The goal was to make the filibuster harder, not eliminate it. Reid couldn’t even do that despite having the votes. Like I said, I think this is all a big con game so the dems can pretend to want to pass progressive agenda but pretend the filibuster is the reason they can’t.
It’s not in the interests of individual Senators to make it harder to extract favors.
And the “talking filibuster” is a fantasy. Like many fantasies it’s a heartwarming tale but it just doesn’t fit the real world. The only way the Senate could require it would be by abandoning the fiction that debate has any meaning and thus destroying the philosophical justification for the filibuster in the first place.
Yeah, I’m getting a little tired of the Democrats pursuing unilateral disarmament. An opportunity has been squandered.
Sadly the GOP of 2004 was more moderate than the GOP of 2013. George W Bush used to talk about things like tolerance for muslims or reaching out to hispanics, things that are considered liberal in todays GOP. Filibuster abuse didn’t start in earnest until 2007 anyway, so there was no real incentive back in 2004.
If the GOP wins in 2016 I’d give it a good chance they abolish/limit the filibuster.
If the GOP wins the Senate and the Presidency, they will abolish the fillibuster and add 5 Justices to the USSC. Anything to keep power.
Inflating the court won’t help them keep power-- That’d be too transparent, and would result in a hue and cry that couldn’t be ignored.
That’s sadly true, but at the same time if the GOP were to come back to power it’d have to be more moderate. In addition, the GOP leadership would at that point probably be looking ahead to the next time they’ll be in the minority and need a filibuster.
That would require a “perfect storm” of control in the House, Senate, and the Presidency along with retirements in the Supreme Court (ie highly unlikely).
They won’t have to stack the court. Ginsburg will retire before 2016, giving Obama the opportunity to maintain the SC status quo ongoing. Breyer probably should as well, but I don’t know if he will. Kennedy & Scalia will retire after 2016 if a Republican gets the presidency. If that plays out, status quo will be maintained, and it will be a conservative court for another few terms. If Breyer doesn’t retire before 2016 and we get 8 years of a Republican president, then the conservatives might even gain another seat.
Why would it require retirements? In my scenario, the GOP could add 40 Justices to the USSC roster. They would, of course, have to face the voters afterwards, but…
It’s never “jam today,” is it?
If FDR couldn’t do it despite having a virtual supermajority in both houses of Congress and a tidal wave of public anger at the “Nine Old Men”, nobody can do it.
“I told you so.” And removal of debt-ceiling obstruction should have been a must-have for any December deal.
I’m reluctant to abandon support for America’s right-wing party however. The alternative – turning the asylum over to the inmates – might be amusing if America were a third-rate banana republic, but seems unfunny for the world’s superpower.
Too bad about Occupy Wall Street. If America’s obituary is written in the near future, OWS may be seen as America’s final wasted chance, failing because America’s Middle was just too comfortable, playing on its iPhones, to care.
Harry Reid detonates the Nuclear Option:
And pundit heads all across Washington are spinning!
About time. How many times did Reid and McConnell make a deal to avoid filibuster reform only to see McConnell break the deal shortly thereafter. Lucy can only pull the ball away from Charlie Brown so many times before Charlie kicks her square in the ass. The scope was limited, it doesn’t fix Supreme Court nominees or legislation. But a baby step in the right direction.
Chris Christie is smiling right now.
So he’s not seeing any teachers today? 
Why? Do you think the American public is mad at Congress for doing too much?
Does he think pork barrel projects will come through how? Will he finally get that gravy pipeline built?
Or are we going to go through a phase where every event that happens anywhere in the world will be interpreted as good news for Christie?
No.
After Bush packed the courts with right-wing loonies, Obama tries to appoint centrist judges and is informed in so many words that no judges at all need be appointed until a Republican sits in the White House.
And it is the Democrats who are accused of “going nuclear.” :smack: :rolleyes: 
If present-day politics were a fictional story, publishers would turn it down as unbelievable.
My regret is that the Democrats didn’t kill the filibuster completely. With this precedent does anyone believe for a moment that the GOP will not “go nuclear” on any filibuster that displeases them when they’re back in control?