So nothing is lost. Collins gone doesn't bother me knowing that GA and MI are very much in play for the GOP to get back.

Get rid of the obstructionists and shoe that were done with their *****

If Thune can't get the caucus in lockstep like the Dems do whenever something NEEDS to happen, he has no business being Majority Leader and controlling the purse strings

Quote:

---

Collins is already a yes.

---

Nope.

She's against the version Trump wants and will only vote for the "watered down" version in situations it won't pass.

the one she voted for doesn't even include the mail-in ballots provision.

BMX Bandit said:

---

Quote:

---

Collins is already a yes.

---

Nope.

She's against the version Trump wants and will only vote for the "watered down" version in situations it won't pass.

---

If you're going to speculate Collins will only vote for that, it's fair to speculate Trump would sign it if it passes (without the trans stuff), imho. As we've seen with the whole Iran fiasco, Trump wants nothing more than to announce a 'deal' and a 'win.'

Gaeilge said:

---

So nothing is lost. Collins gone doesn't bother me knowing that GA and MI are very much in play for the GOP to get back.

Get rid of the obstructionists and shoe that were done with their *****

If Thune can't get the caucus in lockstep like the Dems do whenever something NEEDS to happen, he has no business being Majority Leader and controlling the purse strings

---

The bolded is going to be done where it can be.

But nuking the filibuster for nothing makes no sense right now. If we lose the House (or Senate, though less likely) this year, we have the nuked the filibuster and can't do anything with that advantage. If the Dems take over in 2028, we are screwed for sure.

nortex97 said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

Quote:

---

Collins is already a yes.

---

Nope.

She's against the version Trump wants and will only vote for the "watered down" version in situations it won't pass.

---

If you're going to speculate Collins will only vote for that, it's fair to speculate Trump would sign it if it passes (without the trans stuff), imho. As we've seen with the whole Iran fiasco, Trump wants nothing more than to announce a 'deal' and a 'win.'

---

Trump will 100% sign the SAVE Act without the trans bull**** if it were to pass the Senate. Why he (or whomever) decided to muddy the water and add that crap is beyond understanding.

Logos Stick said:

---

Gaeilge said:

---

So nothing is lost. Collins gone doesn't bother me knowing that GA and MI are very much in play for the GOP to get back.

Get rid of the obstructionists and shoe that were done with their *****

If Thune can't get the caucus in lockstep like the Dems do whenever something NEEDS to happen, he has no business being Majority Leader and controlling the purse strings

---

The bolded is going to be done where it can be.

But nuking the filibuster for nothing makes no sense right now. If we lose the House (or Senate, though less likely) this year, we have the nuked the filibuster and can't do anything with that advantage. If the Dems take over in 2028, we are screwed for sure.

---

The Republicans don't have to nuke the filibuster. They only have to enforce it instead of going along with the bull**** "gentleman's handshake" crap that the Senate has been using for who knows how long.

It's not "speculation." It's her documented record and statements.


Though I do agree Trump would likely sign the watered down version despite his saying he won't b

Logos Stick said:

---

In Thune's defense, if they don't have the votes, then he will have killed the filibuster and failed to get anything for doing so. Its not worth it.

---

Then get the votes! If Thune can't push an 80/20 issue over the line, then honestly, what good is he?

Logos Stick said:

---

Gaeilge said:

---

So what's to lose by actually having the balls to do it then? Make the snakes poke their heads up so we can deal with them come election time. Because this way sure as **** isn't working.

---

Because it will kill the filibuster which is exactly what the Dems want.

---

I wouldn't use the nuclear option for just anything. This is the hill to die on.

The problem is that in the current Senate, the nuclear option doesn't get you the 50 votes needed.


If that is the route the Republicans decide to go, they will have to wait until January

BTKAG97 said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Gaeilge said:

---

So nothing is lost. Collins gone doesn't bother me knowing that GA and MI are very much in play for the GOP to get back.

Get rid of the obstructionists and shoe that were done with their *****

If Thune can't get the caucus in lockstep like the Dems do whenever something NEEDS to happen, he has no business being Majority Leader and controlling the purse strings

---

The bolded is going to be done where it can be.

But nuking the filibuster for nothing makes no sense right now. If we lose the House (or Senate, though less likely) this year, we have the nuked the filibuster and can't do anything with that advantage. If the Dems take over in 2028, we are screwed for sure.

---

The Republicans don't have to nuke the filibuster. They only have to enforce it instead of going along with the bull**** "gentleman's handshake" crap that the Senate has been using for who knows how long.

---

Yes and that kills it. You can't speak forever.

The Dems will then do the same to stack the scotus, ban guns, raise taxes to insane levels, open the border, eliminate ice and BP, implement DEI, etc ..

BMX Bandit said:

---

The problem is that in the current Senate, the nuclear option doesn't get you the 50 votes needed.


If that is the route the Republicans decide to go, they will have to wait until January

---

Maybe not on its own. Has Thune put vulnerable Democrats on repeat votes? Make senators from purple or red-leaning states vote again and again against election-integrity language.

Has Thune tried breaking the bill into pieces? If the whole SAVE package cannot get 60, force Democrats to vote separately on citizenship verification, voter ID, state database cleanup, noncitizen voting penalties, and mail-ballot controls. Make them oppose the most popular pieces individually.

Has Thune tried attaching it to must-pass bills? Trump just tried to force the issue by tying SAVE to surveillance/national-security legislation, and Senate Republicans resisted because they feared blowing up the broader bill. That tells you the pressure point exists. That's a tool Thune can use.

What has Thune tried to get it passed?

Thune needs to go.

no "vulnerable" Democrat is going to care. They are happy to vote against it again and again.



Attaching it to a "Must pass" bill is the best shot, but even that's not going to work. Democrats are now against passing FISA because Trump wants it

Id love to see a new leader next term. New senate needs a new leader not from the McConnell family.


But this term there isn't much Thune or anyone can do.

Logos Stick said:

---

BTKAG97 said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Gaeilge said:

---

So nothing is lost. Collins gone doesn't bother me knowing that GA and MI are very much in play for the GOP to get back.

Get rid of the obstructionists and shoe that were done with their *****

If Thune can't get the caucus in lockstep like the Dems do whenever something NEEDS to happen, he has no business being Majority Leader and controlling the purse strings

---

The bolded is going to be done where it can be.

But nuking the filibuster for nothing makes no sense right now. If we lose the House (or Senate, though less likely) this year, we have the nuked the filibuster and can't do anything with that advantage. If the Dems take over in 2028, we are screwed for sure.

---

The Republicans don't have to nuke the filibuster. They only have to enforce it instead of going along with the bull**** "gentleman's handshake" crap that the Senate has been using for who knows how long.

---

Yes and that kills it.Y You can't speak forever.

The Dems will then do the same to stack the scotus, ban guns, raise taxes to insane levels, open the border, eliminate ice and BP, implement DEI, etc ..

---

You are playing semantics. Enforcing the filibuster does not kill the filibuster.

The filibuster isn't even the problem. The problem is how cloture is used. Why and how do you even have a cloture vote if you don't even have debate? Cloture should only be used to end debate and not be the deciding factor if a bill gets passed.

If Republican politicians worry about what the Democrats will do when they regain control, then maybe those Republicans should pass good legislation that benefits the American citizens instead of constantly *****ing about Trump. Why worry abolut it anyway? Democrats seemingly get what they want passed regardless of a cloture vote as is.

Also, it's strange that you never hear about the need for debate and a cloture vote in the house. A simple 51% majority vote is all that's needed over there. Why's that?

TexAgs91 said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

In Thune's defense, if they don't have the votes, then he will have killed the filibuster and failed to get anything for doing so. Its not worth it.

---

Then get the votes! If Thune can't push an 80/20 issue over the line, then honestly, what good is he?

---

Remember when they tossed out McCarthy and he was replaced by Johnson who did the exact same crap?

Is there anyone on the right who understands how Congress works? These people have their own agendas.

Yes it does. I'm not playing semantics. The filibuster is the issue.

Since you disagree, answer this:

When the Dems get control, if they want to pass a law increasing the size of scotus, and they enforce the talking filibuster, will the act be passed in the Senate?

BMX Bandit said:

---

Id love to see a new leader next term. New senate needs a new leader not from the McConnell family.

---

100%

Logos Stick said:

---

Yes it does. I'm not playing semantics. The filibuster is the issue.

---

Explain how the filibuster is the issue if the Senate doesn't even use it.

ADDED: The filibuster - BY DESIGN - has an end. It should not last into perpetuity just because someone says so.

I edited my post.. please answer and I will answer you.

Doesn't matter what the original design was, it's been redesigned.

Logos Stick said:

---

Yes it does. I'm not playing semantics. The filibuster is the issue.

Since you disagree, answer this:

When the Dems get control, if they want to pass a law increasing the size of scotus, and they enforce the talking filibuster, will the act be passed in the Senate?

---

If the Democrats want to pack SCOTUS, they will with or without the filibuster and a cloture vote.

But to answer your question directly, it's something we will have to live with and if we don't like it then we need to stop being lazy asses at the voting booth which allows for Democrat control. Better yet, repeal the 17th Amendment. Without the 17th, Republicans would have a cloture proof majority right now as we speak.

Regardless, it's a pointless debate if the Democrats do not control both the House and Exective Branch. In addition, the Republicans can turn around and unpack SCOTUS as soon as they regain control (Yeah, I know, I'm laughing at this crap comment too since Republicans haven't been able to repeal the worst piece of legislation in my lifetime [PPACA]).

Logos Stick said:

---

Doesn't matter what the original design was, it's been redesigned abused.

---

BTKAG97 said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Yes it does. I'm not playing semantics. The filibuster is the issue.

Since you disagree, answer this:

When the Dems get control, if they want to pass a law increasing the size of scotus, and they enforce the talking filibuster, will the act be passed in the Senate?

---

If the Democrats want to pack SCOTUS, they will with or without the filibuster and a cloture vote.

But to answer your question directly, it's something we will have to live with and if we don't like it then we need to stop being lazy asses at the voting booth which allows for Democrat control. Better yet, repeal the 17th Amendment. Without the 17th, Republicans would have a cloture proof majority right now as we speak.

Regardless, it's a pointless debate if the Democrats do not control both the House and Exective Branch. In addition, the Republicans can turn around and unpack SCOTUS as soon as they regain control (Yeah, I know, I'm laughing at this crap comment too since Republicans haven't been able to repeal the worst piece of legislation in my lifetime [PPACA]).

---

They won't just pack scotus. They'll pass a law allowing non citizens to vote. Biden let in 15 million illegals. The next Dem will double that. They will allow blue states to cast EC votes based on the popular vote if they choose. They will make ballot harvesting and unsolicited MIBs legal.

Tell me again how the Rs will take back control and roll it back.

Getting rid of the current implementation of the filibuster ensures permanent control by the Dems, unless you want blood to flow.

you think it'd be easier for him to assemble a Senate of loyalists

Maybe with they'll get some momentum going after Paxton dominates talolrico

Logos Stick said:

---

BTKAG97 said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Yes it does. I'm not playing semantics. The filibuster is the issue.

Since you disagree, answer this:

When the Dems get control, if they want to pass a law increasing the size of scotus, and they enforce the talking filibuster, will the act be passed in the Senate?

---

If the Democrats want to pack SCOTUS, they will with or without the filibuster and a cloture vote.

But to answer your question directly, it's something we will have to live with and if we don't like it then we need to stop being lazy asses at the voting booth which allows for Democrat control. Better yet, repeal the 17th Amendment. Without the 17th, Republicans would have a cloture proof majority right now as we speak.

Regardless, it's a pointless debate if the Democrats do not control both the House and Exective Branch. In addition, the Republicans can turn around and unpack SCOTUS as soon as they regain control (Yeah, I know, I'm laughing at this crap comment too since Republicans haven't been able to repeal the worst piece of legislation in my lifetime [PPACA]).

---

They won't just pack scotus. They'll pass a law allowing non citizens to vote. Biden let in 15 million illegals. The next Dem will double that. They will allow blue states to cast EC votes based on the popular vote if they choose. They will make ballot harvesting and unsolicited MIBs legal.

Tell me again how the Rs will take back control and roll it back.

Getting rid of the current implementation of the filibuster ensures permanent control by the Dems, unless you want blood to flow.

---

Divorce. Whether it will be peaceful or not is entirely up to the left.

BMX Bandit said:

---

SAVE America Act that Trump wants won't have 50 votes until after this election. Then we need two of these to happen

Barr wins in KY (close to a lock)

Whatley pulls the upset in NC

Collins has a change of heart after reelection in ME

---

Collins will.

Thune has to go. Full stop.

Logos Stick said:

---

As you know, Trump tied the SAVE act to FISA auth. This is what Trump posted last week:

Quote:

---

"I will not approve FISA without THE SAVE AMERICA ACT going along with it

---

Thune responded:

Quote:

---

"The president has his own mind, makes his own decisions," he said. "So do we."

---

Now this...

Quote:

---

He summoned House Speaker Mike Johnson to the White House to discuss personnel disputes and the lapsed FISA law, conspicuously leaving Thune out of the conversation. He has also been quietly polling Republican senators on their views of Thune's leadership, a clear signal that his patience with the majority leader is running thin.

---

Trump Is Furious With Senate GOP, Puts Thune In His Crosshairs https://t.co/wWoXiZ0doF

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) June 21, 2026

---

Trump's patience with Thune should've worn thin about a year ago.

Logos Stick said:

---

In Thune's defense, if they don't have the votes, then he will have killed the filibuster and failed to get anything for doing so. Its not worth it.

Perhaps Colins needs to be threatened since she's vulnerable this election. If we get her vote, then its a "possible" go.

---

Collins is a tough one because she can't run or govern like a true conservative or she'll never win. The alternatives are people like platner. She's the best we're ever going to get out of Maine. The good thing is she votes with Republicans the vast majority of the time so she's miles better than any dem. But in order for her to get to the senate chamber she has be be a very moderate Republican.

ts5641 said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

In Thune's defense, if they don't have the votes, then he will have killed the filibuster and failed to get anything for doing so. Its not worth it.

Perhaps Colins needs to be threatened since she's vulnerable this election. If we get her vote, then its a "possible" go.

---

Collins is a tough one because she can't run or govern like a true conservative or she'll never win. The alternatives are people like platner. She's the best we're ever going to get out of Maine. The good thing is she votes with Republicans the vast majority of the time so she's miles better than any dem. But in order for her to get to the senate chamber she has be be a very moderate Republican.

---

Even if we got a yes from her, Cornyn and/or Cassidy would likely torpedo it.

Quote:

---

Thune has refused to bring judicial and cabinet nominees to the floor for vote too.

---

judicial nominees have been slow to be sure, but what cabinet nominees aren't getting votes?

Logos Stick said:

---

ts5641 said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

In Thune's defense, if they don't have the votes, then he will have killed the filibuster and failed to get anything for doing so. Its not worth it.

Perhaps Colins needs to be threatened since she's vulnerable this election. If we get her vote, then its a "possible" go.

---

Collins is a tough one because she can't run or govern like a true conservative or she'll never win. The alternatives are people like platner. She's the best we're ever going to get out of Maine. The good thing is she votes with Republicans the vast majority of the time so she's miles better than any dem. But in order for her to get to the senate chamber she has be be a very moderate Republican.

---

Even if we got a yes from her, Cornyn and/or Cassidy would likely torpedo it.

---

Cornyn needs to set up his next job as a DC consultant. We will never see his face again in Texas.