Was the Senate right in filibustering the background checks bill today?

[Fritz]

I just don't get it.

[badgate]

Hell to the no.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

My avatar change should give my answer away.

[pbrower2a]

Checks with large denominations will be cut today, payable to re-election funds. May they prove futile!

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

The rules of the debate was that every amendment required 60 votes to go forward. My opinion is that the Coburn amendment is the better approach than the Manchin-Toomey amendment, and would stand a much better chance to pass the House.  But if the Manchin-Toomey amendment passed then I expect few Democrats would vote to allow the Coburn amendment.  So I have to say I might have voted nay on cloture. 
This wasn't the only conceivable approach to better background checks, nor was it necessarily the last, best hope.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The part I don't get is that they got a few Republicans and DINO Manchin on board, and still 3 or 4 "Democrats" vote to filibuster.

[Pheurton Skeurto]

Absolutely not. It's shameful to think that those who voted no essentially spit in the face of every victim of gun violence that was present in the Senate that day.

[7,052,770]

The part I don't get is that they got a few Republicans and DINO Manchin on board, and still 3 or 4 "Democrats" vote to filibuster.

With 1 more Republican supporter, I think we could have twisted their arms and made it 60-40.

[Zarn]

Maybe if they took a serious approach, they would get a serious response.

Parading around victims families, stirring up emotions, and pushing for legislation that would have done zero to prevent another Newton is not the way to go about this.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Kind of interesting how there are a few Senators who are against background checks but for gay marriage.

[Хahar 🤔]

Kind of interesting how there are a few Senators who are against background checks but for gay marriage.

It's a great step forward that now even terrible people can be in favor of gay marriage.