I admit to being somewhat confused here. It’s my understanding that all Bunning did was refuse to let the issue go without a vote, and the leadership could have brought the issue up as a bill to be voted on at any time, with or without his support, if they wanted. This is what they eventually did and it passed, by a large margin.
What I don’t understand is, just what he did that would be called a “cave in”.
I would appreciate someone with better knowledge of the whole thing filling me in here, mine is a simple mind and easily confused.
You have it right. Bunning did not “cave” and what he was doing was not a filibuster.