It won’t be eliminated. It is too useful for both parties. Much ado about nothing.

Nope ^^^^^ both sides need and use it.

I really doubt it will be eliminated.

I think the elimination of the filibuster isn’t the big deal here. The article is about the results ahead due to the elimination of both liberal and even moderate Republicans from their party, along with that party’s disastrous excursion toward nut ball extremism. They presently classify moderate and even conservative Democrats as radical liberals. The point is that the Republicans could get away with this tactic when the issues are disguised as peripheral to the big one—minority gridlock on the will of the majority—such things as race, immigration or abortion. But when it comes to such issues as economic relief, there are assuredly as many desperate Republican voters who will pay attention to just WHICH class in this society receives the lion’s share of economic relief and stimulus. The crisis now is actually over the increasingly difficult task facing our legislators in disguising their primary function of catering to the preferences of the corporate rich.

@JLeslie I think it will one eliminated.Because the Democrats cannot accomplish any part of their ambitious agenda with the filibuster in place.

@elbanditoroso I think it will be eliminated. Because the Democrats can do nothing with it in place.

This is not the first time the elimination of the filibuster has been discussed.

As early as 1841, when the Democratic minority hoped to block a bank bill promoted by Kentucky senator Henry Clay , he threatened to change Senate rules to allow the majority to close debate. Missouri senator Thomas Hart Benton rebuked Clay for trying to stifle the Senate’s right to unlimited debate.

If you think it’s bad now, think about what it would have been like before 1917, when “cloture” was introduced.

No I don’t think they’ll eliminate the filibuster any time soon.

@Strauss I hope you are right. But, realizing that the filibuster may stifle the progressives, I think it will soon be a goner.

If the filibuster is to be the primary weapon for gridlock in the age of recalcitrant partisanship, perhaps we will be better off without it. Even incompetent decisions on vital issues would be preferable to the do nothing mode defining the current political divisions. At least the goof ups can be corrected and those responsible pay at the polls. Isn’t that the way it’s supposed to work in the first place?