Why would they need 60? I thought they only needed that much to override a Presidential veto or amend the Constitution. Otherwise just 51, right?
Leo Roberts
You know you can get banned for a shitty OP like this.
Kevin Smith
You need 60 votes to break filibuster. Otherwise the oppositions party can forestall forever.
Filibuster isn't what it used to be either, with senators physically present and doing shit like reading the phone book for twelve hours. Now most times someone just announces they intend to filibuster and no one has the balls to force vote and see who actually shows up. The Republicans did this for eight years under Obama so don't expect the Dems to be conciliatory with the power either.
William Hughes
If video games has gamejournopro what do we call this?
Josiah Wood
juden lugenpresse
Nicholas Edwards
Just google the headline. It is clearly a coordinated effort to delegitmize Republican government.
The rifles in our closets legitimize the republican government, who cares what the press thinks about it. That headline is very boring, by the way. What is the opposite of "catchy?"
Carson Wright
Am i understanding this correctly? Thanks to the "nuclear/constitutional option", which the democrats brought in 2013 to prevent Republicans from filibustering all the time, they could overulle Republicans with the majority of 51, as long as Obama declared nuclear option?
So basically, as long as Republicans have above 50 votes, Trump can now prevent filibustering democrats, by simply stating this option too now? If so, then the democrats truly have rearfucked themselves with this.
James Robinson
Like fuck.
The nuclear option has always been there since filibustering is not a constitutional right. Basically the President of the Senate (usually the VP iirc) has to override the filibuster by changing the senate rules that allow a filibuster to continue.
The democrats were going to invoke it in 2013 but the Republicans (smartly) gave them some meat instead, allowing the filibuster rule to remain in place.
With Republican control of Senate, House, Executive, States, etc., Obama's obnoxiousness and Trump's maverick persona I see no reason why they wouldn't bring it in immediately.
Adrian Carter
All the plans that they had wrought…
Nathan Gomez
I can only find WSJ using this headline.
Julian Ross
Democrats voted away filibustering a few years ago when they had their majority and thought they'd be in power forever.
Camden Morales
And they would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for us meddling kids :^)
Lucas Sullivan
That there were so many kids involved with trolling journalists still seems to be driving them all insane. They seem to forget what laws and precedents they helped set that are going to bite them in the ass. I rarely see any Democrats even comment on how Trump is wanting to undo much of Obama's 'legacy' of executive orders with his own executive orders, which makes me think many of Obama's fans have no idea how much he seriously used them.
Dylan Cooper
Another fine slide thread of zero importance.
Jaxon Hughes
Did Washington even have so many phone numbers back then?
Kevin Phillips
To the contrary it's an actual article from the WSJ that highlights what's going allegedly to be happening in the next month.
Oliver Scott
I have Breaking News, Politics, and US News RSS feeds for CNN, Fox, Reuters, and Associated Press in my bookmarks and I don't see this headline anywhere.
Jackson Green
Almost everyone has had a landline for the past 50 years user…
Nolan Hughes
YOU LADS KNOW WHAT WE DO WITH THIS RIGHT? FIRSTLY, WE BIGPOST. SECONDLY, WE COMPILE ALL THE IDENTICAL ARTICLES, AND SEE HOW MANY TALKING HEADS WE CAN FIND VIDEO OF SPEAKING THE SAME HEADLINE AND WE MAKE A VIDEO LIKE THAT CHRISTMAS NARRATIVE BULLSHIT WHERE EVERY SINGLE LOCAL STATION WAS SAYING VERBATIM "WHO BUYS ONE PRESENT ANYMORE BUY 10. 11.. 12 FOR EVERYONE YOU KNOW"
THE FAKE NEWS NARRATIVE IS STILL FRESH OUT OF THE OVEN, LETS SHOVE THE LUGENPRESSE BACK IN IT.
Jordan Russell
Checked for divine truth.
Elijah Johnson
FUCK OFF YID
Angel Reed
A bunch of literal what shit
Jeremiah Cooper
It's just a WSJ article that Politico picked up and ran with, and now the Leftist Blog-o-sphere is jerking themselves raw with.
What are you even supposed to be showing? I never even heard of any of those sites until I saw your screencaps.
Literally what are these shit sites?
Xavier Hughes
AM I DOING IT RIGHT?
Benjamin Hernandez
YE! CONGRATULATIONS ON YOUR FIRST BIG POST!
Julian Evans
Those sites are just linking to the wall street journal, you cretinous moron. Is this your first day on the internet? Are you some middle aged retard who can't think straight?
Lurk the fuck more.
Robert Jones
This is going to be great.
Levi Rogers
PIC RELATED
Jacob Watson
I FEEL UNSTOPPABLE NOW!
Isaiah Evans
Kek has spoken.
Parker Torres
B…b…but… he called the person he was replying to a yid! That, combined with his crack google sleuthing means he is definitely a regular.
Leo Morris
Probably means he's an idiot Putinboo tbh, yid is the russian slang for kikes.
Isaiah Bell
stop making questions now goy
Ayden King
Not exactly Ivan exclusive.
Brandon Reyes
That's not it OP. They have confidence as they're lacking fear. Did we kill the Buzzfeed Jew who shutdown, MDE? No. Did we kill Kunt Buchanwald? No.