Jesse Brohinsky

Strongly agree

No, it is a necessary check against the tyranny of the majority

Aligns with libertarian concern about majoritarian overreach and centralized power; the filibuster is commonly defended in libertarian circles as a brake on ‘tyranny of the majority’ and rapid federal expansion. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Agree

No

More consistent with LP instincts to keep checks that slow federal lawmaking and prevent rapid expansion of government; libertarians often argue gridlock can be preferable to sweeping federal action. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Agree

No, without it laws would wildly flip-flop every election cycle

LP would somewhat agree that easier lawmaking can produce unstable, oscillating policy and more federal intervention; however, this is a secondary argument compared to principled minority-rights/limited-government concerns. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Slightly disagree

Yes, but only for voting rights or constitutional matters

LP strongly supports voting rights/civil liberties, but is skeptical of carving out special exceptions that empower majorities and entrench partisan agendas; it tends to prefer neutral rules rather than issue-specific procedural carveouts. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Disagree

Yes

The Libertarian Party generally favors limiting federal power and is wary of procedural changes that make it easier to pass expansive legislation; it has often criticized both parties’ use of Senate rule changes (e.g., the 2013/2017 “nuclear option”) as power grabs. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Strongly disagree

Yes, the minority should not be able to hold the government hostage

LP rhetoric typically rejects framing that prioritizes ‘government action’ over minority rights; calling the minority ‘hostage-takers’ conflicts with libertarian emphasis on protecting dissenting minorities from majoritarian coercion. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.