Over the past couple of weeks, Senate Republicans have come up with this plan to bring back the talking filibuster, all in an effort to pass the SAVE America Act. On paper, it is clever. Force Democrats to physically hold the floor to block voter ID legislation that polls as an 80-20 issue. Make them read the phone book. Make them look unserious. Put Jon Ossoff and other swing-state Democrats on the record defending a position that is wildly unpopular nationally.
I actually think it would be smart politics. It’s also never going to happen.
The reason is simple: Senate institutionalists. John Thune does not want to be the Republican leader who weakened the filibuster, even in a limited way. The Senate sees itself as the “august deliberative body,” not the truck stop chaos of the House. No one wants on their résumé that they chipped away at the 60-vote threshold. The irony is that nothing in the rules prevents a talking filibuster. It simply fell out of use. But reviving it would still be seen as escalation.
And escalation is not what senators do to each other lightly. They are there for six years. They share committee rooms and green rooms. They nurse grudges quietly. They do not enjoy public humiliation.
So while conservatives may draw up elaborate procedural roadmaps, this one caps out at tradition. And tradition, in the Senate, wins more often than base energy.
The Shutdown Nobody Wins
Meanwhile, we are entering an actual shutdown this weekend because Senate Democrats blocked a Department of Homeland Security funding bill after the House had already left town. Democrats escalated their demands from a handful of changes to what is effectively a multi-point overhaul. The problem is not moral clarity. The problem is math.
When you shut down the government, history suggests you rarely get what you want. Often, you get nothing. The Trump White House already has a blueprint from the last shutdown: keep the pain manageable, move money around where possible, and wait for pressure to build. If that pressure intensifies, especially around TSA delays, FEMA responses, or spring break travel, Democrats will face the same brutal reality every minority party faces during a shutdown.
Just like in the fall, they will have to cut a deal.
And when they do, their base will not celebrate incremental concessions. They will accuse leadership of caving. The drawdown of ICE activity in Minneapolis, which could have been framed as a win condition, has already been overtaken by new demands.
That is the trap. You negotiate past your leverage point because your base expects maximalism. Then you are left explaining why the maximalist outcome was never achievable in the first place.
A State of the Union Circus
All of this sets up a February 24th State of the Union that looks increasingly like a circus. Some House Democrats are openly discussing protests, despite Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries urging restraint.
We have seen these moves before. Last year’s disruptions did not damage Trump. If anything, they made him look calmer by comparison. When the visuals are heckling and signage next to moments crafted for television, the protest becomes the spectacle, not the message.
The deeper issue is control. Neither Mike Johnson nor Hakeem Jeffries appears to have ironclad command over their conferences. The margins are thin. The base pressure is intense. And Trump remains such a polarizing figure that restraint feels like betrayal to some members.
So expect noise. Expect moments engineered for viral clips. And expect very little institutional discipline.
Chapters
00:00:00 - Intro
00:04:03 - Talking Filibuster DOA
00:18:06 - Update
00:18:33 - Shutdown
00:22:36 - ICE in Minnesota
00:25:50 - Democrats SOTU Plans
00:28:55 - Interview with Stella Tsantekidou on UK Politics and Epstein
01:13:06 - Wrap-up
