• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Kyrsten Sinema: Dems hypocritical for trying to end filibuster after using it 'just last year'

American

Trump Grump Whisperer
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
96,062
Reaction score
33,377
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative

Again, Democrat myopic thinking and hypocrisy.
They wish to correct a wrong and they see the reality of todays partisanship. Give the Dems credit.
 
They wish to correct a wrong and they see the reality of todays partisanship. Give the Dems credit.
What wrong would that be?
 
Republicans are hypocritical for embracing after ending it to get Gorsuch appointed.

Hypocrisy is a poor argument.
Its all they have ever had for years. Like straight up everytime you would criticize a republican for doing something “hypocrisy check!!!!”
 
Republicans are hypocritical for embracing after ending it to get Gorsuch appointed.

Hypocrisy is a poor argument.

McConnell ended the filibuster on Supreme Court nominations in response to Harry Reid's orchestration of the "nuclear option" in 2013 to reduce the number of votes required to confirm many presidential appointments (not including Supreme Court) -- in 2013 it was judicial nominees and executive office appointments.
 
End the filibuster!
 
McConnell ended the filibuster on Supreme Court nominations in response to Harry Reid's orchestration of the "nuclear option" in 2013 to reduce the number of votes required to confirm many presidential appointments (not including Supreme Court) -- in 2013 it was judicial nominees and executive office appointments.

His rationale for his hypocrisy isn't germane. If anything, his argument is one of tribal supremacy. Nothing else.
 
McConnell ended the filibuster on Supreme Court nominations in response to Harry Reid's orchestration of the "nuclear option" in 2013 to reduce the number of votes required to confirm many presidential appointments (not including Supreme Court) -- in 2013 it was judicial nominees and executive office appointments.

He upped the ante, considerably. There is certainly no reason to think he wouldn't do it again for bills before the Senate, and blame the Democrats for it to boot.
 
I think that it should be done away with...the filibuster does nothing but grind halt to progress....if Republicans are in charge and a Democrat is president, they will have to deal with him or be vetoed...if Democrats are in charge and a Republican is president the same thing....if all three houses are one party...that states that it is up to them to show us what they can or cannot do....done with all this nonsense
 

Again, Democrat myopic thinking and hypocrisy.
300+ times Dems used the filibuster last year and whadayaknow? It wasn't racist when they did it..
 
They wish to correct a wrong and they see the reality of todays partisanship. Give the Dems credit.
Well, that must have been a recent change of heart, since they missed the opportunity to "correct a wrong" over 300 TIMES just last year!
 
"To those who want to eliminate the legislative filibuster to pass the For the People Act (voting-rights legislation I support and have co-sponsored), I would ask: Would it be good for our country if we did, only to see that legislation rescinded a few years from now and replaced by a nationwide voter-ID law or restrictions on voting by mail in federal elections, over the objections of the minority?" Sinema wrote in The Post."

Uh, Ms. Sinema, that's exactly what they are doing in the states right now.
 
Getting beyond the partisanship, both US parties want the filibuster when it suits them and usually when they are the minority party.
When the US Republicans are once again in control of their senate, the Democrats won’t find the filibuster so vile.
I will agree that it seems especially strange to anyone studying American politics. It is not used anywhere else in the world.
I believe the US senate writes it’s own rules so it seems like they could write it out but I have never been clear what majority is needed to change these rules.
 
Let's see, American. Today, you said this:


Again, Democrat myopic thinking and hypocrisy.

But less than two years ago, you said this:

With Democrats filibustering the defense bill tomorrow, Trump should say say there's no budget to protect the sum'bitch. [emoji23]

Also, and here's the kicker, the Democrats will filibuster the same program to fund Ukraine that they're trying to impeach Trump on.

Sent from Hillary's private email server.

So. We can see that you are just fine with the filibuster only when it suits your right-wing agenda.
 
The party in the minority lauds the filibuster as a safeguard while the majority party lambasts it as obstruction.

Wash, Rinse, Repeat…
 
The party in the minority lauds the filibuster as a safeguard while the majority party lambasts it as obstruction.

Wash, Rinse, Repeat…

Represntatives of 37,000,000 outvoting representatives of 297,000,000 is a rather extreme version of minority rule.
 
Back
Top Bottom