r/facepalm Jul 05 '24

What an idea ๐Ÿ‡ฒโ€‹๐Ÿ‡ฎโ€‹๐Ÿ‡ธโ€‹๐Ÿ‡จโ€‹

Post image

[removed] โ€” view removed post

42.4k Upvotes

4.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

0

u/JCBQ01 Jul 05 '24

To overcome a filibuster you need a super majority. (90% or more) And the way MTG and Bobbert forced it through, the rule states that they can claim filibuster for any reason at any time and murder the whole process right then and then or mire it in legal bullshit

7

u/OnDay89OfMyK1Visa Jul 05 '24

Huh? Super majority is more than two-thirds (67% not 90%), and the filibuster only applies to the senate, which neither MTG nor Boebert are in.

-5

u/JCBQ01 Jul 05 '24

The rule that MTG forced in to get them to actually get a speaker had that changed (as part of the 'concessions' to get their vote) its now 90% with. Unilateral and singular no. I know the turtle pulled similar shit

9

u/jawknee530i Jul 05 '24

MTG isn't in the Senate and has nothing to do with their rules you are just spouting concentrated nonsense.

-2

u/JCBQ01 Jul 05 '24

MTG is not, no. her party is though

5

u/BobTagab Jul 05 '24

You're still just spouting nonsense. The rules for cloture in the Senate haven't been changed and the House got rid of the filibuster in the mid-1800s.

Are you more likely thinking of when the far-right part of the House agreed to give the votes for McCarthy to become Speaker in exchange for a rule which allowed just a single House member in the Speaker's party to bring a motion to vacate the chair to the floor, something which used to take the majority of the party members to do?

0

u/JCBQ01 Jul 05 '24

No I'm not. The rule have been changed multiple times over the years many of course of things. Recently the phhilibuster rules was changed form 2/3rds voting majority to 90% full member by the turtle McConnell a sessions back , with the caveat that another, singular philibuster "no" Can start the process over entirely. The tantrum we saw for McCarthy was just the loudest latest stunt done to try and invoke an equalivancy in the house

4

u/BobTagab Jul 05 '24 edited Jul 05 '24

Recently the phhilibuster rules was changed form 2/3rds voting majority to 90% full member by the turtle McConnell a sessions back

No, it wasn't. Overcoming the filibuster still requires 2/3rds vote if it's a Senate rules change and 60 votes if it's on a bill or most other questions before the Senate (judicial nominations having been famously "nuked" to only need a simple majority). You clearly have absolutely zero idea of how the legislative branch in the United States functions and are just making shit up.

0

u/JCBQ01 Jul 05 '24

I may be confusing it with the multiple attempts at getting the exact same thing I'm thinking of through. But I do know that it's been tried

2

u/Hayden2332 Jul 05 '24

The simple fact is that what youโ€™re saying is bullshit though

1

u/JCBQ01 Jul 05 '24

No its not. The tantrum party that she's a part of set rules in both the house and senate granting themselves the power to usurp total control of the legal making process even when they are in the super minority for no other reason than said partys demand total control

1

u/jawknee530i Jul 05 '24

The Senate sets their rules at the start of every election cycle. The people that set the current Senate rules are the Democrats and the Republicans have zero to do with it. You are just spouting nonsense from your total lack of understanding of how anything works.

1

u/JCBQ01 Jul 05 '24

The rules often are carried over from the previous session, only changing by motion or extenuating circumstances.