/warroom/ - War Room

[LURK FIRST AND READ BELOW]

BASIC PROCEDURES

Gather Everyone In the AM and HIT 'Them' With Everything You Got in the PM! [POST STORM - THE WAVE]

[1] MEME, MEME and MEME some MOAR! Stay Focused on Current #HOTTOPICS

[2] Pick 2-3 hashes from https://botsentinel.com and use them to help get your #HASH out.

[3] Post @ 10-11Am | 12-3Pm | 6-9Pm EST

[4] Always Try to Post Meme/Cap/Vid/Article (Not just plain text)

[5] Use .@them to respond to all their following.

[6] Remember to be Quirky in your posts and ask question instead of making statement.

[7] RT other's tweets and Report Bots (New account, no followers, lots of RT's)

WR Class https://web.archive.org/web/20260120163654/https://fullchan.net/?fe34aa64eb8a4a8f#GEfZTe3cQN6xdXjm77oE1mtEW9RWSAbuh6Z6h1yj1mQL

NAVIGATION

>>7967 [S.T.F.U.] Positions

>>7954 Dig -> Meme -> Pray

>>7951 Operations Page

>>7958 Hash Board

>>7962 CALL FOR MEMES

>>7963 CALL FOR DIG

TWITTER

>>7955 Twitter Social Marketing

>>7956 Twitter Optics

>>877 FAQ Page

TOOLS

MEME WARRIOR UI 1.3 #240904: https://archive.is/3Pe0E

MEME CANNON https://github.com/QCodeFagNet/MemeCannon/

Download Twitter Vid: https://www.downloadtwittervideo.com/

Twitter Ghost Check: https://shadowban.yuzurisa.com/

Twitter Analytics: https://analytics.twitter.com/user/tweets

Twitter Manager: https://tweetdeck.com

Twitter Trends: https://twitter.com/i/trends

Hash Check: https://www.hashtags.org/

>>8670 Game Theory

>>7976 Tools and Services Page

Select Notables Ammo https://8kun.top/qresearch/catalog.html

Meme Ammo https://web.archive.org/web/20260120164619/https://fullchan.net/?f02e9b5ccc4b224c#5w3xpJM8SpX7FbX3xQQTNp5AffbWSeyGCgDVqisdW1F1

TRUST THE PLAN

DONALD TRUMP >>7959

Q >>>/qresearch/18777053

Letters to Friends and Family >>7960

Other Known Boards >>7961

SHUTDOWN

404 ERROR Bunker >> https://endchan.net/qrbunker/catalog.html

505 ERROR Bunker >> https://dis.tinychan.net/read/lounge/1668433295

CURRENT OPS

>>7968 Fade to Black

>>7970 Election Fraud

Secure Vote https://archive.ph/U0TzX

RINOS https://archive.ph/kuWML

Democrats https://archive.ph/fIQBh

Repeal 230 https://postimg.cc/Js2w3ZNk

Epstein Link Dump https://archive.ph/IRPYv

Uniparty https://archive.ph/YoGxB

Soros Antifa https://archive.ph/JwBwG

ANTIFA https://archive.is/ExaXr

DOUGH

https://web.archive.org/web/20260120165000/https://fullchan.net/?6cfb4682cc188c54#8EZEe78Mp1DnDSD31seq2razQR8331oum2TQUmimhjs9

easy game theory: Black Americans and illegal alien frauding somalis are currently mad at each other, share the reasons of Black Americans

>>8658

>>8659

>>8660

Great games to add to SCOTUS wins and Tariff income.

NOTED AND SHARED ON ALL PLATFORMS FOR THE NORMIES AND MYSELF

ty anon

>>8662

https://x.com/i/grok/share/9f62920bfea74a518c72a690f78901e3

list of people who have died around the clintons

>>8664

>TERMINATE THE FILIBUSTER

yup

its such a unique move that the way is unknown cuz its never been done

also its not very interesting to Normies

if you ask them what does filibuster mean they prolly don't know

thus i think the best move is to make cool memes which will get Normies thinking/moving

even Anons aren't sure how to meme about the filibuster

i suppose first we learn about removing the filibuster, then we make it a cool move where even Normies want it to happen as shown by how they spread our memes and repeat our arguments (not out of blind loyalty but cuz they are strong arguments)

thank you Anons

>>8667

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/115923723486523883

Jan 19, 2026, 12:47 PM

>>8665

>even Anons aren't sure how to meme about the filibuster

right lol

still thinking on this one

pass the SAVE Act..

https://x.com/ScottPresler/status/2013590370035056682

>>8713, >>8669

Are your talking about this in more than one sense?

If so, isn't clarifying the problem an effective method?

>>8711

Ah, it looks like fun

>>8714

>filibuster

If talking about Congress, wouldn't that also include a legal perspective?

And won't changing the law just prolong the 'filibuster' because it can take time?

As for things that prolong time by not drawing a conclusion or avoiding the point at issue (such as delaying things that don't improve), isn't it proven that continuing to clarify the problem also includes not presenting improvements or ideas?

I also think it will be an opportunity for the public to recognize it

>>8716

I think that using such MEME is useful for raising awareness of superficial problems

What I'm talking about is focusing on more fundamental issues, and I'm talking about ideas for making things even better

I think it's more efficient to RT things like that on Twitter, etc., because you can RT them with a single button, but I think this space is very efficient when you want to focus on deeper issues, and I don't think people who can't speak up because of the opinions and viewpoints of those around them have no reason to remain silent here

>>8717

>fundamental issues,

The fundamental issue is BOTH sides of the gov are the problem.

Solution: Remove them all

but for now, try to get normies to understand the effect the filibuster is having on america may be a good path to show

mr dem senator used the filibuster to block such and such.

Article.cap.link.researched

show the people why the filibuster is hindering progress may work, and then to pull memes from that may the route. or im completely off?

thoughts?

forgive am still low to mid level here.

>>8718

I thought I had already presented the idea

I went so far as to say that by clarifying the problem, it is constructive and effective to connect not only to the superficial problem but also to the fundamental problem

I'm not sure what level you're talking about, but

The method of repeatedly using the exact same image and summarized information is already being used repeatedly by anon who have information about the Vati-can

In other words, are you telling them to increase the methods mentioned above?

If wanted to increase the numbers, advertising in the media would probably help

Although this anon doesn't have that kind of money

>Solution: Remove them all

^Is this about censorship or delete recording?

Or is it about physical removal?

Or is it just a statement that you want they gone?(remove?)

>>8719 ID changed

^ >>8717 (me)

Filibuster

>>8665

>first we learn about removing the filibuste

I agree and have researched it a bit

simple majority is needed

>>8714

>Are your talking about this in more than one sense?

I dont believe I am. I am speaking in the sense that the filibuster needs to be addressed as many are under the impression that To end a

Senate filibuster on most legislation, you need a "cloture" vote of 60 Senators to cut off debate

>>8714

> clarifying the problem an effective method?

The problem is the filibuster can also be removed entirely by the majority party using the "nuclear option" (a simple majority vote to change Senate rules)

Thus not removing the filibuster itself but redefining its removal standards

>>8714

>Ah, it looks like fun

thanks anon, a culmination of a few anons here. you may be one of them

>>8715

>If talking about Congress, wouldn't that also include a legal perspective?

yes if we were indeed trying to remove it from ever occurring again, but I have a feeling this is just for adjusting the filibuster Stance on what is the Majority

>And won't changing the law just prolong the 'filibuster' because it can take time?

see above

>>8717

>I think that using such MEME is useful for raising awareness of superficial problems

It may and hopefully other dig in to find the deeper issue. I think of it as a breadcrumb leading the researcher to a path of deeper knowledge

>>8717

>What I'm talking about is focusing on more fundamental issues, and I'm talking about ideas for making things even better

I am listening, and reviewing your post over and over

>>8718

>Solution: Remove them all

impeach.recall.censure

>>8719

>I thought I had already presented the idea

you have, but it takes a moment for processing for me as i like to review and review

The main issue i see is that people do not know that a simple majority is needed to stop a filibuster. I never knew till i researched it.

-again could be wrong here

>>8719

> it is constructive and effective to connect not only to the superficial problem but also to the fundamental problem

I would say that Potus gives us the superficial issues and our researches find the fundamental issues

superficial - this legistlation failed due to dem filibuster

fundamentally the dem is corrupt and no GOP senator has a backbone (Thus remove them all)

>>8719

>The method of repeatedly using the exact same image and summarized information is already being used repeatedly

repetition builds reputation

I will often revert back to the same "old" memes myself, or repost the same op over and over again. just as vatican does.

>>8719

>In other words, are you telling them to increase the methods mentioned above?

no, i do not share that. Every anon has there own will and mind, I just push the superficial mostly as researches on the main board are professionals in their research and will find the fundamental issues associated. if no anons pick up, then i begin the deeper research and share, share, share. then re meme

>>8719

>advertising in the media

the account would be shut down same day

>>8719

>Or is it just a statement that you want they gone?(remove?)

this

Again The fundamental issue i know of is that the people do not know that a simple majority will stop a filibuster, and thus they do not push their constituents to end it

I hope this layout is a better idea of what i am suggesting and the plan of attacks i work with

>meme superficial

>wait for diggers to find deeper insights

>share share share ^^^^

>create deeper fundamental memes

Superficial Meme >Nuke the filibuster

Fundamental Meme >Simple Majority to End a filibuster

Thoughts?

and thank you for the exercise anon

>>8721

Thank you for your detailed reply

Understanded that the filibuster you're talking is about Congress

In other words, is it correct to say that it's a matter of majority vote?

(So, gathering on a transparent platform may be one possible action to actually make people thinking in majority rule)

(I am concerned about the problems that may arise from grouping)

In that case, I think it's essential to approach public awareness

(Well, I think that's still happening now)

I think it's effective to go from explicit content to a fundamental approach

I think it would be effective if more people started to approach the issues from a superficial perspective to a more fundamental one

By explicit approach, I mean approaches such as MEMEs, which I think are visually effective as well

Of course, simply pushing repeated information can come across as propaganda, so I think it's important to take a more fundamental approach, one that allows for further clarification

That's why I think it's very important to connect to this platform (8kun/ch) (to raise awareness)

I also think that a movement to place even more importance on this platform is extremely necessary in order to improve the problems of clickbait and de-platforming, which hinder fundamental -understanding

This is one of the things that I thought about when I arrived at this point

>exercise

^Hmmm(don't really understand), I'm seriously having fun

>>8723 add

This is also intended to determine which ideas are most constructive/effective or important or necessary.

what are Q+ reasons for why he thinks we should remove the filibuster? (list them)

list the threats of removing filibuster

list the threats of NOT removing filibuster

thank you Anons

>>8723

>>8724

>>8725

Why does Donald trump want to end the filibuster?

1. To Resolve Government Shutdowns: Trump has argued that eliminating the filibuster would allow Republicans to pass funding bills with a simple majority, quickly ending shutdowns without needing Democratic votes.

2. To Pass Legislation Efficiently: Without the 60-vote threshold, Republicans could approve bills faster, bypassing Democratic obstruction and advancing Trump's agenda.

3. To Enact Voter Reforms: Trump ties ending the filibuster to passing "voter reform" measures like requiring voter ID, which he believes would strengthen elections.

4. To Prevent Future Democratic Blockades: He views the filibuster as a tool Democrats use to stall Republican priorities, and removing it would limit minority party leverage.

5. To Boost Republican Electoral Chances: By passing popular policies, Trump claims Republicans would become "impossible to beat" in midterms and future elections.

6. To Counter Supreme Court Reforms: In response to Democratic ideas like term limits or court expansion, Trump urges ending the filibuster to block such changes.

7. To Advance Economic Policies: Eliminating the filibuster would facilitate tax cuts, trade deals, and investments, which Trump sees as key to economic success.

8. To Reduce Senate Gridlock: Trump has long complained about the filibuster causing delays, arguing it hinders effective governing and national progress.

9. To Fulfill Campaign Promises: Removing the barrier would allow swift action on promises like health care reforms and infrastructure, fulfilling "Make America Great Again" goals.

10. To Strengthen Party Unity: Trump pressures Republicans to end the filibuster as a "Trump card," believing it unites the party and punishes those resisting his demands.

The fundamental issue with the filibuster in the U.S. Senate is that it has evolved into an anti-majoritarian tool that effectively requires a 60-vote supermajority to pass most legislation (via cloture to end debate), rather than the simple majority (51 votes) envisioned by the Constitution's framers for ordinary lawmaking. This creates a de facto veto power for a minority of 41 senators, often leading to gridlock, obstruction, and the blockage of bills—even those with broad public support or majority backing in the Senate.

https://x.com/i/grok/share/62de2161e1f64919aa99619f815a2774

>>8726

End the Filibuster Use the Simple Majority Rule

if the filibuster is removed what benefits will Americans see?

which upcoming bills are threatened by filibuster?

thank you Anons

>>8728, >>8729

>End the Filibuster Use the Simple Majority Rule

As continue to uncover the issues, the next step is to think about implementation to put an end?

How can move forward as safely as possible for people?

Well, I think safety is a matter of individual safety, so I think it's important to discuss it

I think doing so in a transparent and anonymous environment would be very constructive

However, if discussions are not progressing, I think a different approach may be necessary

Just question/opinion

>>8729

>>8730

>>8729

>if the filibuster is removed what benefits will Americans see?

Justice

>>8729

>which upcoming bills are threatened by filibuster?

best guess, all of them

>>8730

>implementation to put an end?

push a senator for simple majority change

>>8730

>How can move forward as safely as possible for people

did not realize adjusting filibuster was a safety hazard?

>>8730

>important to discuss it

of course

>>8730

>if discussions are not progressing >different approach may be necessary

Have the Dems adjust the filibuster now?

>>8732

>>if discussions are not progressing

ill aproach the liberals and complain the GOP uses the filibuster twice as much as the DEMS and we should end it, kek

>>8732, >>8733

>push a senator for simple majority change

What are you thinking of doing?

You didn't understand what safety I was talking about?

Talking about how to finish(filibuster) it safely(About the process by which people will take action to end this problem in the future)

>ill aproach the liberals and complain the GOP uses the filibuster twice as much as the DEMS and we should end it,

Does that mean knocking on someone's door to say something to them?

Or are you going to complain to the other person's account?(@)

What is kek?

Did you feel like you could sayed something witty?

>>8732

>>8730

>>How can move forward as safely as possible for people

>did not realize adjusting filibuster was a safety hazard?

Key Potential Hazards and Arguments Against the ChangeIncreased Policy Volatility and Instability

Legislation could pass with narrow majorities (potentially just 51 votes, including the vice president's tiebreaker). Laws would then be more easily repealed or dramatically altered when the majority flips in future Congresses. This creates a "pendulum" effect where major policies (e.g., healthcare, taxes, gun laws, climate regulations, or social programs) swing wildly between administrations, undermining long-term stability, predictability for businesses/economy, and public trust in government.

Loss of Minority Party Protections and Incentives for Compromise

The 60-vote threshold forces the majority to negotiate with at least some members of the minority party to build a broader coalition. Dropping to 51 votes removes this pressure, allowing the majority party to pass highly partisan legislation without input from the other side. This could lead to more extreme laws, reduced bipartisanship, and greater polarization.

Risk of "Tyranny of the Majority"

Critics argue the Senate was deliberately designed (unlike the House) to slow down action, protect smaller states, and prevent hasty majorities from steamrolling minorities or regions. A simple-majority threshold shifts the Senate closer to the House's model, potentially eroding the chamber's unique "cooling saucer" role (as described by George Washington) and making it easier for temporary majorities to enact sweeping changes with minimal consensus.

Long-Term Institutional Damage and Retaliation Cycles

Once the filibuster is lowered or eliminated for legislation via the nuclear option, future majorities could further weaken Senate rules or traditions. Historical precedents (e.g., 2013 and 2017 changes lowering cloture to 51 for most judicial/executive nominees) show that precedents build: what starts limited often expands. This could erode the Senate's deliberative nature over time.

Potential for Abuse During Unified Government

When one party controls the presidency, House, and Senate (trifecta), a 51-vote threshold enables rapid passage of controversial agendas without broad support. While proponents see this as enabling action on popular priorities, opponents warn it risks overreach, backlash, and backlash-driven reversals.

https://x.com/i/grok/share/36b5c984fe69415899c0fed7217e0986

This could be an issue.

>>8734

>>8732, >>8733

>>push a senator for simple majority change

>What are you thinking of doing?

Most easiest option would be to have the people "both parties" flood with calls demanding the end of the Majority Rule Filibuster and replace with the simple majority

but issues with that as well.

>>8735

>>8735

Key Potential Benefits

Changing the Senate filibuster's cloture threshold from 60 votes (supermajority) to 51 votes (simple majority) for most legislation is a highly debated reform, often supported by those frustrated with congressional gridlock. Proponents, including many Democrats and reform advocates, argue it would make the Senate more effective and democratic. Here are the top 5 commonly cited benefits, drawn from policy analyses and political arguments:

Reduces Gridlock and Enables Action on Priority Legislation

The current 60-vote requirement often leads to total obstruction, preventing even popular or urgently needed bills from advancing. Lowering to 51 votes would allow the majority party to pass its agenda more efficiently, breaking chronic stalemates on issues like infrastructure, climate change, healthcare, or voting rights.

Restores True Majority Rule and Democratic Responsiveness

In a democracy, the party that wins elections should be able to govern and implement its platform. The filibuster effectively gives a minority of 41 senators veto power, overriding the will of the electoral majority. A simple majority threshold aligns the Senate more closely with majoritarian principles, making government more accountable to voters.

Allows Passage of Popular Policies Blocked by Minority Obstruction

Many broadly supported reforms (e.g., background checks for guns, paid family leave, or immigration fixes) have majority backing in Congress and among the public but fail due to filibusters. Reform would clear the path for these measures, enabling Congress to address pressing national problems without needing near-unanimous consensus.

Increases Legislative Productivity and Efficiency

The modern filibuster (often "silent" without actual debate) has dramatically slowed the Senate's output compared to historical norms. Shifting to 51 votes would streamline the process, allowing more bills to reach votes and potentially leading to a more active, responsive legislative branch.

Counters Minority Overreach and Promotes Accountability

The filibuster has been used increasingly for partisan blockage rather than deliberation, tilting power toward the minority party (whichever it is). Eliminating or lowering the threshold prevents a small group from indefinitely stalling the elected majority's agenda, encouraging parties to campaign on achievable goals and face consequences at the ballot box.

>>8734

>What is kek?

a sound, a laugh, a snort of sort if you will

and yes. yes, pushing the dems to change cloture at the same time pushing gop is pretty witty. kek

>fetterman

>>8736

>Most easiest option would be to have the people "both parties" flood with calls demanding the end of the Majority Rule Filibuster and replace with the simple majority

If that's how change happens, it's very easy and simple, and I think having lots of people send in lots of documents is a safer way to go than having people gather somewhere in person

So, going back to the topic, in order for this to turn into actual action, it is important to recognize the problem

It is also important to clarify the actual damage

From another perspective, I also think that using threats or unclear explanations (i.e., the same kind of control as 'they') to advance these processes can lead to the creation of new problems

For example, I think that such actions can also slow the progress of justice and the improvement of problems

Well, if think it doesn't matter what do as long as the results are good from the start, then there's no need to think of safe ideas and methods from the start

>>8738

Ah, I don't really understand

When I watch a comedy show and everyone is having fun and laughing, there are times when I don't really understand it

It feels like that

Well, what I would like to say in the end is that when deciding on the best idea, it is very important to present the validity and validity of both positive and negative ideas

This is because I think it will also help prove that the choice is the true choice

Therefore, I think it is important for those who present ideas or those who present their denials to present clear explanations

(How far can go to prove that the choices made were not under mind control or brainwashing?)

>>8741 Seems to be a compromise solution "Talking Filibuster"

The most frequently proposed compromise reform is restoring the "talking filibuster" (requiring senators to actively hold the floor and speak to sustain a filibuster). Here's how it could work and why it's seen as a middle-ground solution:

>Key Changes Proposed:

Eliminate the "silent" or "drive-by" filibuster: A filibuster would only continue if senators are physically debating on the floor (as in classic movies like Mr. Smith Goes to Washington).

Shift the burden: Instead of the majority needing 60 votes to invoke cloture (end debate), the minority would need to muster 41 votes to sustain the filibuster and keep talking.

Once speakers yield the floor (e.g., from exhaustion or lack of participation), debate ends, and the bill proceeds to a simple-majority vote.

>Why This Could Reduce Overuse:

It raises the political and physical cost of filibustering: Senators would face public scrutiny, media coverage, and fatigue for blocking popular or routine bills, deterring frivolous use.

Routine or partisan obstruction would become rarer, reducing gridlock on non-controversial matters.

>Why It Preserves Minority Rights (Appealing to Defenders):

The filibuster remains intact for truly high-stakes issues where a minority is willing to "go to the mat" with sustained debate.

It maintains the Senate's deliberative tradition without dropping to pure 51-vote majority rule.

>Bipartisan Appeal:

Supported by figures like President Biden (in 2021 interviews), Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR, who circulated detailed proposals), and some moderates.

Defenders of the filibuster (e.g., Sens. Manchin and Sinema in past cycles) have expressed openness to this over full elimination.

It's viewed as a "reform, not abolish" approach, with historical precedent before the 1970s rules changes made silent filibusters easy.

https://x.com/i/grok/share/b488a5458db5434bb2ca6f62c26d5dbc

>>8739

>>8741

>(How far can go to prove that the choices made were not under mind control or brainwashing?)

Twit is a good example

To what extent are the numbers accurately reflected?

It is true that the brainwashing situation may be accurately reflected in the numbers

>>8742

I thought it was efficient to clarify current issues and make people aware of them by explaining things clearly, but do you think otherwise?

Or did the AI ​​say so?

>>8744

I think that people's awareness and understanding would help things get done right and quickly

In other words, I think that the movement to promote 'Awakening' will lead to the resolution and improvement of the problems are currently talking about, and the possibility of creating even better things

>>8744

>but do you think otherwise

yes, again it seems more of an abuse and it may be an easier step to change to "talking filibuster" as a middle ground for both parties to get behind.

>point our how each never get anything done because of the filibuster

>point out the overusage

>point out the benefits and downfalls

but yes, seems a great middle ground imo atm.

will reviw more in the am

also how many are under mind control with their actions? lots.

>>8742

>Supported by figures like President Biden (in 2021 interviews),

>>8747

Biden Says the Filibuster Is Being Abused ‘in a Gigantic Way'

SOLUTION

>>8746

Of course, unnecessary long conversations without trying to improve things are out of the question

However, even that proves something else, and in fact, isn't this one proof that Filibuster is a problem?

>>8748, >>8747

Sorry, but could you please tell me in more detail what you would like to convey?

>>8744, >>8749

Also, once the problem becomes clear, I think it is effective to meme (in other words, provide counter ideas) their ideas that are not constructive/effective or that clearly lead to actual harm

(Well, I think this can be defined as an ongoing event)

(Therefore, I think that by further deepening our fundamental understanding, will further expand our awareness of abnormal problems)

If the answer presented by pursuing the problem is a good one, can approve it; if not, presenting an even better idea will create an opportunity to make things even better, and similarly, presenting another idea consisting of negation will reveal further issues/problems

I hope things get better quickly

>>8750

this video needs to be pushed to democrats along with trumps call to the gop for filibuster reform

seems the middle ground is a "Talking Filibuster", which will reduce the abuse of its use.

again imo the filibuster has been weaponized

>>8751

>I hope things get better quickly

*soon

>>8752

Thanks for your reply

If use something to fight, it becomes a weapon

>>8751 (me)

>February 7, 2018

https://theweek.com/speedreads/753805/nancy-pelosi-filibustering-house-floor-over-fate-dreamers-immigration-bill

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Wednesday launched a filibuster on the House floor over the young undocumented immigrants known as DREAMers. At 10:04 a.m. ET, Pelosi began to recount the stories of various DREAMers, who were brought to the U.S. illegally by their parents and are protected by the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.

"Why are we here, if not to protect the patriotic young people who are determined to contribute and to strengthen America?" Pelosi asked. During her speech, she demanded that House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) allow a vote on a bill that would protect the DREAMers; she had announced earlier Wednesday that she would not support a Republican-authored spending bill unless it included a path to citizenship.

The Washington Post's Paul Kane noted that Pelosi is one of only three House leaders — the speaker, the majority leader, and the minority leader — who have the right to speak for an unlimited amount of time. HuffPost's Matt Fuller observed that Pelosi asked for water an hour into her speech and predicted: "We could be here awhile."

CHUCK SCHUMER IS GOING TO USE THE FILIBUSTER TO DEFUND THE DHS

Gotta get the nation on changing the rules of the filibuster back to the original "Talking Filibuster"

Need patriots pushing this

THEY KEEP USING THE FILIBUSTER TO STOP LEGISLATION. PAYING ATTENTION YET?

CHANGE BACK TO THE "TALKING FILIBUSTER"

>Biden reporting filibuster abuse and weaponization

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m85RDDQzuLo

here is too much abuse now, the high cost filibuster of later was the route intended to avoid abuse and overuse. would you agree?

Yes, I largely agree with your assessment: the high-cost, talking filibuster of the earlier era served as a natural deterrent to routine abuse and overuse in a way that the modern silent/virtual filibuster does not, and many scholars, reformers, and even some senators have argued that restoring elements of the high-cost version would better align with the Senate's original deliberative intent while curbing procedural gridlock.

https://x.com/i/grok/share/134c0332125c44e29756478bb82e3558

WEAPONIZED DIGITAL SOLDIERS

MEMES AT THE READY!!!

Call for filibuster memes to revert back from "Silent Filibusters" to "Talking Filibusters"

IMO the filibuster has been weaponized.

>>>/qresearch/24171241 SCHUMER IS GOING TO USE THE FILIBUSTER TO DEFUND THE DHS?

>>>/qresearch/24171309 "The Filibuster Is Being Abused" -Biden

>>>/qresearch/24171314 Back when Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Wednesday launched a filibuster

>>>/qresearch/24171335 There is too much abuse now,

>>>/qresearch/24171399 WHY NOTHING GETS DONE IN CONGRESS