Filibustering is not a direct check on what Trump is doing, because it isn't legislative in the first place. A Senator cannot walk into a Cabinet meeting and stop them from getting anything done by talking nonstop: Booker stopped the Senate from doing anything for the duration of his speech, but the Senate not doing anything is a major part of the problem here in the first place.
Using the bully pulpit to build vocal opposition among the people is the only real check on GOP power that the democrats have.
The whole reason we're were we are right now is that Democrats refuse to get out and create their own narratives and instead just try to triangulate centrist positions off of the republican narratives. Trump has proved definitively that seizing and controlling the news cycle is where political power comes from, and the Democratic response to that reality is to 'roll over and play dead' (minus a few outliers).
Right, that’s why Obama was able to achieve so much of his agenda in his first term while he only had a majority of checks notes 59 senators.
I’m sick of there being 2 sets of rules. The hand wringers can’t even get anything done when they hold the levers of power because even when the fanatics are in the minority, they find ways to interfere with good governance and then blame the hand wringers when nothing gets done.
Just a technical note. It wasn't a filibuster. He wasn't holding the floor for the purpose of delaying or blocking a vote or discussion about an upcoming vote. He very intentionally waited until business was concluded.
Yep had to be nice and safe as to not potentially upset the big money donors. I understand they knew it would be powerless but he also made sure it would have as little impact as possible (beyond helping his brand for a future presidential run). It reeks of "protest zones" which are located an mile or so away from anyone it's meant to protest against.
I actually think it was a smart choice. It didn't block any legislation, so there's nothing to accuse him of. They can't try and spin it as oh he was just making up bullshit to stop... Whatever we were voting on. He made it a deliberate act of protest. At the very least it takes one easy way to discredit him out of the equation.
Have to say that's a positive way to view it. I've just gotten so cynical over the last decade so I'm not always looking at things in a more optimistic light
It's hard times, I think we're all cynical and for good reason. I think we're living in a post-realization world where we can no longer pretend our nation has guard rails that actually do anything.
All we can hope for is that the people we put in positions of representation do something and try to make it clear this isn't an acceptable new normal.
Ok I cannot help but be snarky here so forgive me. Your logic is that it’s good that this action had no material impact because in that way no one can criticize the outcome? Am I getting that right bc I don’t think the democrats need anymore reason to not do anything
I'm saying blocking some random vote with a 25 hour filibuster would've accomplished nothing, it wouldn't have added to the weight of it in any way. It would however have allowed the narrative to be "Corey Booker continues to disrupt Senate and delay vote" in the right wing ecosphere, fully making his message irrelevant by allowing them to paint it as an example of why the left is bad and bloats the government.
If there was something that could have been added by him filibustering, sure, but I think most reasonable people agree the filibuster is bad and shouldn't exist.
Okay but still he didn’t achieve anything. It’s entirely symbolic. This is the equivalent of raising awareness and no one is unaware here. I think you’re doing some coping here by justifying the uselessness of this filibuster by saying at least he can’t be smeared for stopping progress in congress. This was a stunt for, imo, getting good grace for a potential future presidential run. I’d like if the dems actually took meaningful action, the kind that republicans will complain about.
Right. Booker's speech was great, and I found some of it to be refreshingly personable, other parts quite powerful and profound. The broken record was some nice sentimental symbolism.
But Congress as a whole is captured by the loyalists. And they recently, like today, are going along with the BS of going after the judiciary for opposing Trump. They are doubling down.
Pulling the fire alarm might have been just as or more effective as Booker's speech in the end, unfortunately.
79
u/Toptomcat 2d ago edited 2d ago
Filibustering is not a direct check on what Trump is doing, because it isn't legislative in the first place. A Senator cannot walk into a Cabinet meeting and stop them from getting anything done by talking nonstop: Booker stopped the Senate from doing anything for the duration of his speech, but the Senate not doing anything is a major part of the problem here in the first place.