American Politics: Fiscal Cliffhanger

[Neutraligon]

I mean, it makes sense as a legal move to prevent quorum if you do not have the votes to maintain a filibuster. Easiest way to change this would have been to change the quorum rule to requiring only majority being present.

Perhaps they will do so if 113 is struck down. It would also require a constitutional amendment I think.

Pretty sure it is not set out in the constitution, but rather house and senate rules.

[San Lumen]

Perhaps they will do so if 113 is struck down. It would also require a constitutional amendment I think.

Pretty sure it is not set out in the constitution, but rather house and senate rules.

If it is then why not change it immediately?

[Neutraligon]

Pretty sure it is not set out in the constitution, but rather house and senate rules.

If it is then why not change it immediately?

Because they would need a quorum to do so....or wait until the rules are revoted on at a new session. I very much doubt GOP members would be present in a vote to change the rules like that.

"Thirty-one or more votes are required to adopt, amend
or rescind any rule. However, forty or more votes are required to amend or rescind Rule 9.30. Once
the House has organized for business the adoption, amendment or rescission of any rule must be
proposed in writing, read at a regular business session under the order of business Other Business
of the House, referred to the Committee on Rules by the presiding officer, and if reported from the
Committee on Rules, upon distribution of the report, it shall be in order to vote on the proposed
amendment immediately"

No standing rule of the Senate shall be adopted, amended or rescinded
except upon the affirmative vote of a constitutional majority (16). After
the Organizational Session of the Senate, the adoption, amendment or
rescission of rules shall be proposed in writing, read at a regular business
session, printed, distributed to members’ desks and allowed to lie on the
table for at least one session day prior to any vote thereon

[Bienenhalde]

No you are too busy ranting about non-existent conservative socialism most of the time in this thread.

Non-existent?? Explain the middle and late USSR and its satellites. Explain North Korea. Explain Cuba. (In fact, I don't think there's ever been a free, progressive socialist society maybe with the exception of the first 5-10 years of the USSR). Also, I don't see how that has anything to do with Schmitt, that was a complete non-sequitur.

If the USSR was socially conservative, then how do you explain their suppression of the Russian Orthodox Church, the monarchy, and other aspects of traditional Russian culture? They might not have been individualist liberals, but that doesn't make them conservative. And their radicalism went beyond merely changing the economic system.

[San Lumen]

If it is then why not change it immediately?

Because they would need a quorum to do so....or wait until the rules are revoted on at a new session. I very much doubt GOP members would be present in a vote to change the rules like that.

Therefore there is no solution here especially if 113 is struck down.

[Neutraligon]

Because they would need a quorum to do so....or wait until the rules are revoted on at a new session. I very much doubt GOP members would be present in a vote to change the rules like that.

Therefore there is no solution here especially if 113 is struck down.

This is things working as they should, why does there need to be a solution to something that is not a problem.

[Pizza Friday Forever91]

I will give one thing to Khurkhouger however, and that was Romania, at least under the leadership of Ceaușescu was socially conservative.

[San Lumen]

Therefore there is no solution here especially if 113 is struck down.

This is things working as they should, why does there need to be a solution to something that is not a problem.

Grinding government to a halt is not things working as they should. As I've said before why not write into their platform and campaign on elect us and the majority won't be able to get anything passed because the evil people in the Valley outnumber us?

[Pizza Friday Forever91]

anyways I cannot wait for Fort Bragg to be renamed.

[Ifreann]

This is things working as they should, why does there need to be a solution to something that is not a problem.

Grinding government to a halt is not things working as they should. As I've said before why not write into their platform and campaign on elect us and the majority won't be able to get anything passed because the evil people in the Valley outnumber us?

Why don't you go there and campaign yourself?

[Neutraligon]

This is things working as they should, why does there need to be a solution to something that is not a problem.

Grinding government to a halt is not things working as they should. As I've said before why not write into their platform and campaign on elect us and the majority won't be able to get anything passed because the evil people in the Valley outnumber us?

Yes it is. That is exactly what a filibuster is. For the same reason you would not write on your platform that you support the Thanos snap.

[Galloism]

This is things working as they should, why does there need to be a solution to something that is not a problem.

Grinding government to a halt is not things working as they should. As I've said before why not write into their platform and campaign on elect us and the majority won't be able to get anything passed because the evil people in the Valley outnumber us?

If you don’t like it, why don’t you go run for office there yourself?

[Galloism]

Grinding government to a halt is not things working as they should. As I've said before why not write into their platform and campaign on elect us and the majority won't be able to get anything passed because the evil people in the Valley outnumber us?

Yes it is. That is exactly what a filibuster is. For the same reason you would not write on your platform that you support the Thanos snap.

Thanos fatal flaw was not including in the snap that everyone would forget the disappeared people ever existed. Then they would have nothing to fight for as far as they remembered.

[San Lumen]

Grinding government to a halt is not things working as they should. As I've said before why not write into their platform and campaign on elect us and the majority won't be able to get anything passed because the evil people in the Valley outnumber us?

If you don’t like it, why don’t you go run for office there yourself?

I have no desire to live in Oregon. This is for the people of the state to decide. They passed a referendum about it and now its up to a judge if its constitutional or not.

[Galloism]

If you don’t like it, why don’t you go run for office there yourself?

I have no desire to live in Oregon. This is for the people of the state to decide. They passed a referendum about it and now it’s up to a judge if its constitutional or not.

Well, if you don’t vote in Oregon and don’t run for election there, you would seem to have no right to complain.

[El Lazaro]

So you don't care about the erosion of democratic rights, you just want your team to be the one that does it.

Counterpoint:

(100% real quote)

[San Lumen]

I have no desire to live in Oregon. This is for the people of the state to decide. They passed a referendum about it and now it’s up to a judge if its constitutional or not.

Well, if you don’t vote in Oregon and don’t run for election there, you would seem to have no right to complain.

So can we no longer debate things here that occur in any state but our own?

[Khurkhogur]

I will give one thing to Khurkhouger however, and that was Romania, at least under the leadership of Ceaușescu was socially conservative.

And so was Poland, the USSR, Bulgaria, and Yugoslavia. Czechoslovakia and Hungary were both invaded at the first sign of adopting liberal, progressive ideals. And also you never addressed the imposed progress point, which is objectively a really strong point.

[El Lazaro]

Well, if you don’t vote in Oregon and don’t run for election there, you would seem to have no right to complain.

So can we no longer debate things here that occur in any state but our own?

Run for office if you want to do that

[Galloism]

Well, if you don’t vote in Oregon and don’t run for election there, you would seem to have no right to complain.

So can we no longer debate things here that occur in any state but our own?

Apparently.

Yes we absolutely should. If you don't vote you have no right to complain about the government or who gets elected. If you don't like whose running then run for office yourself.

[Pizza Friday Forever91]

I will give one thing to Khurkhouger however, and that was Romania, at least under the leadership of Ceaușescu was socially conservative.

And so was Poland, the USSR, Bulgaria, and Yugoslavia. Czechoslovakia and Hungary were both invaded at the first sign of adopting liberal, progressive ideals. And also you never addressed the imposed progress point, which is objectively a really strong point.

Did the supreme court impose progress on to the states that hadn't legalized homosexuality in 2003?

[San Lumen]

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watc ... th-disney/

DeSantis says ‘zero’ chance he will back down from dispute with Disney

[Galloism]

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4012712-desantis-says-zero-chance-he-will-back-down-from-dispute-with-disney/

DeSantis says ‘zero’ chance he will back down from dispute with Disney

I mean, that would require introspection.

[The Jamesian Republic]

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4012712-desantis-says-zero-chance-he-will-back-down-from-dispute-with-disney/

DeSantis says ‘zero’ chance he will back down from dispute with Disney

Daily reminder that this started with Disney disagreeing with him, and not Disney thanking the regional authorities in Xinjiang where an ongoing genocide against the Uyghur people is occurring.

[Khurkhogur]

And so was Poland, the USSR, Bulgaria, and Yugoslavia. Czechoslovakia and Hungary were both invaded at the first sign of adopting liberal, progressive ideals. And also you never addressed the imposed progress point, which is objectively a really strong point.

Did the supreme court impose progress on to the states that hadn't legalized homosexuality in 2003?

Sure. Those states are also backwaters and are in the absolute minority population-wise. Meanwhile, even in the Russian metropole gays are treated with distaste to this day.
And this isn't an argument about homosexuality, it's an argument about progress vs. conservatism in socialist and capitalist societies. Let's focus on the broader question.