Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
Please feel free to participate, I am going to track the political attitudes on this forum over a few months as an experiment. Your help is greatly appreciated.
Iron-fisted philosophy Is your life worth a painting? Is this 'girl vs. boy' with different symbols? Being born is power Scout leader Nazi tagged as 'big sin' Your risk chains me hostage Me, I'm fighting with my head, I'm not ambiguous
I must'a looked like a dork
Me, naked with textbook poems Spout fountain against the Nazis With weird kind of sex symbols in speeches that are big dance thumps If we heard mortar shells We'd cuss more in our songs And cut down on guitar solos
So dig this big crux
Organizing the boy scouts for murder is wrong Ten years beyond the big sweat point Man, it was still there ever without you Coming back around, look! Coming together, for just a second A peek, a guess At the wholeness it's way too big At the wholeness it's way too big
just found out my 2nd cousins kid transitioned, my grandma is probably going to lose her shit. fingers crossed this helps them open up a little more maybe?
This reminds me of the time in 6th grade we all had to line up and shake hands with the Cop after DARE graduation, and everyone said "thank you" to him. For some reason I thought it would be cool if I said "you're welcome" to him instead just to be different. No one thought it was cool or funny.
*clears throat* Warren is better than Bernie for the left until Bernie says he will get rid of the Filibuster.
It's an interesting point.
I'm concerned about the Senate going forward, given how much consolidation there already is of voters in the more populous states and how trends are expected to continue in the direction of more consolidation. It's probably more concerning to me than the electoral college, which is a problem on its own, to be sure.
What is the mechanism for removing the filibuster? I haven't clarified that in the coverage that I've read. Is it simply holding a majority in the Senate and refusing to recognize the filibuster?
*clears throat* Warren is better than Bernie for the left until Bernie says he will get rid of the Filibuster.
It's an interesting point.
I'm concerned about the Senate going forward, given how much consolidation there already is of voters in the more populous states and how trends are expected to continue in the direction of more consolidation. It's probably more concerning to me than the electoral college, which is a problem on its own, to be sure.
What is the mechanism for removing the filibuster? I haven't clarified that in the coverage that I've read. Is it simply holding a majority in the Senate and refusing to recognize the filibuster?
Voting to change Senate rules. Need a majority and need enough votes, which, with Democrats, isn't always the same thing.
I'm concerned about the Senate going forward, given how much consolidation there already is of voters in the more populous states and how trends are expected to continue in the direction of more consolidation. It's probably more concerning to me than the electoral college, which is a problem on its own, to be sure.
What is the mechanism for removing the filibuster? I haven't clarified that in the coverage that I've read. Is it simply holding a majority in the Senate and refusing to recognize the filibuster?
Voting to change Senate rules. Need a majority and need enough votes, which, with Democrats, isn't always the same thing.
So, to be clear, that vote would be filibuster-proof itself?
I'm worried about the Democrats' ability to take the Senate in the first place. And yeah, Democrats aren't the best as exercising power, even when they do have it.
Voting to change Senate rules. Need a majority and need enough votes, which, with Democrats, isn't always the same thing.
So, to be clear, that vote would be filibuster-proof itself?
I'm worried about the Democrats' ability to take the Senate in the first place. And yeah, Democrats aren't the best as exercising power, even when they do have it.
I mean, only like four current senators understand Senate rules, peons like you and me couldn't deign to begin to understand them. But yes, I think Senate rules changes are not subject to filibuster. This is how Senate D's changed rules on judicial nominees and then Senate Rs went nuclear on same.
Gillibrand made an interesting point regarding this:
Gillibrand also expressed concerns, but didn't rule it out altogether, saying she "will absolutely consider this issue," if elected president, but warned that “we have a risk that if you are for this today, it may be done before you have the majority.”
So it could just as easily happen now as with Warren, Buttigieg, or whatever Democratic president. Its just that McConnell has thus far been against it. Who is elected president really has no bearing on this, and the Republicans currently control the Senate.
But, if the issue is pressed strongly enough and becomes popular, it could pressure the candidates returning to the Senate to change their attitudes toward the subject.
I'm also inferring from that that you are correct about it requiring a simple majority, though the nuclear option is itself a unique case involving the Senate rule in question being argued as unconstitutional, which I suppose could get the Supreme Court involved, which might not work out well for Dems.
And I'll include this, as far as Warren vs Bernie on the subject:
In 2017, 61 senators signed a letter saying that they opposed changing the filibuster for legislation from 60 to 51 votes.
The 2020 Democratic contenders who signed the letter at the time were Sens. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., Kamala Harris, D-California, and Cory Booker, D-N.J. The two 2020 Democratic candidates who did not sign it were Warren and Sen. Bernie Sanders, D-VT.
Although, Bernie has said since he's "not crazy about" eliminating the filibuster.
In 2017, 61 senators signed a letter saying that they opposed changing the filibuster for legislation from 60 to 51 votes.
The 2020 Democratic contenders who signed the letter at the time were Sens. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., Kamala Harris, D-California, and Cory Booker, D-N.J. The two 2020 Democratic candidates who did not sign it were Warren and Sen. Bernie Sanders, D-VT.
Although, Bernie has said since he's "not crazy about" eliminating the filibuster.
Bernie's plan is to bypass Senate rules and let his VP decide what can pass under reconciliation. It's just a overly complicated way of doing it. That's at least his plan for M4A. I'm not sure if you could keep doing things this way but I guess if you're by-passing rules it's whatever? and I think it opens him up to even more ludicrous attacks from the right. I'm assuming that he'll be talked into just going along with getting rid of the fillibuster. It an easier way to communicate things and you'd also not be stuck with all this weird procedural shit that's hard to explain.
Ah. I may support that as opposed to ending the filibuster. I just don't think the country is headed in a population distribution direction where the Democrats can reasonably expect to control the Senate, at least in the medium-term.
They are allowed one such measure per year for each of revenue, spending and debt limit, so it's possible to get a good amount of agenda through.
Regardless, they obviously need to actually win the presidency and the Senate.