Reddit Image
Read More


  1. As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)

    In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don’t attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, **any** advocating or wishing death/physical harm, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.

    If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.


    *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*

  2. I edited the quote a little for clarity.

    > Recently, the 60 vote supermajority threshold has become synonymous with the filibuster.
    > […]
    > The supermajority threshold stems from an obscure rule that was introduced in 1917. Rarely invoked for the first half century of its existence, it started to mutate in the 1970s as post–civil rights realignment fed partisan tensions, control of the majority was up for grabs more frequently, and senators looked for more creative ways to make the other side look bad. Senators don’t have to hold the floor to invoke the 60-vote threshold. They don’t have to debate or explain their position publicly, or try to persuade anyone of anything. They don’t have to talk at all—they can literally phone in their objection to the Senate cloakroom, then sit back and watch the gears of governance grind to a halt.
    > […]
    > McConnell has taken the institution across that Rubicon, there’s no going back. Reform is the only way to restore the Senate to a reasonably well-functioning institution. The good news is that the supermajority threshold can be abolished with a simple majority vote. Such a move would offend some pundits and armchair institutionalists. And some Democratic senators, like Delaware senator Chris Coons, continue to ignore the evidence of recent history and argue that the 60-vote threshold will function as a force for compromise rather than a tool of gridlock and obstruction.

  3. I agree, gotta win the Senate or absolutely nothing happens. Need like 10 seat majority to really unfuck the country too.

    Got your work cut out for you America. Yeah, the boomers are going to die off leaving a much more favorable situation for left wingers, but that’s still a long way off and they can quite frankly destroy the country on their way out.

  4. If you want to reform the senate, we need to elect more Democrats:

    South Carolina




    If only a popular candidate would put his ego aside and end his failing presidential campaign.


    If only a popular governor would put aside his ego and end his failing presidential campaign.

    Georgia 1 and 2
    (several candidates)

  5. The new president needs to come in and immediately re-sanction Oleg Deripaska again, and anyone doing business with him. That means McConnell and whoever else is in on the aluminum plant deal. Then freeze any accounts known to have received money from Deripaska and his cohorts including Len Blavatnik. He donated to McConnell, Graham, Rand Paul and Ron Johnson. Freeze those accounts. Put GOP leadership on the same side of the law as Russia. Begin to dismantle the GOP from the top down. Both Gorsuch and Kavanaugh had between $12 and $14 million in dark money backing their campaigns to get on the SC bench. Haul them in for questioning as to how much of that came from Russia, and send a message that covering for the GOP is going to get them in tremendous hot water. Go scorched earth from the very beginning, and the GOP can basically be destroyed once and for all. It won’t matter how many hillbillys still vote republican, the party will have no access to the levers of power, especially if the democrats only allow funding into the blue urban areas of the red states to help them grow, and let the poor rural areas wither and die.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here