The right thinks that it's wrong to kill people, and good to help people in need. The left thinks that it's wrong to kill your allies, and good to help your allies in need. It's not wrong for the left to kill those who are not their allies, in fact, killing those who are their enemies is good for your allies, so thats what you should do. The right sees getting rid of the filibuster as either a good or bad thing. The left sees the filibuster as either something helpful to their goals, or harmful to them, by their moral standards, they should support it when it helps them, and oppose it when it hurts them, otherwise they are neutral on the subject. It's not hypocrisy, it's how people act when they beleive good and evil exist, and that there are forces for good, and forces for evil. They naturally align themselves with good, and work to destroy evil. For as much as thet deny moral absolutes, they certainly act as if they are diehard moral absolutists. All the right beleives in is rules, doesn't matter what they are, just that they are being applied consistently. For as much as they may preach about morality, their actions tell a different story. Makes sense, the left loves simplistic pop culture stories, they use fiction to inform their every opinion. Fiction is full of us vs them, good versus evil, the idea of a generalized universally applicable rule just doesn't come up often, and when it does it is usually heavily criticized and rejected, rightly, might I add, because in practice it is both suicidally impractical and morally abhorrent. The right, on the other hand, tends to love people who preach about objective morals and normative ethics, constant rules that apply in all cases with all people, and with no consideration given as to who those people are and in how they relate to anyone else. Consequentialism, deontology, virtue ethics, whatever. Their heroes (Lord Jesus Christ/Rabbi Yeshiva bin Josef, for example) only care about the rule, not the people governed by them. One side is conditioned to see the war as two armies, and decide who to shoot, the other sees the war as a bunch of people who sometimes shoot other people, and decide whether or not shooting should occur at all. Then the supporters on the right wonder why they keep losing. Above all, this philosophical difference with regard to morality is enough to explain the issues we are facing, we need a fundamental change in our foundational ethics in order to stand a chance of fighting back, let alone gaining any ground, let alone winning.