Should Senate Dems Filibuster the Gay marriage Amendment

[Perky]

Poll question: Should Senate Dems Filibuster the Gay marriage Amendment

when Frist bring it up in a couple of weeks?



Edited for typo

[xchrom]

1. three no votes

[Perky]

17. kickety kick kick

[FloridaPat]

2. They shouldn't even bother to show up for the vote. After congress

approves an amendment I think it has to pass in 60% of the states. This country if falling apart and these idiots in DC are planning amendments because of Gay marriage? What is wrong with these people? Maybe we need an amendment that our congress people have to uphold the Constitution. Oh wait - I think they take a loyalty oath to do that.

[JNelson6563]

3. It depends

If it is certain it doesn't have the votes to pass, don't waste a filibuster. If it looks like it could pass, THEN filibuster.

Julie

[terrya]

4. Absolutely they should

The Democratic Party SHOULD be the opposition party. They should start acting like it. Beginning with this piece of shit. Filibuster it.

[Shrek]

5. Why bother?

Since an amendment requires a 2/3 majority to pass, it's easier to win the actual vote.

Defeating the amendment needs only 34 votes, but defeating a cloture motion takes 41.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

6. They won't need to.

The votes to pass it aren't there in the first place. This is just a silly stunt for the fundies back home.

[pstans]

7. Doesn't it need 2/3 of the Senate to pass?

That would be hard to get.

[mmonk]

8. Democrats don't filibuster,

they capitulate.

[Rowdyboy]

9. What on earth for? As has already been mentioned, it only takes 34 votes

to beat this monstrosity and it takes 41 for a filibuster. A filibuster would be downright stupid.

[bullimiami]

10. yup. this was an uniformed and pointless question.

[Rowdyboy]

13. A manufactured excuse to bash Democrats over a non-issue....

So what else is new. Now if it had enough votes to pass, there would be reason to consider a filibuster. However, there aren't so its not a real issue.

[oc2002]

11. No, this is a WEDGE ISSUE. for November.

Besides, the Dems do not have the balls to do anything, especialy any actual opposition, such as phillibuster.

[TechBear_Seattle]

12. The matter is a non-issue

This is a stunt, and it won't pass the Senate. To talk of filibuster now is a bit premature.

[Freddie Stubbs]

14. A filibuster is unnecessary

Constitutional amendments need a 2/3 vote to pass the Senate, which is a higher threshold than is needed to break a filibuster.

[WI_DEM]

15. they should, but they won't because it's too much of a red meat issue

in which too many Americans don't support. Look how all the anti-gay marriage amendments on the ballot in '04 galvanized the right and increased their turnout that is why they are resurrecting it now because they have nothing positive to run on, so they think that by using this bogeyman issue they can blunt the democrats. I don't think the Democrats in congress are going to allow that to happen, so they won't fight it too hard.

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

16. no. I'm pro-gay marriage, pro-gay rights, pro-equality for all...but

I think we can turn this into an election winner if we allow it out of congress and position it as a question that co-opts conservative states-rights advocates, so democratic candidates can say something along the lines of "The difference between me and my opponent is that he doesn't think we can decide for ourselves in this state what to do...on this issue or any other. But I think we can. The Constitution's worked very well for this country and I don't want to mess with it, and I don't want a federal law either to tell us how we have to run our state. Especially when we have a ton of problems to fix to get out of this mess he's helped get us into."

Make them defend government interference in our lives when we have pressing issues at stake. And make the states-righters think twice about what they might otherwise support.

[Dr Fate]

18. Only if they can do it without getting their powder wet. n/t

n/t