[quesera]

I believe very few votes require a supermajority in the Senate -- impeachment votes definitely do, and also votes to override a Presidential veto.

All ordinary votes just require a simple majority, but the filibuster is sort of a special-case that can be invoked any time, requiring 60 votes to bring the vote to the table at all.

You're right -- if this Senate abolishes the filibuster, it will likely be for "budget votes only" or somesuch. The Senate isn't quite as full of short-term thinkers as the House is though. I don't think the Senate Rs will go for it, because it's the only thing stopping a future D majority from doing what majorities do, and smart Rs know they are a minority party under ordinary circumstances.

But if I'm wrong, it will mean that the Senate Rs are going for broke on a short-term play, and may be discounting future risks. That would be the behaviour of the very desperate, or of the very powerful.

If the Senate Rs believe they are one of those two things -- either one -- the consequences could be enormous.

This is all very dramatic of course. Normally I'd dismiss such ideas. But the temperature is very high right now, and this time might actually be different, this time...