overturning Roe v Wade. But just keep on blaming the Democrats for the fault of the Republicans. Any high school student will tell you who is to blame for it in the first place!!

How do you propose that to occur in Red States? What states do you think the Democrats can turn?

 

[jcpro]

Nope. Change the leadership of the Dems.

What else can be done? You still haven't presented a viable solution. Just excuses.

LOL!!! The Dems are too busy trying to stop Trump. Everything else is waaay down the list.

 

[Valcazar]

Nope. Change the leadership of the Dems.

You don't want that though.
You have consistently argued that is pointless and so people need to vote third party and let the Republicans win.

"More and better Democrats" is my position and you hate it.

 

[Valcazar]

Yes the Butler point is an easy one to agree on.

But remember that you started the argument in the first place. The filibuster rules can be dropped by both parties if they even have the VP to break the deadlock.

Yes. We agree.
But you keep saying "The Dems would do it" like it is some kind of magical incantation they have and aren't doing.

"The Dems" are the 50 current senators. That's it.

Manchin and Sinema have always thrown the roadblocks and that is why I mentioned that if they had the majority of votes in a Bipartisan Bill with all the 4 critical Republicans and Democrats on Board who see this Bill as a cause for concern then it would have been possible to drop the filibuster to accelerate it into Legislation.

"Possible" yes, but Murkowski and Collins have already said they wouldn't vote to drop the filibuster for their own bill.
Unless you have some magical GOP people who are going to cross over to vote down the filibuster, I don't know what world you are talking about.

In fact if there were two other Sanders type of Senators instead of both Sinema and Manchin then no doubt this Bill would have been accelerated through the Senate with the urgent need to curtail what the Red States are implementing!!

Many of the older Dems are institutionalists who think fondly of the old Senate traditions and think the filibuster is a part of those traditions and not a terribly backward piece of rulemaking that provokes countermajoritarian rule. They think it might be bad to give it up for nostalgic and stupid reasons. They are coming around, but slowly.

But yes, "if 50 Senators were willing to exempt it from the filibuster it could be exempted" is true by definition.
The problem is that there aren't.

 

[Butler1000]

You don't want that though.
You have consistently argued that is pointless and so people need to vote third party and let the Republicans win.

"More and better Democrats" is my position and you hate it.

Would I like to see it, sure? Do I think it's viable? No.

Bill Clinton introduced them to the money. They won't give it up. The leadership sidelines any progressives that do get elected. And works against any in the primaries. They talk a good game but the erosion of New Deal Politics continues.

Time for them to go the way of the Whigs.

 

[dirtydaveiii]

Conservatives are against abortion as a self preservation tactic. They know once you can determine genetically what causes a person to become conservative that all conservative fetuses will be aborted at a rate far greater than down syndrome babies.

 

[Valcazar]

Would I like to see it, sure? Do I think it's viable? No.

Bill Clinton introduced them to the money. They won't give it up. The leadership sidelines any progressives that do get elected. And works against any in the primaries. They talk a good game but the erosion of New Deal Politics continues.

Time for them to go the way of the Whigs.

LOL.
You didn't even last 7 posts.

And how do you plan to engineer a Whig-like collapse of the Democrats?
You don't have the issue of Slavery to split the party.

 

[Butler1000]

LOL.
You didn't even last 7 posts.

And how do you plan to engineer a Whig-like collapse of the Democrats?
You don't have the issue of Slavery to split the party.

And other than "elect more Democrats" which is proven not to work for getting progressive legislation passed (they had it all in 2009) you haven't come up with shit.

Sorry but both parties in the early 90's changed. And neither cares to govern effectively.

 

[bver_hunter]

How do you propose that to occur in Red States? What states do you think the Democrats can turn?

That is why the majority of voters should wake up to the fact that what the Republicans are doing such as overturning Roe v Wade is something that is contrary to what they battled against for decades. The electorate college is designed to favour the Republicans especially in the more remote boonies.
The decision of reversing Roe v Wade was purely based on Fundamental ideology!!

 

[Valcazar]

And other than "elect more Democrats" which is proven not to work for getting progressive legislation passed (they had it all in 2009) you haven't come up with shit.

You really do just think of politics as aesthetics, don't you?

Sorry but both parties in the early 90's changed. And neither cares to govern effectively.

This should be interesting.
How did both parties change in the 90's?

 

[Valcazar]

That is why the majority of voters should wake up to the fact that what the Republicans are doing such as overturning Roe v Wade is something that is contrary to what they battled against for decades. The electorate college is designed to favour the Republicans especially in the more remote boonies.
The decision of reversing Roe v Wade was purely based on Fundamental ideology!!

You haven't asked Butler who he would run in the Red States to get the results he wants.

 

[Butler1000]

You haven't asked Butler who he would run in the Red States to get the results he wants.

I would get rid of the Filibuster, by demanding that only nominees who support doing that get the fundraising.

 

[Butler1000]

That is why the majority of voters should wake up to the fact that what the Republicans are doing such as overturning Roe v Wade is something that is contrary to what they battled against for decades. The electorate college is designed to favour the Republicans especially in the more remote boonies.
The decision of reversing Roe v Wade was purely based on Fundamental ideology!!

You didn't answer the question.

 

[Butler1000]

You really do just think of politics as aesthetics, don't you?



This should be interesting.
How did both parties change in the 90's?

Bill Clinton chased after Corporate Donors. The GOP became obstructionist. So between the two the only legislation that passes is Corporate and non progressive in nature. Tax cuts, corporate subsidies, bailouts, union busting legislation, laws that allow corruption without jail time, just fines, Corporate friendly judges, concentration of media ownership, news curation, all as a result.

The budget passes for the Military with annual increases without debate, Corporate bailouts in days, but now its a crisis to get other budgetting done where before it happened without this brinkmanship.

Both parties are to blame. One for selling out, thevother for taking advantage of the sellout. Cimbined controlled opposition for the same donor class.

 

[bver_hunter]

You didn't answer the question.

Pay attention, as I did answer it. Those who are opposed to the Roe v wade overturning are the ones that need to be galvanized to get out and vote.
If Biden flipped those Red States in the 2020 Elections, then it is still possible to do the same at the midterms. Did Biden not win those States fair and square?