Harris to end filibuster to support abortion

[task0778]

This right here is why I cannot support Kamala Harris. She wants to end the filibuster so the democrats can pass abortion rights with 51 votes. It's only for abortion she says, but any idiot knows that once you abolish the filibuster for a specific reason it ends up being permanent for everything. And once that happens, there will be no more compromise or cooperation in the Senate and bipartisanship goes right down the drain.

Harris backs ditching filibuster to pass nationwide abortion protections, angering Manchin in the process

Vice President Kamala Harris declared Tuesday that she supported changing Senate filibuster rules to allow a simple majority vote to codify the nationwide right for women to obtain an abortion.

www.yahoo.com

The democrats came close to doing just that back in 2021 when they tried to abolish the filibuster but Manchin and Sinema wouldn't go along. One of these days, they're going to get it done and that's when we start down the road to a one-party rule gov't. If you think gridlock is bad, wait until you get one-party rule.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

SCOTUS got it right, it's a state issue

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

It's a winning issue. The slippery slope argument alone might not cut it. And as quickly as the Senate can change the rules, it can change them back.

I don't think we have heard the last of this.

 

[shockedcanadian]

Many people may get an abortion free of charge, in the form of a nuclear missile if WWIII breaks out.

 

[jotathought]

Kamala: "My values haven't changed."

Today: Annihilate the filibuster
April 2017: Senate Letter to maintain the filibuster

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It's a winning issue. The slippery slope argument alone might not cut it. And as quickly as the Senate can change the rules, it can change them back.

I don't think we have heard the last of this.

There’s been 2.4MM abortions since the Dobbs decision

Remind me who was harmed

 

[SassyIrishLass]

There’s been 2.4MM abortions since the Dobbs decision

Remind me who was harmed

The most innocent of all

 

[jotathought]

It's a winning issue. The slippery slope argument alone might not cut it. And as quickly as the Senate can change the rules, it can change them back.

I don't think we have heard the last of this.

I hope they do filibuster it, and the Republicans take control of the Senate and fuck the Democrats with their decision.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Kamala: "My values haven't changed."

Today: Annihilate the filibuster
April 2017: Senate Letter to maintain the filibuster

Right. Her values didn't change. The lay of the land did. Now abortion must be federally protected, since it was deleted as a constitutionally protected right.

How can you not puzzle this out?

For "changing values", see Trump's flip flop on the Florida abortion law. He can do it seamlessly, in mere minutes.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I hope they do filibuster it, and the Republicans take control of the Senate and fuck the Democrats with their decision.

Well that's a difference between you and me.

I want the Senate to protect an important right for half the country.

You want to see someone fucked over, in the pettiest and most venomous way possible.

In fact, I think that about sums up one of the major contrasts in this entire election.

 

[jotathought]

Well that's a difference between you and me.

I want the Senate to protect an important right for half the country.

You want to see someone fucked over, in the pettiest and most venomous way possible.

In fact, I think that about sums up one of the major contrasts in this entire election.

It's already protected in many states.

 

[BackAgain]

She signed a letter by Senators not that long ago vowing to keep the filibuster to make sure that the Senate would remain the greatest deliberative body in the world. (Their own slightly overblown rhetoric.)

But now, once again, Kamalalala has confirmed her own disdain for consistency of principles.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

It's already protected in many states.

If 49 or less, than not many enough.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

There’s been 2.4MM abortions since the Dobbs decision

Remind me who was harmed

Only 2.4 millimeters? That's pretty small.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

There’s been 2.4MM abortions since the Dobbs decision

Remind me who was harmed

This is so painfully dumb.

It's a big country, Frank. Lots of people. Big numbers.

 

[Mashmont]

This right here is why I cannot support Kamala Harris. She wants to end the filibuster so the democrats can pass abortion rights with 51 votes. It's only for abortion she says, but any idiot knows that once you abolish the filibuster for a specific reason it ends up being permanent for everything. And once that happens, there will be no more compromise or cooperation in the Senate and bipartisanship goes right down the drain.

Harris backs ditching filibuster to pass nationwide abortion protections, angering Manchin in the process

Vice President Kamala Harris declared Tuesday that she supported changing Senate filibuster rules to allow a simple majority vote to codify the nationwide right for women to obtain an abortion.

www.yahoo.com

The democrats came close to doing just that back in 2021 when they tried to abolish the filibuster but Manchin and Sinema wouldn't go along. One of these days, they're going to get it done and that's when we start down the road to a one-party rule gov't. If you think gridlock is bad, wait until you get one-party rule.

This is where Trump could have really hammered her had he taken an unabashed pro-life stance. He could have legitimately said "The goal of the Democrats is to make abortion mandatory like they did in China for 70 years." He could have taken the high position and correctly have accused Harris for making killing children the centerpiece of her campaign.

He could have aggressively taken control of the issue AND converted hearts and minds as well.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Right. Her values didn't change. The lay of the land did. Now abortion must be federally protected, since it was deleted as a constitutionally protected right.

How can you not puzzle this out?

For "changing values", see Trump's flip flop on the Florida abortion law. He can do it seamlessly, in mere minutes.

Go right ahead and pass a Constitutional amendment, because anything else will not fly. SCOTUS already ruled and you cannot pass a law that will be declared unconstitutional the second it is tested in court.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

This is where Trump could have really hammered her had he taken an unabashed pro-life stance. He could have legitimately said "The goal of the Democrats is to make abortion mandatory like they did in China for 70 years." He could have taken the high position and correctly have accused Harris for making killing children the centerpiece of her campaign.

He could have aggressively taken control of the issue AND converted hearts and minds as well.

Oh boy, I hope he says all of those things.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Well that's a difference between you and me.

I want the Senate to protect an important right for half the country.

You want to see someone fucked over, in the pettiest and most venomous way possible.

In fact, I think that about sums up one of the major contrasts in this entire election.

Where is this right in the Constitution? Roe v. Wade was overturned because it does not exist. Feel free to add it via a new amendment if you can. Until then, the states have the right to restrict it.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Go right ahead and pass a Constitutional amendment, because anything else will not fly. SCOTUS already ruled and you cannot pass a law that will be declared unconstitutional the second it is tested in court.

The SCOTUS did not rule Congress could not take it up. The only standing against would be to argue it violates States' rights.

So it would have to be framed and passed within a construct that falls within federal regulation power, like commerce.