you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 2 years ago* (21 children)

Keeping the filibuster is pretty important. Without it, Republicans would simply have un-codified Roe in 2016.

Followed by repealing the Voting Rights Act and Medicaid, privatizing Social Security and the Post Office, enacting a regressive flat tax, etc.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (20 children)

    Keeping the filibuster is pretty important.

    ...for blocking progress. Republicans don't have to put any work into blocking progress since Democrats do it for them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (19 children)

    It also blocks Republicans from repealing any progress.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago* (18 children)

    And Democrats from implementing any. Popular progress would make Republicans very unpopular indeed if they repealed it. Just look what happened when they finally caught that car they'd been chasing for decades and killed Roe.

    Imagine if they had to undo the law first and then get the Supreme Court to strike down Roe. They would have taken the same popularity hit twice. Imagine if the John Lewis Voting Rights Act passed instead of being stopped in its tracks by the filibuster. All the fuckery Republicans are trying to pull at the state level would have to get through a popular civil rights law first. But no. The filibuster is a relic of the Jim Crow era, and holds back civil rights to this day. And that's how centrists like it.

    Since it provides Democrats a way to pretend their hands are tied, they prioritize its preservation over the civil rights of their constituents.

    Of course, this also means they have limited accomplishments to run on. Which is why the only message right now is "not trump".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago* (17 children)

    Yes, what happened after Republicans killed Roe? Kate Cox had to flee her state to get an abortion, that's what. Republicans are doubling down, not backing down.

    I'd rather have small, permanent progress than constantly watch Republicans take away what we gained.

    By the way, state legislatures don't have filibusters. Having seen what they are doing, I don't want more of the same at the federal level.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 2 years ago (16 children)

    I’d rather have small, permanent progress

    You'd rather have no progress.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (15 children)

    I'd rather not have the equivalent of the Florida or Texas legislature running the country. That's worse than no progress.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago (14 children)

    Same. Unfortunately, the John Lewis Voting Rights Act was less important than centrists' adherence to the Jim Crow Filibuster.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (13 children)

    Floridians had rights, until suddenly they didn't.

    Rights aren't so important when they can easily taken away.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (12 children)

    Rights aren't important to you at all. As long as Democrats get to keep their stupid procedural excuse for inaction, everything else is secondary.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (11 children)

    And yet they are taking action where they can, like in Ohio, Kansas, etc.

    You are willing to risk everything for short term again, most of us aren't.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (10 children)

    Great. Could have codified Roe, but you're happy with Texas' law as long as your precious Jim Crow filibuster keeps progress from ever happening on the national level.

    Your real nightmare scenario isn't Florida's abortion laws. It's Washington's minimum wage, universal vote by mail, and legal cannabis.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (9 children)

    Codified Roe = short term gain. The only way to codify it is to plant the seeds for its destruction. Along with the destruction of other laws you should care about.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    Codified Roe = short term gain.

    You prefer no gain at all ever. Congratulations on getting it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    I prefer incremental gains that are not easily reversed. Like the ACA and the latest climate change legislation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    You like the filibuster because you like your losses to be untempered by gains.

    You're trying to coast on the ACA from 15 years ago, when the only thing you liked about it was how the filibuster prevented the public option from happening.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (5 children)

    I like the filibuster because without it the ACA wouldn't have lasted 15 years.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    If Republicans were willing to simply undo anything that Democrats put into place, why haven't they?

    They could have ended the filibuster with a simple majority and done whatever they wanted any time they had a majority in the Senate. They won't, and it's not because of some non-existent worship of decorum. It's because they know that repealing popular legislation would be so unpopular that it would sink them.

    Democrats just don't want to end the filibuster. It gives them a flimsy excuse to let Republicans dictate the limits of policy regardless of who has the majority.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (3 children)

    Republicans don't want to end the filibuster for the same reason as Democrats: they are afraid Democrats will undo whatever they manage to pass.

    And it's laughable to suggest that they are worried about unpopularity, they pass unpopular laws all the time. Literally book banning is unpopular. Six week abortion bans are unpopular. Tax cuts for the wealthy are unpopular. Republicans don't care, they only have to do things that are popular among conservatives.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Republicans don’t want to end the filibuster for the same reason as Democrats: they are afraid Democrats will undo whatever they manage to pass.

    Sounds good. Maybe we should undo whatever Republicans pass. You don't want to do that either, of course.

    Republicans already have their mechanism for undoing things Democrats like: the courts and red states. You'll happily let all of it go forever as long as Democrats have the only thing they care about: the Jim Crow Filibuster.

    We've been going around in circles for some time now. You're determined to support a stupid racist policy that serves almost exclusively to prevent civil rights legislation from passing. I'm done with this conversation. Thanks for the confirmation that the Dixiecrats never completely left the party.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    And you want to undo decades of progress, because you weren't alive before those laws were passed and you're clueless about what life would be like without them. "Sounds good, burn it all down" is something only a privileged person would say.

    It's a shame you're so obsessed with instant gratification. People are willing to work for enduring change, not the temporary quick-fix you're selling.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment