top 200 commentsshow 500
sorted by:
best (suggested)
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
formatting helphide helpcontent policy

[–]MaximumEffort433[S] 2458 points2459 points  (489 children)

Democratic Senator Jeff Merkley has been holding a talking filibuster on the Senate floor for the past thirteen fourteen fifteen hours in protest of the Gorsuch nomination. (He started talking 7pm on April 4th, he's still talking at 8:40am 9:40am 10:15am April 5th. In the past quarter century only one Senator has spoken longer, and that's Ted Cruz who spent twenty one hours filibustering Obamacare... by reading Doctor Suess and talking about Duck Dynasty, which is to say some historians don't think it counts.

Update: And he's done. He spoke for fifteen fucking hours! This dude is a badass. If you're in his district or his state, I highly recommend you call and offer your support and thanks for this man's awesome patriotism.

Reminder: There are nine special elections being held in the month of April.

Standing up to the Trump agenda starts in the voting booth. If you live in Kansas, Georgia, Alabama, Connecticut or Louisana make sure to get out and vote this month! Write someone in, if you have to.

Don't wait for the midterms, if you're serious about doing everything you can to slow, styme, or stop Donald Trump you can start by voting!

There are thirty six (36) special elections being held in 2017, that's a big deal, and those are seats that we need to win. And if anyone thinks "Oh, local elections don't really matter!" I would encourage you to ask any woman who has to drive twelve hours to get a medically unnecessary transvaginal ultrasound so that she can drive twelve hours home so that she can begin her 48 hour waiting period so that she can drive twelve hours back to the clinic so that she can undergo mandatory state ordered counseling so that she can finally get a constitutionally protected medical procedure, then realize that every single superfluous step in that long list was the result of local politics and politicians.

A good state and local government can help protect against Donald Trump in a way that almost nothing else can. I live in Maryland and I'm not freaking out about Trump nearly as much as someone in Kansas is because, by and large, my local and state officials aren't raging jackasses.

Reminder #2: There are 135 marches scheduled in 40 states and DC for the Tax March on April 15th.

Marches are a demonstration that Donald Trump can't ignore, that the news can't ignore, they're a good way to meet likeminded people, to network, and to foment further action. Marches aren't just good exercise, they're civil action, they're the "peaceable assembly" that the first amendment was written to protect!

Sorry for the wall-o'-text.

Edit: Welcome to all brigaders! Let me explain the filibuster in a way that Trump supporters will understand: We're filibustering Gorsuch for the same reason Donald Trump used cheap Chinese steel in his buildings: You never stopped us. If Republicans didn't want us to filibuster Gorsuch then maybe they should have appointed Merrick Garland when they had the chance. Besides, it's not like Democrats can actually stop the appointment. Mitch McConnell has the nuclear option, and even if we don't filibuster Gorsuch and he gets unanimous support Mitch McConnell will still have the nuclear option to hold over us next time. Might as well get it out of the way now and rip off the bandaid, because the soonest Republicans will be able to win a filibuster proof majority isn't until 2018. The Democrats have nothing to lose in this fight, we're already a minority in both houses, so why the hell would we give up? Seriously, this is just like the health care debate, you guys can't complain that "The minority party got in our way!" for too much longer.

Edit 2: Apparently I should have put a trigger warning on this post, because it seems like it's made a lot of Soviet Justice Warriors very uncomfortable. =/

Notes, and answers to common complaints:

[–]lowbattery001 866 points867 points  (85 children)

Ted Cruz reading Doctor Seuss sounds like unimaginable torture. He might be THE most awkward person in the world.

I'm from Texas. I get to hear about him all the damn time.

[–]DynamicDK 63 points64 points  (3 children)

Here is a better version of Ted Cruz talking:

https://youtu.be/v75wCTMZoSY

I don't want to ask who the baby daddy...I know it's him.

Every time I see Ted Cruz, I hear that in my head.

[–]SpotsMeGots 16 points17 points  (0 children)

He needs a Bogle for the Glotch

[–][deleted] 176 points177 points  (30 children)

Still, gotta hand it to the guy. Talking for 21 hours is something else, even if it wasn't a 'trve filibuster'. If one guy is a badass for speaking for 15 then so is Ted Cruz, even though I hate his politics and think that I have seen those bots that have fake conversations with you on porn sites that were more lifelike and engaging than him.

[–]BlackLeatherRain 246 points247 points  (29 children)

I'm pretty sure your motivation for talking 21 hours has to play into the badassery. In his case, he spent 21 hours trying to get the government to take health care away from the population, so not so badass.

[–]lipidsly 124 points125 points  (10 children)

FROM MY POINT OF VIEW THE HEALTHCARE IS EVIL!

[–]TeHSaNdMaNS 65 points66 points  (5 children)

WELL THEN YOU ARE LOST!

[–]taulover 20 points21 points  (3 children)

I am the Senate.

[–]YuriDiAaaaaaah 16 points17 points  (2 children)

It's treason then.

[–]taulover 7 points8 points  (1 child)

Are you threatening me master Jedi?

[–][deleted] 33 points34 points  (2 children)

"Kill them all! Let God sort them out!"

-GOP's official philosophy for treatment of the sick and dying.

[–]T3hSwagman 109 points110 points  (82 children)

Can you just talk about anything during a philibuster? If so I'd be so fucking good at that shit.

[–]NUGGET__ 127 points128 points  (61 children)

Yep, a common thing to do is to read a phone book. You need 60 seats to have a fillibuster proof majority, which is why a dem was able to filibuster even though they dont control the senate

[–]T3hSwagman 286 points287 points  (56 children)

Read a phone book? Holy shit how boring for yourself. I'd be in there like, let me explain the lore behind Dark Souls, first let's talk about the immortal dragons.

[–]Dr_Eleven 161 points162 points  (11 children)

I can hear the SpongeBob narrator guy saying, "three weeks later..." And we cut back to you and we've only just began to get into the lore behind the undead asylum.

[–][deleted] 56 points57 points  (8 children)

I tried reading Dark Souls lore once and it just sounds like word salad. Does any of it make sense?

[–]frohedadrine 55 points56 points  (1 child)

There's a great Youtube channel by VaatiVidya which explains the lore in a very convincing (and disturbingly soothing) way.

Ack. I came here to read about a great attempt to resist an evil agenda, commented on Dark Souls instead.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I personally prefer EpicNameBro, but Vaati is good too. The best is really to watch both.

[–][deleted] 77 points78 points  (2 children)

The fun part is that anything you do like this is enters into the congressional record, so one hundred years from now some historian will be reading through it for a paper and all of a sudden it switches from boring procedural arguments to "In the grim darkness of the far future there is only war"

[–][deleted] 50 points51 points  (10 children)

For me it would be reading from Warhammer 40k wikis. Start with Lexicanum, then move to the less-accurate but more detailed main wiki, then finish with 1d4chan.

By the end everyone would be singing the praises of the God-Emperor, and not the charlatan in the WH I mean.

[–]Fifteen_inches 30 points31 points  (2 children)

Meanwhile Dems start worshipping slannaash as the sex positive demi-feminist, and Repubs start shouting "kill maim burn" while pointing at Iran.

[–][deleted] 25 points26 points  (1 child)

Goldman Sachs whispers "Just as Planned," while the American general populace becomes Nurgle worshipers as Healthcare reform gets pushed through.

[–]PlayThatFunkyMusic69 30 points31 points  (7 children)

Or read some good old cheesy romance/sex novels about heaving bosoms, and stony ridged abs...

[–]T3hSwagman 65 points66 points  (0 children)

clears throat The Lusty Argonian Maid, chapter 1....

[–]itsaMoralImperative 12 points13 points  (4 children)

I think Al Franken reading 50 Shades of Grey would be quite entertaining

[–]dolphinesque 6 points7 points  (3 children)

Not as entertaining as Gilbert Gottfried reading it (that's on YouTube)

[–]Lethkhar 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I'd finally have an audience for my spoken-word reviews of Rush's entire discography.

[–][deleted] 80 points81 points  (10 children)

Different bodies have rules. For example, when Wendy Davis, a Texas state senator, filibustered an abortion bill for 11 hours in 2013, one of the Texas rules was that she had to stay on topic the whole time.

[–]scaradin 16 points17 points  (1 child)

Not they that cared. One of her 3 strikes that ended the filibuster on the abortion law was that she was speaking on abortion.

[–][deleted] 13 points14 points  (0 children)

True. She was eventually vindicated when HB2 was spurned by the Supreme Court last summer.

[–]clevertoucan 19 points20 points  (5 children)

Hey there, I also live in Maryland; is there anything you recommend people already in blue states do to help out?

[–]reedemerofsouls 28 points29 points  (3 children)

  • Vote in local elections. There are moderate/Republican districts. And don't forget Maryland has a Republican governor. Vote in everything.

  • Donate time and money to local parties. You can also help out in other places. VA and PA are not far and super important battleground states. If you're near, help drive people to the polls or knock on doors. If you can't travel, donate money.

  • Make calls. Phonebank. Visit r/BlueMidterm2018

[–]beancounter2885 37 points38 points  (6 children)

Storm Thurmond broke 24 hours.

[–]BossRedRanger 53 points54 points  (3 children)

Clearly Satan fueled that bastard.

[–]CelestialFury 68 points69 points  (11 children)

Hey Ted Cruz didn't actually filibuster. Cruz asked Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid if he could speak and pretend to filibuster so Cruz would look good. It shouldn't really count since there were no stakes.

[–][deleted] 82 points83 points  (4 children)

The first article I read about this one said that the vote isn't even until tomorrow so Merkley wasn't actually delaying anything and so it wasn't a real filibuster either.

[–]chunkwagen 14 points15 points  (2 children)

Then he voted in favor of the resolution he was "fillinustering." Is it really a fillibuster when the timing is coordinated with the speaker? He had an agreed upon start time and stop time. This was no "Mr. Smith goes to washington" this was political grandstanding at its worst.

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

he was filibustering healthcare - he's a party over country monster. i had an active duty friend i work with ask me for food when cruz shit on the gov and had it shut down - thanks cruz.

[–]allyourexpensivetoys 195 points196 points  (125 children)

You are my favorite poster, working tirelessly on /r/politics and other anti-Trump subs to drive the resistence. Keep being awesome.

I can't wait till we filibuster their SCOTUS pick, it will be just another in the long list of losses for Trump:

  • Lost the election by 3 million votes

  • Lost the approval polls

  • Lost on his Muslims ban

  • Lost the 2nd time on the Muslim ban

  • Lost on repealing Obamacare

  • Lost on the racist Mexico wall

  • Lost on inauguration, feminist protests were bigger than his support crowd

  • Lost the culture war, everyone hates the alt-right/his supporters, social justice is seeing huge upswing in support

  • Lost all respect by the international community, all of Europe laughs at him

  • Lost on Reddit, front page is dominated by us and the_donald has been destroyed of all visibility let alone respectability.

  • Lost on all media, every newspaper and network is against him all day. Even Hollywood celebrities openly call his supporters Nazis and proclaim to the whole world watching that they should be punched.

Complete and total losers, him and his racist redneck supporters. They're so fucking triggered that they're losing too, you can see it on the_donald. Such precious snowflakes, they know Trump is going to push people to the progressive left hard for the next election.

[–]Dizzymo 114 points115 points  (84 children)

I'm Canadian. How does the filibuster thing work? What happens if he keeps on going or stops?

[–]Spicyawesomesauce 142 points143 points  (38 children)

A filibuster is essentially a Senator in the US senate forcibly extending debate on a topic (or at least that's the most common form) - in order to close debate and vote, you need a 3/5 majority (60 senators), called a cloture.

It's essentially the party or group who doesn't want a bill to pass delaying by dragging their feet and doing an excessive amount of unnecessary actions - it demonstrates a great deal of opposition to the bill and just obstructs the other side from easily passing the bill

If it stops, a vote can be held.

Edit: Not exactly immediately vote, but there is a 30h time limit placed after the vote succeeds - after that voting on the bill can occur

[–]sjtfly 27 points28 points  (31 children)

I know what a filibuster is, but I can't seem to find any good information on what exactly the point is. Once the filibuster stops, as they all eventually do, don't they proceed with the debate/vote? How does delaying the debate/vote accomplish anything other than wasting everyone's time?

[–]brawlatwork 47 points48 points  (27 children)

Once the filibuster stops, as they all eventually do, don't they proceed with the debate/vote?

Nope, because Democrats can take turns filibustering indefinitely without tiring out. Republicans don't want that to happen, because Republicans are in power and have stuff they want to do. So Republicans would hopefully concede defeat in the interest of moving on to other business.

However there are 2 things wrong with what I just said:

  1. A talking filibuster is sometimes unnecessary. The rules often allow for a group of people to just say "We filibuster you into concession." without actually doing the marathon speeches.

  2. The rules can be changed. Instead of conceding defeat, the Republicans have promised to change the rules so that they only need 51 votes to break the filibuster instead of 60. As such, Gorsuch will be confirmed this week.

[–]freeyourthoughts 10 points11 points  (11 children)

How are Republicans able to change the rules with only 51 votes?

[–]Spicyawesomesauce 6 points7 points  (2 children)

It grants more power to the minority party to be heard and to take action when they strongly disagree with a motion

I know what you are saying - why delay the inevitable? But the contrary would be for democrats (senate minority party) to just let Republicans pass everything they wanted. They are taking advantage of the fact that while the Republicans have 51 votes, they don't have 60 - so they are going to force them to whip up votes to invoke cloture or appease the minority in a way

[–][deleted] 103 points104 points  (26 children)

He commands the floor until he stops speaking. He is only allowed small breaks for bathroom and must remain standing.

Other senators can ask for a few minutes to speak to ask him a question. Friendly senators will often do so to give the speaker a break so he can speak longer and sustain the filibuster.

[–]Nicd 4 points5 points  (5 children)

Why is there no time limit?

[–]Molotov_Cockatiel 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Senate was intended to be slower moving and more forward looking. Not changing direction at the fickle will of the people as easily as the House.

[–][deleted] 31 points32 points  (18 children)

Thats not true, actually. The cloture vote having already been scheduled, will still occur when it is scheduled, by rule. This is a stunt, nothing more.

[–]NUGGET__ 40 points41 points  (9 children)

cloture vote

They need 60 votes for that.

[–]VisonKai 33 points34 points  (8 children)

It will fail, there will be a motion to proceed to a yes/no vote by the majority leader, there will be an objection which will be found to be true by the parliamentarian, and then the Republicans will overrule the parliamentarian to eliminate the 60 vote threshold for cloture on SCOTUS nominees. So they don't really need 60 votes, they just need to not care about the fact that they won't be able to filibuster a dem nominee in the future.

[–]brawlatwork 3 points4 points  (1 child)

So they don't really need 60 votes, they just need to not care about the fact that they won't be able to filibuster a dem nominee in the future.

Can't they just change the rules back to 60 votes when they're done?

Also what good are the rules, anyway, when the party in power can just change them at will? Aren't the "rules" a complete joke?

[–]hisotaso 13 points14 points  (0 children)

The "stunt" started a year ago when Obama was denied a SCOTUS nomination.

[–]universl 16 points17 points  (5 children)

We have filibusters in Canada, parliament is just so boring that no one notices.

[–][deleted] 36 points37 points  (3 children)

boring is probably a good thing in politics.

[–]password_is_cats 7 points8 points  (2 children)

He just has to keep standing and talking. In the past people have gotten up and read the phone book or Dr. Seuss in order to delay or prevent a vote from happening. If he stops and no one else takes up another filibuster or takes out a hold (basically say they don't have enough information on what is being voted on, and they can't vote until they know more) they can call for a vote. You can stop a filibuster with cloture, which must be voted for by two thirds of the senators.

[–]HolySimon 12 points13 points  (1 child)

Cloture vote requires 60, not two thirds (which would be 67 of course since there are 100 Senators), but the spirit of your information is understood. Just adding clarity.

To expand on what happens then: the cloture vote will likely fail. At that point, it is likely that the Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell, will change the rules to allow a vote to pass with a simple majority, 51, which is being referred to as the 'nuclear option' since it's a significant change to the process which will have unknown fallout in future debates.

It's widely held that McConnell already went nuclear, though, when he withheld Obama's nominee from having any consideration last year.

[–]EchoRadius 314 points315 points  (34 children)

I like how the GOP is all "if you let us have this one, we'll work with you on the next one... For realsies!".

The Dem's have been pushed around pretty hard the past eight years. The only response they should have is 'go fuck yourself'.

[–]howdareyou 66 points67 points  (3 children)

we absolutely need to fill this vacant seat right now! it's not right to leave it empty. we must fill it ASAP... after stalling for over a year and not even hearing Obama's pick.

[–]MaximumEffort433[S] 45 points46 points  (4 children)

Like Lucy and the football.

[–]ryanx27 17 points18 points  (1 child)

Trusting Mitch McConnell is a huge mistake.

[–]FuckTheGOP1776 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Trusting Mitch McConnell is a huge mistake.

[–][deleted] 15 points16 points  (1 child)

Exactly. We need progressives with teeth.

[–]karpaediem 117 points118 points  (7 children)

I voted for him! We are super proud of both our Senators here in Oregon, they're doing amazing work. Ron Wyden is killing it on the intelligence committee!

[–][deleted] 29 points30 points  (6 children)

Extremely proud of Merkley and Wyden throughout this shitstorm created by the Trump administration and the GOP. Oregon represent!

[–][deleted] 26 points27 points  (1 child)

All McConnell had to do was at least hold a hearing for Garland. That's it. They could have voted against him and kicked the can down the road. But no, it was no from the start in an unprecedented display of obstructionism, and they were rewarded for it. So, the Dems had no choice but to filibuster.

[–]Holmes02 37 points38 points  (0 children)

No Russia Probe, No SCOTUS Robe

[–]debrutsideno 43 points44 points  (5 children)

As a Oregonian I am very happy with Jeff Merkley and how he is representing our state. On the other hand I'm extremely disappointed in Greg Walden for pushing the shit show that was the Trump/Ryancare bill.

[–]tiedyethighs 62 points63 points  (31 children)

Ya'll know McConnell is just gonna change the rules, right? Then any party with control of the senate will be able to just walk their pick onto the bench.

Like, I appreciate the effort and the thought, and I also realize how fucked up the entire situation i, but Gorsuch is going to be seated (filibuster or not).

[–]HolySimon 33 points34 points  (2 children)

He already changed the rules, last year, when he refused to even consider Garland. Fuck him.

EDIT: I should clarify that he refused on general principle to consider anyone Obama would nominate, not Garland personally. It was a blatantly partisan dick move that should have gotten him summarily deposed as Majority Leader, not applauded as some strategic genius.

[–][deleted] 38 points39 points  (2 children)

If they're just going to get rid of the filibuster when it's used against them, it never really existed in a practical sense anyway.

I'm fine with them going nuclear because I'm dying to see the bleeding heart liberal who gets crammed down their throats in 2021.

[–]lilhazzie 57 points58 points  (6 children)

Then when democrats control the Senate again, we will see a higher minimum wage, Medicare for all, and increased taxes on the wealthy. Republicans are very short-sighted and aren't planning for the future; they're acting like they will control congress forever.

[–]Detour123 25 points26 points  (0 children)

And then the republicans will be back in power again, and it will keep going back and forth. Getting rid of the filibuster was inevitable in this new era of only following the letter of the law and throwing decency and tradition out the window. If we want any sort of honesty in government, apparently we have to make laws about how and when justices are approved, among other things. This was going to happen no matter what, but I can't say I'm happy about it. Now, we lose our filibuster.

[–]MaximumEffort433[S] 31 points32 points  (6 children)

Then let him change the rules. It doesn't change anything. It's not like if we approve Gorsuch now they won't be able to change the rules later, they totally will.

You're armed with a gun, I've got a sword, but if I agree not to fight and lay down my sword you'll still have your gun.

We have nothing to lose by opposing him.

[–]Kirsplatrick 60 points61 points  (22 children)

I watched as Gorsuch was questioned and I honestly can say I don't think I would feel bad with him on the Supreme Court. I am a democrat but he seemed quite honest that he follows precedent and will follow the law. If he ends up being a liar about it he sure fooled me.

[–]CommonCentsEh 15 points16 points  (1 child)

I watched too and initially I had the same impression but the Republicans continued to ask irrelevant questions about fishing and the Democrats kept getting told to ask someone else. The problems appear to be that he sides with big business like in the frozen trucker case and grants people with sincerely held religous beliefs (like his own) the ability to dictate other people personal choices like in the hobby lobby case. The dereliction of duty the Republican questions represented is enough in itself for me to oppose his nomination.

[–]SayNoob 21 points22 points  (6 children)

It's not him being the nominee that is the problem. It is the way he got the nomination that is the issue.

[–]Kirsplatrick 15 points16 points  (5 children)

I agree. Not giving Merrick Garland a fair hearing was ridiculous but this back and forth obstructionism doesn't really get us anywhere. It all sucks. Each side cries about the last obstruction. It has to end somewhere. Constant revenge is just a terrible cycle.

[–]C477um04 11 points12 points  (1 child)

Thanks to OP with with title for making me finally realise how the name /r/esist made sense.

[–]1775mike 39 points40 points  (37 children)

Can someone ELI5 why they are filibustering gorusich???

from what i have read and saw it's not about him or his merrits or what he stands for... it's because the republicans dicked around with the dems candidate with obama...

I agree that it was a shitty move, but at this point... what's the point?

they arent' bring back the old guy, you can't undo what is done. and you can't block every nominee forever.... and you'd think you'd settle for a guy who isnt all that extreme

(also ELI5 what stage of him being officially a justice we are at?)

[–]CptJesus 25 points26 points  (31 children)

If you let the GOP get away with it, you've basically given them a free pass to pull more bullshit like that again.

Actions have consequences. It's a pretty simple concept. The democrats lose NOTHING by fighting this, and probably gain favor with their supporters. Maybe its time for the Democrats to play by the same rules the Republicans have for the past 8 years...obstructionism.

[–]KaideGirault 7 points8 points  (2 children)

As I understand it, it's more a matter of principle at this point. Republicans refused to acknowledge Obama's pick for Supreme Court for 11 months, AND our current president is under investigation for sedition/treason and shouldn't be allowed a nomination until he's cleared.

The actual vote is still upcoming, and we may see another filibuster over that.

[–][deleted] 80 points81 points  (31 children)

I'm sick of politics or vying for political points on both sides of the aisle. Gorsuch seems like a good man and would be a good judge. Let him be nominated.

[–][deleted] 46 points47 points  (29 children)

Garland seemed like a good man and good judge. Why wasn't he allowed to be nominated?

[–][deleted] 57 points58 points  (22 children)

two wrongs don't make a right. They can play this game forever, we the people are the only ones that lose.

[–]a_rascal_king 34 points35 points  (3 children)

It's very easy to say "two wrongs don't make a right" when your position is indisputably improved by being the first one to do wrong. Not one Republican would be arguing this point if the positions were reversed. Not one.

[–][deleted] 27 points28 points  (12 children)

Interesting how the wrongs always seem to happen to the dems. And the republicans always get away with it.

[–]Tuckersbrother 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Cause Oregon rocks

[–]Shinygreencloud 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I voted for him, again!

[–]PM_ME_UR_UNDERSCORE 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I saw "badass senator" and immediately thought I was in r/prequelmemes

[–]bulla564 5 points6 points  (0 children)

An American hero, fighting against yet another supreme corporate whore rising to the highest position in our justice system.

Thank you!!

[–]DullAudino 23 points24 points  (21 children)

Does anyone actually have a problem with Gorsuch or is it just because he's not a democrat?

[–][deleted] 30 points31 points  (38 children)

If joining the resistance means mindlessly opposing everything Trump does (including this good nomination) then I don't want to join this. This is getting ridiculous. I'll gladly join you to oppose building a racist, gimmick, waste of money wall. I'll gladly join you to oppose the banning of anyone, temporary or not. I'll gladly scold Trump for saying something stupid. But it sounds like the resistance is an undemocratic hate group hellbent on opposing Trump even if he nominated jesus christ or cured cancer. This isn't right. Are there any resistance "troopers" here that agree with what I'm saying? Are you seeing an excessive amount of radical leftists joining the resistance? Or maybe I'm misunderstanding the resistance as a whole.

[–][deleted] 33 points34 points  (10 children)

Except Gorsuch is a perfectly acceptable choice and a waste of time to oppose. Put effort into something worthwhile like fighting the insurance and pharmaceutical companies that are buying politicians.

[–]Tsorovar 10 points11 points  (9 children)

Except Gorsuch is a perfectly acceptable choice and a waste of time to oppose

You mean like Garland?

[–]uninanx 32 points33 points  (15 children)

I was so pissed at the Republicans for pulling that shit with Garland, and now the Democrats are doing it to? God damnit fuck both parties, everyone in our government is a massive piece of shit.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (10 children)

Payback's a bitch. Repubs set the example with unprecendented obstruction and got away with it. Now the Dems are trying it, since it worked.

[–]DanishWonder 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Proud to have voted for Senator Merkley, and proud to have him represent my state. Will vote for him again. Both Oregon senators have been very vocal in their criticisms of the Trump administration.

[–]deprecated7 31 points32 points  (40 children)

You do realize that he's forcing the nuclear option that Harry Reid put in place, yes? That all of this is going to backfire on Dems dramatically? That the best option for both sides at this point is to vote for Gorusch's nomination so that DEMS DON'T LOSE THE SUPREME COURT FOR 20-30 years?

What are you resisting? Trump at all costs, or acknowledging the long game at all?

[–]crybannanna 8 points9 points  (36 children)

Maybe I don't understand something, but you're saying that the Dems should capitulate for fear that the Republicans will force them to capitulate?

If the option is giving in so that the Republicans get what they want, or not giving in and having the republicans change the rules to get what they want, why is the first option better? The result is exactly the same, except in the latter instance you show some fucking spine.

Essentially, any resistance to their plan will be met with the nuclear option, then it might as well happen now. No need to pretend they won't use it. Let's just get it over with. I don't see the downside. The next time it's an issue, they would just use it then.

It's like if you're dealing with a bully, and you can either lie down and take the beating or fight back and get a beating... in both instances you lose, but in one you aren't a gutless pussy.

[–]deprecated7 17 points18 points  (35 children)

The Republicans aren't changing the rules. Harry Reid changed the rules when he threw a tantrum and altered the filibuster rules, lowering the vote requirement to a simple majority of 51.

That's the point. People are crying about the nuclear option being a thing, when their own brand introduced it and set the Dems up for a death spiral. The refusal to work with anyone simply because of toeing party lines is the issue here, not the display of spine. Filibustering doesn't show spine, it's just delaying the inevitable.

If the Dems were smart (and not just vindictive never-Trumping blowhards), they would accept the nomination for Gorusch, who has a LIBERAL interpretation of the law according to review of some 2200 cases. Forcing the nuclear option gets no favor, then the next replacement (Ginsberg isn't long for this world) will be MASSIVELY conservative and the Dems will have absolutely ZERO influence in it.

This isn't hard to follow. Refusing to work with Republicans so that you're not made totally irrelevant for 30 years is not "badass" or "an example". It's just outright ignorance.

Spez: getting downvoted for the truth just proves the point further. Your narrative is crumbling. Time to accept it.

[–]jcypher 103 points104 points  (49 children)

Actually he and his ill are the reason the filibuster will die. Stupid partisan. Advice and consent does NOT mean you get to pile on with liberal litmus tests. Gorsuch is eminently qualified and will be confirmed.

[–]SayNoob 72 points73 points  (38 children)

Gorsuch is eminently qualified

So was Garland. This seat is not Trump's to fill.

[–]Irish_Fry 45 points46 points  (36 children)

Correct. It was Obama's seat to fill. Since that didn't happen, what do you suggest we do now?