Cory Booker

[Ernie]

Booker has now broken a record for the longest speech/Q&A in the history of Congress.



I remember reading about him as a mayor of Newark, and how he would be out helping to shovel snow in blizzards, and thinking, "It won't surprise me if this man runs for President someday."

I don't particularly like his politics or theology, but he for sure is not a wimp.

[barnhart]

Don't forget about the time he raced into a burning building to rescue a young constituent.

He didn't get far when he ran in the presidential primary but I agree, he has "running for president" vibes.

[Robert]

What reason is he filibustering for?

[JohnH]

What reason is he filibustering for?

He's trying to filibuster the Senate doing any business at all, and instead is just talking and talking for 15 hours about how terrible Trump is.

He reminds me of Strom Thurmond, another Democrat, who also did similar to avoid the business of the Senate going forward with regard to desegregation.

[JohnL]

Booker always seems needy for attention in an annoying kind of way instead of actually doing the job he was elected to do.
Strom Thurmond was really annoying too. I read somewhere that many politicians are narcissistic sociopaths and/or psychopaths. Watching Booker I can pretty much believe it.

[Ernie]

What reason is he filibustering for?

If I understand correctly, this was not technically a filibuster but effectively served the same purpose.

According to Grok

Senator Cory Booker's 25-hour speech on April 1, 2025, was not a traditional filibuster in the technical sense, though it has been colloquially described as such due to its length and disruptive intent. Here’s the distinction based on available information:

A true filibuster in the U.S. Senate is a procedural tactic used to delay or block a vote on a specific piece of legislation or a nomination by extending debate indefinitely. It requires the speaker to hold the floor, often speaking for hours, and can only be ended by a cloture vote (requiring 60 votes to succeed). Historical examples include Strom Thurmond’s 24-hour, 18-minute filibuster in 1957 against the Civil Rights Act or Rand Paul’s 13-hour filibuster in 2013 against drone policy.

Booker’s speech, while breaking the record for the longest continuous Senate speech at 25 hours, did not fit this mold:

No Specific Legislation Targeted: Reports indicate Booker’s speech was a protest against the broader policies and actions of the Trump administration, not an attempt to block a particular bill or nomination moving through the Senate at that moment. He aimed to “disrupt Senate business” and draw attention to what he called a “nation in crisis,” but there’s no mention of a pending vote he was stalling.
Symbolic, Not Procedural: The speech was framed as a symbolic stand—described as a “marathon address” or “protest”—rather than a formal filibuster tied to Senate rules. Booker used it to criticize Trump’s leadership, Republican support, and specific issues like healthcare and immigration, but it functioned more as a platform for public messaging than a legislative roadblock.

Senate Context: On April 1, 2025, the Senate wasn’t necessarily in a high-stakes voting session requiring a filibuster. Booker’s action seemed timed for maximum visibility (it went viral on platforms like TikTok and YouTube) rather than to leverage Senate procedure. Traditional filibusters often occur during contentious debates, whereas this appeared more performative, akin to Ted Cruz’s 21-hour speech in 2013 against Obamacare funding, which also wasn’t a filibuster in the strictest sense since it didn’t delay an inevitable vote.

In summary, Booker’s 25-hour speech mimicked the style and stamina of a filibuster—earning comparisons to Thurmond and others—but it wasn’t a real filibuster in the procedural sense. It was a dramatic, record-breaking act of resistance meant to galvanize opposition and public attention, not to obstruct a particular Senate action. Political commentators and Booker himself leaned into the “filibuster” label for its rhetorical weight, but technically, it was a prolonged speech with a different purpose.

[Ernie]

What reason is he filibustering for?

Again, according to Grok

Here’s a summary of Senator Cory Booker's 25-hour speech from April 1, 2025, as reflected in available reports:

Criticism of Trump’s Leadership and Policies: Booker argued that the Trump administration, in its first 71 days of the second term, had inflicted harm on Americans’ safety, financial stability, and democracy, accusing Trump of disregarding the rule of law and the Constitution. He indirectly implicated Republicans by criticizing their broad support for Trump’s agenda, suggesting they were complicit in enabling these actions despite occasional dissent from figures like the late Senator John McCain.

Economic and Social Program Cuts: Booker warned of cuts to Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security to fund tax breaks for billionaires, a policy he tied to Republican priorities. He specifically called out Republican senators for backing these fiscal moves, reading constituents’ letters to highlight the human toll and framing it as a betrayal of working-class voters who had supported the party.

Immigration Policies: Booker condemned Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act for deportations, criticizing Republicans in Congress for either endorsing or failing to oppose what he called an unconstitutional overreach. He suggested their silence or support reflected a broader party shift away from traditional American values.

Healthcare Concerns: Referencing McCain’s 2017 vote against ACA repeal, Booker praised the late Republican senator as a rare exception in a party he accused of now abandoning healthcare protections. He challenged current Republican senators to follow McCain’s example, arguing their alignment with Trump worsened a healthcare crisis.

Education and Economic Impacts: Booker linked Trump’s education and economic policies to Republican-backed initiatives, claiming they neglected public education and economic stability. He accused GOP senators of prioritizing corporate interests over their constituents, amplifying the administration’s agenda.

National Security and Foreign Policy: On military actions like strikes in Yemen, allegedly coordinated via Signal, Booker questioned the oversight from Republican lawmakers. He implied their reluctance to challenge Trump’s inner circle—described as a “cabal”—undermined national security, contrasting this with past GOP figures who prioritized transparency.

Moral and Democratic Crisis: Invoking John Lewis, Booker framed the moment as a moral test, urging resistance to what he saw as authoritarian tendencies. He criticized Republicans for not breaking with Trump, contrasting their stance with his own speech’s intent—standing “despite” Strom Thurmond’s 1957 filibuster, a historical Republican low point he repurposed as a call for Democratic resolve.

Elon Musk’s Influence and Republican Ties: Booker targeted Musk’s role in the Department of Government Efficiency and federal cuts, like those at the Social Security Administration. He accused Republicans of embracing Musk’s influence—highlighting figures like Senator Ted Cruz who praised such efficiency drives—arguing it harmed public services to appease wealthy allies.

Throughout the speech, Booker used over 1,164 pages of prepared material and personal stories, maintaining an impassioned tone. He positioned Republicans as enablers of Trump’s policies, occasionally noting exceptions like McCain, while urging Democrats and the public to resist. The speech’s viral spread on platforms like TikTok and YouTube amplified its critique of both the administration and its Republican backers.

[temporal1]

altho never a strapping young man, i’ve voluntarily shoveled snow for many neighbors; to my knowledge, no one ever thought i was headed for the White House.

[Robert]

What reason is he filibustering for?

Again, according to Grok

Here’s a summary of Senator Cory Booker's 25-hour speech from April 1, 2025, as reflected in available reports:

Criticism of Trump’s Leadership and Policies: Booker argued that the Trump administration, in its first 71 days of the second term, had inflicted harm on Americans’ safety, financial stability, and democracy, accusing Trump of disregarding the rule of law and the Constitution. He indirectly implicated Republicans by criticizing their broad support for Trump’s agenda, suggesting they were complicit in enabling these actions despite occasional dissent from figures like the late Senator John McCain.

Economic and Social Program Cuts: Booker warned of cuts to Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security to fund tax breaks for billionaires, a policy he tied to Republican priorities. He specifically called out Republican senators for backing these fiscal moves, reading constituents’ letters to highlight the human toll and framing it as a betrayal of working-class voters who had supported the party.

Immigration Policies: Booker condemned Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act for deportations, criticizing Republicans in Congress for either endorsing or failing to oppose what he called an unconstitutional overreach. He suggested their silence or support reflected a broader party shift away from traditional American values.

Healthcare Concerns: Referencing McCain’s 2017 vote against ACA repeal, Booker praised the late Republican senator as a rare exception in a party he accused of now abandoning healthcare protections. He challenged current Republican senators to follow McCain’s example, arguing their alignment with Trump worsened a healthcare crisis.

Education and Economic Impacts: Booker linked Trump’s education and economic policies to Republican-backed initiatives, claiming they neglected public education and economic stability. He accused GOP senators of prioritizing corporate interests over their constituents, amplifying the administration’s agenda.

National Security and Foreign Policy: On military actions like strikes in Yemen, allegedly coordinated via Signal, Booker questioned the oversight from Republican lawmakers. He implied their reluctance to challenge Trump’s inner circle—described as a “cabal”—undermined national security, contrasting this with past GOP figures who prioritized transparency.

Moral and Democratic Crisis: Invoking John Lewis, Booker framed the moment as a moral test, urging resistance to what he saw as authoritarian tendencies. He criticized Republicans for not breaking with Trump, contrasting their stance with his own speech’s intent—standing “despite” Strom Thurmond’s 1957 filibuster, a historical Republican low point he repurposed as a call for Democratic resolve.

Elon Musk’s Influence and Republican Ties: Booker targeted Musk’s role in the Department of Government Efficiency and federal cuts, like those at the Social Security Administration. He accused Republicans of embracing Musk’s influence—highlighting figures like Senator Ted Cruz who praised such efficiency drives—arguing it harmed public services to appease wealthy allies.

Throughout the speech, Booker used over 1,164 pages of prepared material and personal stories, maintaining an impassioned tone. He positioned Republicans as enablers of Trump’s policies, occasionally noting exceptions like McCain, while urging Democrats and the public to resist. The speech’s viral spread on platforms like TikTok and YouTube amplified its critique of both the administration and its Republican backers.

So same old same old. Just a stunt that will have no impact or lasting memory other than breaking the record for length. At least when Rand Paul did it, there was a purpose and it was against government overreach in gathering information about all us.

I guess this was his Spartacus moment too?

[Robert]

Seems the Democrats disagree with Grok.