let's put this out there right now: we need to end filibustering over supreme court nominees

[unblock]

soon, in all likelihood, we'll have president hillary and a barely democratic senate (quite possibly 50-50 with our veep breaking ties).

republicans, being merely consistent with their rotten behavior over the last 8 years, will filibuster anything they possibly can, most notably, supreme court nominees. actually, as long as the house is in their hands, they might not need to filibuster anything else. treaties, maybe. but supreme court nominees, definitely.

there is simply *no way* they will behave reasonably or responsibly in this area. everything on our experience tells us they'll be jerks to the end. they'll look forward 2 years and hope to regain the senate, so they'll filibuster until then. if not, they'll filibuster 2 more years and hope to unseat hillary.

filibustering has gotten completely out of control and simply doesn't work in an era of hyperpartisanship.

and before anyone complains about big bad democrats ruining a fine senate tradition, let's just remind people that republicans are currently breaking and re-breaking their own record every single day for holding up a supreme court nominee. they have poisoned the well long before anything we did.

let's make it happen on january 3rd!

[Salviati]

1. They should just bite the bullet and end the fillibuster completely.

It's done more harm than good.

[ThoughtCriminal]

4. The rule's purpose makes assumptions that no longer apply

That the minority party has reasonable people.

[unblock]

5. Yet we keep giving them more chances

[bagelsforbreakfast]

6. we need to make the bastards payback!@

Hilary should choose a socialist.

[pat_k]

7. No.

The power to filibuster can be abused, sure, but it is a power we must be willing to use when principle demands it.

The Democrats had sufficient numbers opposed to Alito to filibuster, but too many refused to ACTUALLY oppose him by joining forces.

Claiming to oppose something, and then refusing to actually do the ONLY thing possible to stop it, is utter nonsense. But that's precisely what some members of the Democratic caucus did. After refusing to join the filibuster -- the only way to stop Alito -- they claimed they had "opposed" Allito by casting what they knew would be a useless No vote on the floor.

[unblock]

8. But come January and republicans are the minority's in the senate,

They *will* abuse it if it's there.

What's the point of winning a majority only to let them move the goal posts to 60 votes?

[pat_k]

10. And when they abuse the power to...

... to stop legislation that a majority of the nation wants to see enacted, they will inspire more folks to come out and vote against them.

As I noted in a reply above, Bill Clinton said it: "When people feel uncertain, they'd rather have somebody that's strong and wrong than somebody who's weak and right.”

I submit that Strong and Right beats Strong and Wrong any day.

It's time for Dems to fight for the principles they claim to hold dear with the same vigor the Republicans fight for their cronies. It's the only way they have a shot at ever winning back a filibuster-proof majority.

Whether or not Dems win back a majority in the Senate, more of them need to stand up and fight for the big things that matter -- and call on us to join them -- win or lose.

Let the Republicans obstruct. Mount an all out attack on the obstructionists. Make it clear they are blocking things the country needs and wants. We've had enough of preemptive surrender. (Can't win so don't fight.) And we've had enough monumental demonstrations of weakness like the failure to actually stop Alito with a filibuster when they had more than enough voicing "opposition" to him.