Try the political quiz
+

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Answer Overview

Response rates from 65.6k America voters.

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 65.6k America voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 65.6k America voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from America voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @BBL8ND6 from Arizona  answered…4mos4MO

Instead of rallying our efforts behind a plan voted by a portion of the population, even the majority of it, we should instead all work together with whatever resources we have to rectify and progress our society.

 @BBG7ZWG from Texas  answered…4mos4MO

No, but the filibuster should be reformed, specifically with a "talking filibuster" that requires opponents to hold the floor and debate in person. This prevents gridlock, allowing the Senate to function, pass legislation with a simple majority, and overcome obstruction

 @BDBW7LC from Georgia  answered…2mos2MO

No, we should instead switch to a ranked-choice voting system to reduce political extremism and division in our courts.

 @BCF9JVD from Minnesota  answered…3mos3MO

No, unless we introduced a forced 3+ party system where working with other parties was required to pass laws.

 @BC69ZWM from Michigan  answered…3mos3MO

Yes, and effectively, it is only a rule of procedure, since the Senate may not unconstitutionally forbid its own constitutional power to run Senate affairs. If the Senate were to pass simple legislation today and disregard a filibuster/cloture attempt, the Supreme Court would not interfere because the matter is a non-justiciable political question on a power reserved to a coordinate coequal branch under the Baker v. Carr doctrine.

 @BBNXB2N from Georgia  answered…4mos4MO

Congress rules of order need a complete overhaul and should more closely adhere to the modern Robert's Rules. Some measures should require a supermajority, but there should also be built-in limits to debate.

 @BF277M3 from Alabama  answered…7 days7D

No, they just need to learn how to compromise and govern like they did in the pass. They are there to represent the will of the people, not a party. Working together would be the filibuster.

Latest News

Stay up-to-date on the most recent “Senate Filibuster” news articles, updated frequently.

About This Data

Based on 65.6k responses to this question.

These results come from iSideWith's ongoing political issues survey. We collect over a million responses per day, filter out duplicate and multiple submissions, and break the results down by political party, ideology, age, state, and census demographics (income, race, education, household).

iSideWith is non-partisan — we don't advocate for any party, candidate, or position. We report what the public tells us.

Read Our Full Methodology →

Cite Or Embed This Poll

Writing about this issue? Use the live data and link back to the full results.

Cite This Poll

iSideWith. (2026). “Should the U.S. Senate abolish the filibuster to allow a simple majority to pass laws?” — Public Opinion Poll Results. Retrieved June 21, 2026, from https://www.isidewith.com/poll/5545282107

Embed The Live Result

Preview