262
All of a sudden, Montana — and Senate control — is slipping away from Republicans
(www.independent.co.uk)
this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2024
262 points (98.9% liked)
politics
19096 readers
4339 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Until there is a total of 60 votes one way or another, both sides can effectively veto bills forever with a filibuster in the senate. Still, in the absence of said filibuster it's nice to be able to pass legislation through the senate.
Good to see the needle moving from the insanity that has been the last ~9 years of politics but there is so much foundational damage that simply won't build any bridges to bring the country back to it's center. Maybe if we're lucky it will lessen the extremist rhetoric especially after trump is out of the running... but i'm not holding my breath.
50 is also big for confirming judges.
50 + having the majority means you get to avoid stupid shit like McConnell appointment blocking
Note that Harris has called for eliminating the Filibuster should dems get a trifecta
https://www.npr.org/2024/09/23/nx-s1-5123955/kamala-harris-abortion-roe-v-wade-filibuster
honest question, are we not wary of how republicans would operate with no filibuster?
Realistically, given a condition where it stood in their way, they'd probably just eliminate it themselves
They can also just remove it if they have the majority
They already killed it for Supreme Court nominees when it suited them. If they really wanted something they'd kill it for that
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/10/01/fact-check-gop-ended-senate-filibuster-supreme-court-nominees/3573369001/
We know exactly how they’d act, since they eliminated the filibuster for judicial nominees so they could pack the court. Holding ourselves to some standard they will immediately violate when they can get any advantage is stupid.
Never expect them to act in good faith. They have already repeatedly trampled norms
Practically speaking, this election cycle is the hardest for Democrats in the Senate. There are 23 seats currently held by Democrats (and Independants organizing with them) up for reelection, vs. only 10 Republicans.
In the 2026 election, barring any additional vacancies due to retirements or deaths, there will be 13 Democrats defending seats vs. 20 Republicans. In 2028, the split is 15 - 19.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classes_of_United_States_senators
If the Democrats do keep the Senate and reform the Filibuster, then unless there is some radical change in political alignments Democrats will be favored to hold on to the Senate until at least 2030. There is a lot of work Democrats can do during those 6 years that might be impossible with the Filibuster in place, as it currently is implemented.
I would argue that keeping the Senate is just as important as winning the Presidency. Perhaps more so. If Trump wins but Democrats keep the Senate, they can use their power to ratify Cabinet officers to keep the worst of the worst appointments out. Likewise, if Harris wins but Republicans take the Senate, I doubt any of Harris's judicial appointments will be approved at all.
It's not really restraining them at the moment.
Then make them own their choices. As long as they can stick with this limbo there’s plausible deniability that no one sees. Or require it to be a speaking filibuster. In Minnesota, the conservatives had control of all the levers until they “caught the car” on banning marriage equality. At a state level, that woke a bunch of complacent people up and now we have a democratic trifecta after a lot of work since then. That can happen at the federal level too and that’s what we are learning from Dobbs.