rather than acting on it right after the Senate passed it and that right there showed that they would have probably torpedoed it had Harris/Walz won.

What does Bannon say? The era of bipartisanship is over? The conversation is over? Fine.

of 60 votes and they don't have it. And I know the GOP has threatened to do what we kept pushing to do - get rid of that Rule or at least make it a "talking filibuster". But we shall see.

Nix that: MAKE THEM DO IT.

Give nothing.

If yes, I'm sure it will be done by February.

unless they change that filibuster Rule (it was passed there by unanimous consent before but now Democrats most likely wouldn't go along with it given who would be jamming through RW loon judges with the authority).

Since there is no filibuster to confirm federal judges and this is about expanding the federal federal judiciary, I assumed that it was bound by the same no-filibuster rules. I should stop assuming.

only needing a simple majority to proceed to debate and a final vote.

But as it stands, ALL legislation EXCEPT that done by "reconciliation", requires 60 votes for cloture in order to proceed to debate. This is why the 45 folks are looking at doing as much as they can by "reconciliation". But that special process is budget-related and due to the "Byrd Rule", pretty much forbids any "policy" riders.

Anything that does not directly impact the federal budget will be washed out of a reconciliation bill by the Senate Parliamentarian (sometimes called the Byrd Bath). Items that are merely tangential to the budget will most likely not qualify for reconciliation.
On the flip side of that, a point of order can be called and the Parliamentarian can be overridden by a simple majority. The Democrats tried this tactic to include a provision in a reconciliation bill. The provision would have increased the minimum wage, and the Parliamentarian said it didn’t qualify (not directly impacting the federal budget).

The vote to overrule her was where we saw Manchin begin his descent into insanity and Synema pull her cutesy thumbs-down, “nay” vote. While overrides are rarely attempted, I wouldn’t put it past the fascists.

See, I don’t trust them to honor the rules as long as chucking them gives them an opportunity/advantage. Prime example: The “McConnell Rule.” McConnell said that in a presidential election year, no appointments to the SCOTUS should be made until the public had a chance to make their “choice” known. Mitch the Bitch concocted this shit just to keep Obama from appointing a replacement for the dead scumbag, Antonin Scalia. He then promptly ditched his own rule when Ginsburg died, just before the ‘20 election. Another example: Chucklehead Grassley ditching the Senate Judiciary Committee’s “blue slip” tradition to prevent Democrats from blocking Cantaloupe Caligula the Corpulent’s craptacularly fascist and unqualified judicial nominations. With Durbin as chair under Biden, and there was talk of ditching the blue slips permanently, Chucklehead hypocritically screamed about scrapping rules as long as it was convenient for the Democrats.

I hate ‘em all.