re: #152 Targetpractice

No offense, but all of this is wishful thinking unless the leadership is committed to abolishing the filibuster. So long as the filibuster remains in its current form, even a 54-46 Dem majority would still need 6 Repubs to regularly buck their party’s leadership in order to get anything done. That means watering down legislation, it means scaling back progressive proposals, and it definitely means no bills that would endanger what power Repubs have managed to steal since 2011. And already we’ve got Feinstein and Kaine on record as pouring cold water on the idea of putting the kibosh on the filibuster.

And yet Mitch doesn’t have 60 votes, either, and doesn’t have 6 or 7 Democrats backing him on much of anything substantial. Hasn’t seemed to limit his ability to get things done (to the extent that the conflict with a D House has served as a leash on bad legislation, too.)

If he can do it with 53, so can Chuck.

Which is not to say that filibuster reform wouldn’t be a good thing - it would. Just that I think we’ll get the legislation we want and need in spite of it. It might take a little longer.

I wonder, too, how long some of the older Republicans are even going to want to stick around if they realize they’re stuck in a near-permanent minority? If McConnell can’t get judges and Elaine Chao isn’t in the Cabinet anymore to run her grift… where’s the power base for him now?