Posted on 11/04/2025 7:12:46 AM PST by Navy Patriot
President Donald Trump on Tuesday issued a blistering call for Republicans to eliminate the Senate filibuster, warning that failure to act would hand control of Congress and the White House to Democrats in the 2026 midterm elections.
The post, shared on his platform Truth Social, spelled out a sweeping agenda, from secured borders and tax cuts to Second Amendment protections, and placed the burden squarely on Senate Republicans to execute it.
"The Democrats are far more likely to win the Midterms, and the next Presidential Election, if we don't do the Termination of the Filibuster (The Nuclear Option!)," Trump wrote on Election Day morning. "For three years, NOTHING WILL BE PASSED, and Republicans WILL BE BLAMED."
Among his promised policy goals: "FAIR, FREE and SAFE Elections, No Men in Women's Sports ... Strong Borders, Major Tax and Energy Cuts, and ... secure our Second Amendment."
Trump framed the filibuster as a procedural barrier that empowers "crazed Democrat lunatics" to block GOP-led legislation and argued that without its removal, Republicans would face defeat.
He warned of far-reaching consequences: a packed Supreme Court, added states (D.C. and Puerto Rico), four additional Democrat senators, and eight more electoral votes.
In an earlier message via the National Republican Congressional Committee, Trump formally outlined an expanding war chest and a mobilized campaign infrastructure for 2026, but the planned surge of federal policy achievements still depends on clearing the legislative gridlock.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
I doubt they could get 51 votes for a Rules change like that
The problem with that is that Trump won’t be President forever, and Republicans might not retain control forever, either, although I try not to think about that.. The filibuster can be used by both sides.
So you trust that future Dems will be fair-square to the GOP???
It is true that "Republicans" routinely screw their constituents and voters for the "privilege" of getting on their knees and sucking DemocRat d...
Then eliminate DemoRats along with the filibuster.
“The problem with that is that Trump won’t be President forever, and Republicans might not retain control forever, either, although I try not to think about that.. The filibuster can be used by both sides.”
End the filibuster.
Pay the troops and air traffic controllers.
Trim back welfare programs.
Cede most of the lower-income Democratic areas of California and the southern tip of Texas back to Mexico.
Map A: Republican redistricting map
Map B: map of Mexico & the United States in the second half of 2026 if Map A is not adopted
If I understand the law correctly, if 51 Republicans show up physically in the Senate and introduce the continuing resolution,the Democrats must filibuster in person to stop the vote. If the filibuster falters then the bill can pass with 51 GOP votes.
So end it, pass Trump’s MAGA agenda, then put it back.
What would Democrats do?
Excise the communist cancer before it kills.
I wish we could remove the 17th Amendment as it would drastically improve the United States of America.
Sorry, I only reference Grokipedia.
WIKI
Senate Democrats accused the Republican majority under Majority Leader John Thune of exercising the nuclear option three times in 2025:
to allow consideration of joint resolutions of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act,
to allow the use of a current policy budget baseline for scoring of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, and
to allow the consideration in executive session of a resolution allowing the Majority Leader to move to proceed to the en bloc consideration of multiple nominations.
While President, Donald Trump spoke out against the 60-vote requirement for legislation on several occasions. Then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell opposed abolishing the filibuster despite Trump’s demands, and in April 2017, 61 senators (32 Republicans, 28 Democrats, and one independent) signed a letter stating their opposition to abolishing the filibuster for legislation. On January 21, 2018, Trump said on Twitter that if the shutdown stalemate continued, Republicans should consider the “nuclear option” in the Senate. He repeated the call on December 21, 2018, with a fresh shutdown looming.
Concerns about abolishing the filibuster through the nuclear option were reiterated in 2021 as the Democratic-majority Senate could attempt to eliminate the filibuster through the nuclear option. On January 3, 2022, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announced that the Senate would vote on using the nuclear option to reform the filibuster in order to pass his party’s election reform legislation. On January 19, 2022, Schumer made a point of order that would have allowed a ‘talking filibuster’ on a voting rights bill without any other dilatory measures. The Senate voted 52–48 to sustain the decision of the chair overruling the point of order. Senators Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema voted with all Republicans in favor of sustaining the decision of the chair.
In September 2024, then Vice President and presidential candidate Kamala Harris called for ending the filibuster to enact abortion legislation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_option
Hate so hard their heads would explode.
Sorry, I only read Grokipedia.
Grokipedia
The nuclear option is invoked through a procedural sequence that exploits the Senate’s reliance on precedents rather than formal rule amendments, which require a two-thirds majority under Senate Rule XXII. A senator, typically the majority leader, initiates the process by raising a point of order during consideration of a matter—such as a nomination—asserting that the supermajority requirement (e.g., 60 votes for cloture) does not apply and that a simple majority (51 votes, or 50 with the vice president’s tiebreaker) is sufficient to proceed or confirm. This point of order directly challenges established precedents interpreting Senate rules, such as Rule XXII’s cloture provisions or precedents mandating extended post-cloture debate time.
The presiding officer—usually the vice president or president pro tempore—rules on the point of order, almost invariably sustaining the existing precedent and rejecting the challenge, often after consultation with the Senate parliamentarian. The ruling upholds the supermajority threshold, preserving the status quo unless appealed. This step adheres to Senate custom, where the chair defers to accumulated precedents to maintain procedural stability.
The senator then appeals the ruling of the chair, a motion that, under Senate precedents, is typically non-debatable and resolved by a simple majority vote. If the appeal succeeds—requiring only 51 votes—the Senate overrules the presiding officer, thereby establishing a new binding precedent that overrides the prior supermajority norm for the targeted procedure. This precedent applies prospectively without altering the written rules, circumventing the higher threshold for formal changes and enabling majority control over the disputed matter, such as limiting debate or confirming nominees.
https://grokipedia.com/page/Nuclear_option
Where are you from?
New York
California
Massachusetts
Americans vote with their feet too.
not a good idea.
dems would pack supreme court and make DC a state!
voters just have to vote out stupid dems.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.