US Senate: The Filibuster and the Tyranny of the Minority

I know that we can post links IN a thread without comment, but starting them with a link and no comment?

We can argue over whether this is good or bad (it’s bad). But the point is that the structure of the Senate already limits majority power: as Ian Millhiser pointed out in Vox earlier this year, Democratic senators currently represent around 42 million more people than Republican senators do. Yet Republicans currently have just as many votes in the Senate as Democrats do. Adding the filibuster (particularly a filibuster with a threshold as low as 41 votes) on top of that only amplifies the power they have.

This guy should stick to writing business opinions. He’s like a child explaining how a TV works.


Senate was designed to be not too democratic, that’s the point.

Tyranny of the minority.

Dont let BLM hear you say that.

we shouldn’t drink and post

This is a very poorly thought out argument. What if the Republicans have a 51-49 majority, in a scenario even more tilted against simple majority representation. Would the filibuster look like “tyranny of the minority” then? I don’t think so :roll_eyes: Would he be writing this article? I doubt it. Would we hear legions of Democrats railing against it? Ha ha, sure we would except they would be Republicans :slight_smile: If the Senate is undemocratic then the problem is the Senate and not the filibuster, whatever you might think about it.

1 Like

Suggest the book “Kill Switch” by Adam Jentleson on this very issue.

Have you read it?

An essential, revelatory investigation, Kill Switch ultimately makes clear that unless we immediately and drastically reform the Senate’s rules and practices―starting with reforming the filibuster―we face the prospect of permanent minority rule in America.

Seems a yawningly hyperbolic wish fulfillment book designed for progressive confirmation bias.

And I base that comment on the Amazon write up, which barely mentions Democrat use of the filibuster during Jim Crow…it’s just them nasty Republicans.

For much of its history, the filibuster was used primarily to prevent civil rights legislation from becoming law. But more recently, Republicans

Nice skirting of Democratic historic racism, with a lazy implication that Republicans were behind civil rights filibustering.

The way both parties are acting in recent years, im not sure a minority government is all that bad…


Oh no! How dare the Republicans make the Democrats live by the same rules that the Republicans had to work under when they had a bare majority in the Senate during Trump’s term!

Reminder that it was Harry Reid who ended the availability of the filibuster for judicial confirmations, and the Democrats who were then shrieking about how dare the Republicans not reimpose the filibuster on themselves.

Recommend this book
Democracy Betrayed: A History of the Democratic Party from Cotton Plantation to Urban Plantation: Dawson, Nelson L.: 9781628944259: Books

Contrary to its image as a heroic “party of the people,” the Democrats have simply evolved from a racist party sustaining slavery and oppressing African-Americans in the Jim Crow South to a party which has abandoned them in today’s inner-city ghettos to ongoing social and economic deprivation.

The book traces the history of the party from its origins in the political philosophy of Thomas Jefferson to the end of Reconstruction, revealing a record quite different from common belief.

That from the 1619 project? Lol

1 Like

uhm, know much?

It’s not like your opinion is appreciated by many and you know that.

That’s your opinion.