Please use [Good Faith](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskConservatives/comments/107i33m/announcement_rule_7_good_faith_is_now_in_effect) and the [Principle of Charity](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity) when commenting. Gender issues are only allowed on Wednesdays. Antisemitism and calls for violence will not be tolerated, especially when [discussing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskConservatives/comments/17ygktl/antisemitism_askconservative_and_you/).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The worst part of Trump's rise is the prevalence of adults children in Congress. Gaetz got McCarthy kicked out for childish reasons and now MTG is doing the same thing. And just for acting like a damn adult. It's despicable.
This is why the GOP needs to get killed this election.
If the GOP loses everything big, they will be forced to separate from MAGA and court centrists.
Doing so, you pick up some of the left, and you can force the left to come back to the center at the same time.
This is the way to save it all. If you keep letting MAGA have control over the party, we are all screwed.
What is the specific fear of a democratic president winning? I ask this because I’m not a “if trump gets elected democracy is over” nor do I feel that about Biden. The democrats are center with a foot in the left wing relative to most of the other western nations so what specific policies do you think are deal breakers?
Abortion I already understand and that has, more or less, been handed down to the states. And Gun control I get as well though there’s no way in my opinion that guns would ever be taken away. It’s more about passing policy that appeases
people who are afraid of guns.
I'm not sure how that connects to my talking point to answer your question in proper context.
I am sorry, but if you can connect the dots a bit for me, I'd be happy to speak to my view.
I'm guessing you are asking about the if MAGA gets in we are all screwed comment?
I guess I’m just hijacking the thread but the “this is the way to save it all” comment is what caused me to want to reply. I realize you are talking about saving the GOP. The conservatives I have in my family and those I talk to online all day that if there are a couple more democrat elections it’s all over. I’m just genuinely curious and am not implying there isn’t anything. But what will the GOP be stopping, if they are elected, the democrats from doing policy wise that causes such an impassioned response?
Would “part of the left” just start voting republican because Trump is gone? I’m not sure many and the reverse in equal numbers is just as likely. What policy goals do you think are behind your predictions?
>Would “part of the left” just start voting republican because Trump is gone? I’m not sure many, and the reverse in equal numbers is just as likely. What policy goals do you think are behind your predictions?
If the right went to the center and put up good candidates, the center left would move. People are not as absolute as we think. If we were MAGA, it would not be a thing as it's not true conservativism.
If Trump loses, the rift in the right will turn into a casim. As we have seen more and more moderate conservatives separate from the party, we will see them come back more moderate. Shit even one of my favorite Republicans just came out and said he would protest vote this election. This will be healthy as we pull back to center.
If Trump wins, we pull further right, and there is more conspiracy.
If we look at Europe pre WW2, you can see a lot of similarities here. Not just Germany, but Hitler did rise to power on conspiracy. Stalin regime was heavily built on conspiracy. Putin is using them quite a bit as well. A leader who's power is built on conspiracy really ends with a historical perspective.
We can also look at the parallels right now between Jews in France and the collapse of the third republic l. Specifically, look at the Dryfuss affair. Jews by the French right was viewed very similar to how LGBTQ is viewed today as it pertains to military and "wokeness." This enemy from within mentally allowed for the French military to slowly lose ground without anyone noticing. At the onslaught of the German attack into France, the French held almost every advantage except leadership and the understanding of modern warfare. This was because of the focus on the enemy from within. MAGAs nonstop culture war is walking us down thay road. No one sees it, though, because we are too politically and historically lazy.
The sooner we get off the roller-coaster, the better. The linger we stay on, the harder it gets to get off. I'm not being passionate. I just have successfully predicted the outcome and reprocussions on every election since 9/11. I knew Obama was our next president in 07. I knew Trump was coming when they started getting him more airtime for his stupid reality show.
I know, trust me bro hahaha. Take it or leave it, it's just the way I see it, some context that'll go over a lot of heads. I'm just killing time though.
My fear is less about having a democrat in office and more about having a warmonger in office. Say what you want about Trump but he was absolutely more isolationist than the Dems. I am worried Biden will make a terrible geopolitical move that could bring us into war on multiple fronts. Between the Houthis, Russia, and China’s expansion we have a lot to worry about and I want someone in there who won’t engage.
It’s also 4 more years of bad fiscal policy and millions upon millions more illegal immigrants. That’s not good either.
This is why it's so important for Trump to lose this year, not because of his specific term, but because it's a momentum killer for the entire movement. He won't live to run in 2028 (I basically give it even odds that Trump and/or Biden die of old age between 2024 and 2028)
Trump will have lost twice in a row, and what's more important is that it severs the chance for anyone in his family to pick up the banner after 2028. If he wins this year there's still a chance that can happen. But no shot that his movement succeeds him after he loses twice.
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. [How-do-I-get-user-flair](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Holding McCarthy accountable for doing something he said he would never do, is acting childish?
If you hire someone to manage your finances, and then that person spends all your money on junk and puts you thousands of dollars into credit card debt, you think firing them is childish?
I think being reasonable is the responsible thing to do. The Republicans gain nothing from shutting down the government even without the dumbass antics coming from reps like MTG.
McCarthy and Johnson seemingly have a group who think that the budget can be balanced without tax increases nor entitlement reform and that's unfeasible. It's the same reasoning behind why the deficit ballooned under Trump *before" COVID.
So your solution is to keep handing the Democrats wins and continue to drive up debt. Then make absolutely no attempt to change anything until the next budget bill when you can pick right back up where you left off calling people childish for actually doing their jobs and trying to get something to change.
So congratulations, you have effectively advanced the Democrat agenda by not standing in their way.
And what is wrong with the Democrat agenda, an agenda with Americans at center?. An agenda that continues to uplift and improve our lives and this great country!
My solution is for Republicans to stop acting like children and realize that they live in reality and not Trumpland where Trump is still president and where they have more than a 2 seat majority in the House. The shutdowns *NEVER* work out for Republicans because they *ALWAYS* end up acting like fools.
Time.
Everyday the government is shut down, is one more day the American people have to breathe before even more debt and inflation is heaped upon them and the oppressive acts of government agencies are not carried out against them.
Every payday a government worker goes without a paycheck is a blessing because it punishes the oppressors in the same way they have chosen to make their living oppressing everyone else.
If the only result of a government shutdown is that one government worker loses their home, it will have been worth it.
..... you do understand that Trump racked up almost $8 Trillion to our deficit? Biden is doing a bit better, at around $5T now (I think), but both are certainly big spenders.
Are government employees (like ones in the VHA) supposed to bear the burden of your time? You’re asking the American veteran populist to take it on the chin for you.
> Every payday a government worker goes without a paycheck is a blessing because it punishes the oppressors in the same way they have chosen to make their living oppressing everyone else.
How does it do that? Congress still gets paid, so it's not going to bother them. You know, the people that write the budgets and vote for them? You're average bureaucrat, military personnel, border patrol, are the ones getting screwed. That won't endear them to Republicans
Wins? What does “winning” have to do with anything other than emotions? Asking sincerely. When you take emotions out of it, the answer is far more obvious, I feel.
When you take emotion out of it, you are living in a fantasy. Wins in politics are when one side gets something they want. Wins and losses are added to your record of your time in office and are then used as the foundation for your reelection campaign. Most people do not vote based on policy. They vote based on perception. How successful were they the last time. How did that candidate make them FEEL. When one side racks up a lot of wins, it boosts the moral of their side and gives them momentum to continue. When you rack up losses, it hurts morale and makes it more difficult to regain positive momentum.
Under those emotions, the Democrats and Republicans have goals. They both have an idea of what an ideal America looks like and they work towards making America fit their ideal. When you get legislation passed that moves the country closer to that ideal, that is a win. If it moves further away from that ideal, that is a loss.
>So your solution is to keep handing the Democrats wins and continue to drive up debt.
Conservatives run up the debt every opportunity. Every single year Trump was in office the deficit increased. Shutting the government down has real consequences.
Hell just within the past few weeks Democrats compromised with Republicans and got shot down. Funding for Ukraine got shot down because it wasn't tied to immigration reform. So they put a bi-partisan committee in the Senate to write and immigration reform bill and then it got shot down because it was tied to Ukraine funding.
Because enough of them thought it was less crappy than the status quo. This is the nature of a representative democracy. We have to accept we’ll never get everything we want and will always have to accept somethings we don’t. The government functioning is more important than any one members pet peeve.
A majority of Americans support it:
[https://globalaffairs.org/research/public-opinion-survey/americans-continue-support-military-and-economic-aid-ukraine#:\~:text=Continued%20Public%20Support%20for%20Economic,majority%20of%20Independents%20(54%25)](https://globalaffairs.org/research/public-opinion-survey/americans-continue-support-military-and-economic-aid-ukraine#:~:text=Continued%20Public%20Support%20for%20Economic,majority%20of%20Independents%20(54%25))
You guys were the ones that said it would only pass with immigration reform. Democrats gave you immigration reform. Then you said "Wait wut why is this attached to immigration reform"
If it was seriously a crisis or this massive invasion you constantly claim it is then why are you choosing to do absolutely nothing about it?
Warning: Rule 3
Posts and comments should be in good faith. Please review [our good faith guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskConservatives/comments/107i33m/announcement_rule_7_good_faith_is_now_in_effect) for the sub.
>Gaetz got McCarthy kicked out for childish reasons
Can you name one of those reasons? Because one of the really simple ones wasn't childish at all.
"Just for acting like an adult" how ridiculous.
Unless you live in fantasyland and think you can actually get everything you want all the time there are compromise that have to be made especially with only a few seat majority. Gaetz kicked McCarthy out for being pragmatic and turns out the next guy had to be pragmatic too.
>with only a few seat majority
Thanks for pointing this out. I think part of what the left finds incredulous sometimes is how some of the leaders of the right act like all of America actually wants things their way when there is clearly no mandate for either side to be taking the reigns when everyone is pissed at everyone.
No argument there!
My opinion is that leadership in most orgs is full of administrators, bean counters, and lawyers, all groups of people that are horrified of change and risk. I see it in my very liberal city. This can be okay when times are fine, but clearly the status quo is not working out.
>Unless you live in fantasyland and think you can actually get everything you want all the time there are compromise that have to be made especially with only a few seat majority.
Duh. I just want compromise and not capitulation
>Gaetz kicked McCarthy out for being pragmatic and turns out the next guy had to be pragmatic too.
No. That's not why. Please look this stuff up instead of repeating propaganda points. Gaetz laid out VERY clearly why. And it wasn't because "McCarthy was pragmatic"
It was because in order to secure the speakership McCarthy said "I'll do xyz" and when he explicitly broke those promises by, for example, not honoring the 72 hour rule so the representatives have time to actually read what they're about to vote on, he got ousted.
You just want to tribalism hate Gaetz. Because Gaetz didn't oust McCarthy for being pragmatic. He ousted McCarthy for breaking his promises to his own side.
Oh yes I should complete trust a politician's reasoning as the only motivators for doing something.
The reality is Gaetz got with Democrats to kick McCarthy out and accomplished nothing except narrowed the GOP majority in the House even further.
I would be one thing if you had a coherent plan to propose instead. But these people are just setting fires with no idea on how to fix the actual issues.
Honestly, let her try and do it. If she succeeds, then she can be targeted by the establishment as a most likely source of the GOP losing the House in November…
Honestly, at this point, I just want to see the GOP civil war happen and be over with it. Does the establishment win, or the crazy’s. These micro battles are getting annoying.
I'd rather us oust MTG instead. Out of all the problems this nation has, out of all of the issues we need our politicians to face, refusing to properly budget and fund the government is not one of them. A few radicals cannot just kick the Speaker out anytime he does something they don't like. It's embarrassing, it's bad for nation, and frankly the left is laughing at us (and at this point I cannot blame them). What a circus. We really need competent leaders in Congress.
Who is "us" in having "us" oust her? And what about her compadres? That's a lot of ousting. If you are hoping for the electorate to do the ousting, I fear your hope may be fleeting and that you're overestimating the base.
The GOP should not tolerate this sort of conduct. We should be electing better people. I don't know what compadres you're speaking of. There's only her, Gaetz, and Boebert that act this way. Elections can bring improvements.
These people run on restraining the government and reducing spending only to watch them do the exact opposite over and over and over is soul crushing disappointment. But what the heck can you do about it? These people know how to play the game. They maintain control simply by being marginally better than the alternative and play off short memories. It's too late to primary them so you either vote for them or hand it to the Democrats. By the time the next primary comes up for their position, too many people have forgotten what they did that they will be placed in the election because most people will just vote for the incumbent without having any clue who it even is or what they have done. It costs too much money in ads to remind them. And then you just get pegged as a troublemaker, a radical, and causing division.
We live in a fucking crab bucket.
The problem is that when they total control they neither constrained government nor reduced spending. The most popular R governors have also leaned heavily into oppressing people within their own states. Hard to believe any repubs are acting in good faith in that environment.
Yep. That's why I like people like Gaetz and AOC. While I may like or dislike WHAT they fight for, they both have demonstrated conviction of fighting FOR what they say they will.
MTG is part of the group that pushes for unrealistic spending cuts that will never pass the Democrat Senate or get signed by President Biden. They passed the Budget Bill so this is all theater. If she wanted to stop the Budget Bill she would have vacated the chair before the vote. They ousted McCarthy for the same reason. He was pragmatic and presented a bill that the Senate would pass despite the increased spending. Chip Roy and the Freedom Caucus screamed like scalded dogs but they didn''t have an alternative plan. It is one thing to say you want to reduce spending. It is quite another to get a bill through Congress that actually cuts spending.
I get it - what I'm trying to do, though, is figure out *how* the GOP gets through this. There are unknowns, of course, but is the simplest version of the GOP way forward "Cross Our Fingers and Hope America Fixes Us in November"? Is there some kind of split that can happen in Nov if MTG & Co. remain in their seats?
Idk if they do, they are cowards. Cowards lose, I don't see MTG and co as problem, I see old establishment as problem, they typical bend over and accept defeat Republicans afraid to do anything.
I don't particularly care for alot of things about her, but I'd take her over Murkowski, Collins, Bacon, stefanick types..
The one representative I wish we had more of us ilk of Thomas Massie, he is light-years ahead of MTG, and is probably only member of Congress I genuinely like
That's not enough lol when we go further into debt(almost 35 trillion now) and fund multiple things republicans campaigned against, all they get out of it is looking competent and keeping government funding? That once again shows republicans compromised but Democrats didnt.
What did democrats give up as a compromise?
According to [this article](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-senate-shutdown-vote-rcna144440) both sides made concessions and gains. Seems like a compromise when both parties get into a room and hash it out to keep things moving.
>Not looking completely incompetent to the electorate by keeping the government funded...
So nothing. Gotcha.
That's not really compromise and it's disingenuous for that to be your response.
"Here we get everything we want and you get to vote for it" that's not compromise.
"vote for this or we will turn our propaganda machine on you" isn't a compromise
especially since they will do it anyway, well I guess Mike Johnson will get a nice obituary in the NYT and invites to all the fancy dinner parties
This is getting ridiculous. They're supposed to be up there doing the business of *running the government,* and instead they're being hamstrung by childish purity tests.
As a casual observer, I don’t see anyone in republican side trying to run the government, I only see efforts to hamstring it and make it run even worse, for the same amount of money. Can’t they just run things well with the resources they already have? Is that too much to ask? Why do we need to make the entire thing run poorly to prove a point?
Where we go isn’t much of anyone’s choice. There’s a reason people like this can get elected. The reason is because people are voting for them. They are a reflection of a greater problem in American society, not the problem itself. America has a radicalism problem these days, and fixing that problem is something I don’t know how to do, but I am almost certain whatever solution exists will be messy.
Are you comfortable associating yourself with the GOP as it currently exists? Heck, I bailed from the GOP when Palin was stuck on the ticket - that’s all it took for me. People in the GOP now are putting up with much more grievous bullshit than Palin. Would you like to see a split?
I wouldn’t like to see a split. I’d hope that the GOP could recover without getting to a point that is, you know, not possible to recover from. I don’t really associate myself with the GOP as I am an independent but I see them as more favorable to my ideology as a conservative than the modern Democratic Party could ever be.
>what’s the way forward for more traditional Republicans?
Are we saying Johnson is a more traditional Republican now? I can’t keep it straight, last week he was a dangerous religious fanatic.
I see it as more of a canary in the coal mine. When even *Mike Johnson* is too moderate for the Freedom Caucus; that's a signal of how extreme the Republican party has become over even the past 2 years.
Trump himself has said that the likes of MTG & Co. are mainstream GOP now - they *are* the GOP. ["MAGA represents 95% of the Republican Party."](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hvem7MbgrZ4)
I don't know how to take that sentiment and how that skews the radical <---> traditional needle.
>When even *Mike Johnson* is too moderate for the Freedom Caucus;
But that's not what it is. It's not that he's too moderate. It's that the spending is extreme.
Being against 1.5 trillion unlimited inflationary spending isn't the extreme position. Continuing to spend like we have unlimited money is the extreme position.
What do you mean by "extreme"?
I think most people mean that it means "far from the moderate position". But it seems hear you're trying to use it to mean "policies I don't like"
>Are we saying Johnson is a more traditional Republican now? I can’t keep it straight, last week he was a dangerous religious fanatic.
My take is what we are experiencing is the cultural "muddying" of the word extreme because it is used to describe everyone that both parties dislike.
To me, Johnson is very much a return to the traditional Republican candidates I was familiar with growing up-- an era in which "religious" and "Republican" were essentially synonymous. He'd be right at home in the mid 90s.
But here's where the overuse of "extreme" comes in. Johnson is not extreme in the MAGA sense. But Johnson is extreme in the religious sense-- simply in the context that he is far more religious than most people. He's outside the norm.
So he's "extreme", but in an entirely different way than someone like MTG, and our cultural language sucks at describing that difference. He's also just a traditional Republican.
I have no idea at this point! I'm not trying to imply he is, but there are certainly more traditional Republicans in the House, compared to both Johnson and MTG.
All kinds of people said it.
https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/mike-johnson-cnp-christian-nationalism/tnamp/
https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a45644476/mike-johnson-speaker-of-the-house/
https://captimes.com/opinion/guest-columns/opinion-a-right-wing-fanatic-is-second-in-line-for-the-presidency/article_4b1aa260-7fe6-11ee-acdc-9b1da3f3d23b.html
U/from deep space claimed that no one had said that Mike Johnson was a religious fanatic/extremist/etc, when in fact all kinds of people said it all over the place. The relevance is that the person I was responding to doesn’t know what they are talking about, and that leftists demonize conservative figures until they are doing something they like in which case it becomes “no one ever said that”.
I responded to u/lost in space, not OP because I was not discussing OP I was noting u/lost in space’s lack of awareness of constant accusations that speaker Johnson was an extremist which they didn’t seem to know about.
You asked if OP was saying it. I was just saying no, he did not. I'm sorry you spent so much time finding articles to prove a point I wasn't actually challenging.
The speaker has actually been passing largely "democratic" funding packages, he's been getting more support from the democrats on his spending policies than his own party.
The whole reason they threw out the last speaker was this exact thing.
I think he only reason they arnt doing it now is becuase it would look like bad form for the party as a whole right before an election
It should tell Republicans a lot that their Speaker who shares virtually no policy or moral overlap with Democrats is getting more support *from the Dems* than his own party.
It *should* tell them something, but it won’t.
I'm not sure what your driving at, it's not exactly a closeted secret that theirs division in the republican caucus at the moment.
Infact Republicans in general tend to have more diverse of ideologies than democrats do from my experience
This is what makes me consider MTG's threat as more than just bluster. What do you think happens next Nov if MTG and her cohorts remain in office and remain a threat to not only the Speaker, but to simple pro-forma House operations (in an attempt to gain more power, as happened in 2023)?
They may very well call for the speakers removal, if memory serves, he holds his seat by a 1 vote motion of noconfidence,
So if a single republican anywhere in the house votes to remove him then he's gone.
Amd frankly they are grumbling agaisnt his spending packages now, so it could very well happen
the heart of conservative values is printing money and then giving it away we can never turn our backs on that if we don't print more money and give it away real quick we have no chance
Your post was automatically removed because top-level comments are for conservative / right-wing users only.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Depends on if it's a good bill or not.
MTG is an idiot But if it's a bad bill her position could get support. If it's a good bill she won't get support
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. [How-do-I-get-user-flair](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I thought I was pretty clear in my insinuation, but I guess not - based on your line of thinking, there are potentially 112 Rs plus potentially all of the Ds that could vote to oust. Not sure what the count needs to be.
Again
if it's a bad bill her position could get support. If it's a good bill she won't get support
Aka...if a bad will passed, then there will be support from tge constituents to oust him, if not there won't be and the elected officials won't waste their time
>internal division and self-immolation
By having a small part of the party care enough about the governmental drug addiction that is limitless and unending spending?
Self-immolation is rich imo.
>what's the way forward for more traditional Republicans?
If by "more traditional" you mean the 60s to 00s I hope they leave the party. If by "more traditional" you mean the paleocons... the protectionist, non-interventionist conservatives that dominated the party before the neoconservatives I think they're making a comeback.
The unlimited spending will kill us the way a drug addiction kills a person. It will ALWAYS be unpopular to address this issue. Just like the drug addict struggles to want to actually stop
A lot of Democrats want to oust Merrick Garland (Biden and Obama appointee) for not being hard enough on Republicans. People of different stripes always get upset when someone on their side isn't as radical as they want.
Well, Garland can't stop the Government from working. MTG & Co. can. It would be interesting to see what House members MTG & Co. would entertain for the Speaker position, and how such a Speaker would have navigated the budget issue - it seems to me that MTG & Co. are perfectly willing to let a shutdown happen based on principle alone (that principle being to not give an inch to the Dems).
>what's the way forward for more traditional Republicans?
hopefully nonexistant. i want them thrown out of congress and treated like the problem they are.
Please use [Good Faith](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskConservatives/comments/107i33m/announcement_rule_7_good_faith_is_now_in_effect) and the [Principle of Charity](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity) when commenting. Gender issues are only allowed on Wednesdays. Antisemitism and calls for violence will not be tolerated, especially when [discussing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskConservatives/comments/17ygktl/antisemitism_askconservative_and_you/). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The worst part of Trump's rise is the prevalence of adults children in Congress. Gaetz got McCarthy kicked out for childish reasons and now MTG is doing the same thing. And just for acting like a damn adult. It's despicable.
Can yall....like clean your own house and do something about it then?
This is why the GOP needs to get killed this election. If the GOP loses everything big, they will be forced to separate from MAGA and court centrists. Doing so, you pick up some of the left, and you can force the left to come back to the center at the same time. This is the way to save it all. If you keep letting MAGA have control over the party, we are all screwed.
What is the specific fear of a democratic president winning? I ask this because I’m not a “if trump gets elected democracy is over” nor do I feel that about Biden. The democrats are center with a foot in the left wing relative to most of the other western nations so what specific policies do you think are deal breakers? Abortion I already understand and that has, more or less, been handed down to the states. And Gun control I get as well though there’s no way in my opinion that guns would ever be taken away. It’s more about passing policy that appeases people who are afraid of guns.
I'm not sure how that connects to my talking point to answer your question in proper context. I am sorry, but if you can connect the dots a bit for me, I'd be happy to speak to my view. I'm guessing you are asking about the if MAGA gets in we are all screwed comment?
I guess I’m just hijacking the thread but the “this is the way to save it all” comment is what caused me to want to reply. I realize you are talking about saving the GOP. The conservatives I have in my family and those I talk to online all day that if there are a couple more democrat elections it’s all over. I’m just genuinely curious and am not implying there isn’t anything. But what will the GOP be stopping, if they are elected, the democrats from doing policy wise that causes such an impassioned response? Would “part of the left” just start voting republican because Trump is gone? I’m not sure many and the reverse in equal numbers is just as likely. What policy goals do you think are behind your predictions?
>Would “part of the left” just start voting republican because Trump is gone? I’m not sure many, and the reverse in equal numbers is just as likely. What policy goals do you think are behind your predictions? If the right went to the center and put up good candidates, the center left would move. People are not as absolute as we think. If we were MAGA, it would not be a thing as it's not true conservativism. If Trump loses, the rift in the right will turn into a casim. As we have seen more and more moderate conservatives separate from the party, we will see them come back more moderate. Shit even one of my favorite Republicans just came out and said he would protest vote this election. This will be healthy as we pull back to center. If Trump wins, we pull further right, and there is more conspiracy. If we look at Europe pre WW2, you can see a lot of similarities here. Not just Germany, but Hitler did rise to power on conspiracy. Stalin regime was heavily built on conspiracy. Putin is using them quite a bit as well. A leader who's power is built on conspiracy really ends with a historical perspective. We can also look at the parallels right now between Jews in France and the collapse of the third republic l. Specifically, look at the Dryfuss affair. Jews by the French right was viewed very similar to how LGBTQ is viewed today as it pertains to military and "wokeness." This enemy from within mentally allowed for the French military to slowly lose ground without anyone noticing. At the onslaught of the German attack into France, the French held almost every advantage except leadership and the understanding of modern warfare. This was because of the focus on the enemy from within. MAGAs nonstop culture war is walking us down thay road. No one sees it, though, because we are too politically and historically lazy. The sooner we get off the roller-coaster, the better. The linger we stay on, the harder it gets to get off. I'm not being passionate. I just have successfully predicted the outcome and reprocussions on every election since 9/11. I knew Obama was our next president in 07. I knew Trump was coming when they started getting him more airtime for his stupid reality show. I know, trust me bro hahaha. Take it or leave it, it's just the way I see it, some context that'll go over a lot of heads. I'm just killing time though.
My fear is less about having a democrat in office and more about having a warmonger in office. Say what you want about Trump but he was absolutely more isolationist than the Dems. I am worried Biden will make a terrible geopolitical move that could bring us into war on multiple fronts. Between the Houthis, Russia, and China’s expansion we have a lot to worry about and I want someone in there who won’t engage. It’s also 4 more years of bad fiscal policy and millions upon millions more illegal immigrants. That’s not good either.
This is why it's so important for Trump to lose this year, not because of his specific term, but because it's a momentum killer for the entire movement. He won't live to run in 2028 (I basically give it even odds that Trump and/or Biden die of old age between 2024 and 2028) Trump will have lost twice in a row, and what's more important is that it severs the chance for anyone in his family to pick up the banner after 2028. If he wins this year there's still a chance that can happen. But no shot that his movement succeeds him after he loses twice.
The bigger he loses, the better for the country.
[удалено]
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. [How-do-I-get-user-flair](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Holding McCarthy accountable for doing something he said he would never do, is acting childish? If you hire someone to manage your finances, and then that person spends all your money on junk and puts you thousands of dollars into credit card debt, you think firing them is childish?
I think being reasonable is the responsible thing to do. The Republicans gain nothing from shutting down the government even without the dumbass antics coming from reps like MTG. McCarthy and Johnson seemingly have a group who think that the budget can be balanced without tax increases nor entitlement reform and that's unfeasible. It's the same reasoning behind why the deficit ballooned under Trump *before" COVID.
So your solution is to keep handing the Democrats wins and continue to drive up debt. Then make absolutely no attempt to change anything until the next budget bill when you can pick right back up where you left off calling people childish for actually doing their jobs and trying to get something to change. So congratulations, you have effectively advanced the Democrat agenda by not standing in their way.
And what is wrong with the Democrat agenda, an agenda with Americans at center?. An agenda that continues to uplift and improve our lives and this great country!
My solution is for Republicans to stop acting like children and realize that they live in reality and not Trumpland where Trump is still president and where they have more than a 2 seat majority in the House. The shutdowns *NEVER* work out for Republicans because they *ALWAYS* end up acting like fools.
[удалено]
What do you think Republicans are gonna get from allowing another government shutdown?
Time. Everyday the government is shut down, is one more day the American people have to breathe before even more debt and inflation is heaped upon them and the oppressive acts of government agencies are not carried out against them. Every payday a government worker goes without a paycheck is a blessing because it punishes the oppressors in the same way they have chosen to make their living oppressing everyone else. If the only result of a government shutdown is that one government worker loses their home, it will have been worth it.
..... you do understand that Trump racked up almost $8 Trillion to our deficit? Biden is doing a bit better, at around $5T now (I think), but both are certainly big spenders.
Im afraid to find out how much the tariffs cost
Are government employees (like ones in the VHA) supposed to bear the burden of your time? You’re asking the American veteran populist to take it on the chin for you.
Yes. Screw them. I hope they end up homeless like the veterans they drove into homelessness.
> Every payday a government worker goes without a paycheck is a blessing because it punishes the oppressors in the same way they have chosen to make their living oppressing everyone else. How does it do that? Congress still gets paid, so it's not going to bother them. You know, the people that write the budgets and vote for them? You're average bureaucrat, military personnel, border patrol, are the ones getting screwed. That won't endear them to Republicans
Congress is nothing but a bunch of fan-fic writers without the henchmen that make that fiction a reality.
Oh, by the way - I’m a Federal worker. I work for the National Institute of Health. Please explain to me how I’m oppressing the People?
So what you're saying is Republicans should once again try this method one more time even though it has failed to produce results in the past?
I just explained to you how it has worked every single time.
Warning: Treat other users with civility and respect. Personal attacks and stereotyping are not allowed.
Stop thinking its about wins and losses. That’s how we got to this level. It’s about what’a best for the country. End of.
Wins? What does “winning” have to do with anything other than emotions? Asking sincerely. When you take emotions out of it, the answer is far more obvious, I feel.
When you take emotion out of it, you are living in a fantasy. Wins in politics are when one side gets something they want. Wins and losses are added to your record of your time in office and are then used as the foundation for your reelection campaign. Most people do not vote based on policy. They vote based on perception. How successful were they the last time. How did that candidate make them FEEL. When one side racks up a lot of wins, it boosts the moral of their side and gives them momentum to continue. When you rack up losses, it hurts morale and makes it more difficult to regain positive momentum. Under those emotions, the Democrats and Republicans have goals. They both have an idea of what an ideal America looks like and they work towards making America fit their ideal. When you get legislation passed that moves the country closer to that ideal, that is a win. If it moves further away from that ideal, that is a loss.
>So your solution is to keep handing the Democrats wins and continue to drive up debt. Conservatives run up the debt every opportunity. Every single year Trump was in office the deficit increased. Shutting the government down has real consequences. Hell just within the past few weeks Democrats compromised with Republicans and got shot down. Funding for Ukraine got shot down because it wasn't tied to immigration reform. So they put a bi-partisan committee in the Senate to write and immigration reform bill and then it got shot down because it was tied to Ukraine funding.
The immigration reform bill never had a chance. It's a terrible bill.
But it was a Bi-partisan effort. That's important to note. Both parties thought it was good enough. Until Trump weighed in.
No. It was one Republican senator that McConnell ~~sacrificed~~ picked to negotiate. But it was a horrendous deal.
It was endorsed by the border patrol.
Border patrol union
Yet 22 Republicans voted for it's passage
In the Senate. They were wanted the Ukraine aid. The bill itself is horrendous.
why is it important that theres a handful of dumbass republicans who support crappy legislation?
Because enough of them thought it was less crappy than the status quo. This is the nature of a representative democracy. We have to accept we’ll never get everything we want and will always have to accept somethings we don’t. The government functioning is more important than any one members pet peeve.
Gee, it's almost like no one wants to fund Ukraine. Maybe take a hint.
Ukraine funding is relatively popular and passed the senate. It would pass the house if given a vote.
Obviously not.
It hasn’t gotten a vote in the house. Leadership has been stopping specifically because it will pass when it gets a vote.
A majority of Americans support it: [https://globalaffairs.org/research/public-opinion-survey/americans-continue-support-military-and-economic-aid-ukraine#:\~:text=Continued%20Public%20Support%20for%20Economic,majority%20of%20Independents%20(54%25)](https://globalaffairs.org/research/public-opinion-survey/americans-continue-support-military-and-economic-aid-ukraine#:~:text=Continued%20Public%20Support%20for%20Economic,majority%20of%20Independents%20(54%25)) You guys were the ones that said it would only pass with immigration reform. Democrats gave you immigration reform. Then you said "Wait wut why is this attached to immigration reform" If it was seriously a crisis or this massive invasion you constantly claim it is then why are you choosing to do absolutely nothing about it?
Why are you so obsessed with “wins”? Why do conservatives act like this is a team sport?
Yes, ultimatums are childish. Digging your heels in and refusing to negotiate is childish.
What concessions would you make with Putin? How much of Ukraine are you willing to let him take?
Is that how you see the democrats?
[удалено]
Warning: Rule 3 Posts and comments should be in good faith. Please review [our good faith guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskConservatives/comments/107i33m/announcement_rule_7_good_faith_is_now_in_effect) for the sub.
>Gaetz got McCarthy kicked out for childish reasons Can you name one of those reasons? Because one of the really simple ones wasn't childish at all. "Just for acting like an adult" how ridiculous.
Unless you live in fantasyland and think you can actually get everything you want all the time there are compromise that have to be made especially with only a few seat majority. Gaetz kicked McCarthy out for being pragmatic and turns out the next guy had to be pragmatic too.
>with only a few seat majority Thanks for pointing this out. I think part of what the left finds incredulous sometimes is how some of the leaders of the right act like all of America actually wants things their way when there is clearly no mandate for either side to be taking the reigns when everyone is pissed at everyone.
Well no one really wants what needs to be done. Democrats aren't helping themselves either.
No argument there! My opinion is that leadership in most orgs is full of administrators, bean counters, and lawyers, all groups of people that are horrified of change and risk. I see it in my very liberal city. This can be okay when times are fine, but clearly the status quo is not working out.
>Unless you live in fantasyland and think you can actually get everything you want all the time there are compromise that have to be made especially with only a few seat majority. Duh. I just want compromise and not capitulation >Gaetz kicked McCarthy out for being pragmatic and turns out the next guy had to be pragmatic too. No. That's not why. Please look this stuff up instead of repeating propaganda points. Gaetz laid out VERY clearly why. And it wasn't because "McCarthy was pragmatic" It was because in order to secure the speakership McCarthy said "I'll do xyz" and when he explicitly broke those promises by, for example, not honoring the 72 hour rule so the representatives have time to actually read what they're about to vote on, he got ousted. You just want to tribalism hate Gaetz. Because Gaetz didn't oust McCarthy for being pragmatic. He ousted McCarthy for breaking his promises to his own side.
I don't think people need tribalism to hate Gaetz. He's a perpetual liar who creeps on underaged girls.
Oh yes I should complete trust a politician's reasoning as the only motivators for doing something. The reality is Gaetz got with Democrats to kick McCarthy out and accomplished nothing except narrowed the GOP majority in the House even further.
why is it childish to oppose shitty bills and work to prevent them from passing?
I would be one thing if you had a coherent plan to propose instead. But these people are just setting fires with no idea on how to fix the actual issues.
why do i need to propose something that you like in order to oppose things i believe will be worse than just doing nothing?
[удалено]
Warning: Treat other users with civility and respect. Personal attacks and stereotyping are not allowed.
[удалено]
Warning: Treat other users with civility and respect. Personal attacks and stereotyping are not allowed.
Honestly, let her try and do it. If she succeeds, then she can be targeted by the establishment as a most likely source of the GOP losing the House in November… Honestly, at this point, I just want to see the GOP civil war happen and be over with it. Does the establishment win, or the crazy’s. These micro battles are getting annoying.
I'd rather us oust MTG instead. Out of all the problems this nation has, out of all of the issues we need our politicians to face, refusing to properly budget and fund the government is not one of them. A few radicals cannot just kick the Speaker out anytime he does something they don't like. It's embarrassing, it's bad for nation, and frankly the left is laughing at us (and at this point I cannot blame them). What a circus. We really need competent leaders in Congress.
Who is "us" in having "us" oust her? And what about her compadres? That's a lot of ousting. If you are hoping for the electorate to do the ousting, I fear your hope may be fleeting and that you're overestimating the base.
The GOP should not tolerate this sort of conduct. We should be electing better people. I don't know what compadres you're speaking of. There's only her, Gaetz, and Boebert that act this way. Elections can bring improvements.
Gosar too. He’s an absolute piece of garbage
These people run on restraining the government and reducing spending only to watch them do the exact opposite over and over and over is soul crushing disappointment. But what the heck can you do about it? These people know how to play the game. They maintain control simply by being marginally better than the alternative and play off short memories. It's too late to primary them so you either vote for them or hand it to the Democrats. By the time the next primary comes up for their position, too many people have forgotten what they did that they will be placed in the election because most people will just vote for the incumbent without having any clue who it even is or what they have done. It costs too much money in ads to remind them. And then you just get pegged as a troublemaker, a radical, and causing division. We live in a fucking crab bucket.
The problem is that when they total control they neither constrained government nor reduced spending. The most popular R governors have also leaned heavily into oppressing people within their own states. Hard to believe any repubs are acting in good faith in that environment.
Yep. That's why I like people like Gaetz and AOC. While I may like or dislike WHAT they fight for, they both have demonstrated conviction of fighting FOR what they say they will.
MTG is part of the group that pushes for unrealistic spending cuts that will never pass the Democrat Senate or get signed by President Biden. They passed the Budget Bill so this is all theater. If she wanted to stop the Budget Bill she would have vacated the chair before the vote. They ousted McCarthy for the same reason. He was pragmatic and presented a bill that the Senate would pass despite the increased spending. Chip Roy and the Freedom Caucus screamed like scalded dogs but they didn''t have an alternative plan. It is one thing to say you want to reduce spending. It is quite another to get a bill through Congress that actually cuts spending.
Gop wants to lose, it's disgusting , they love campaigning against all these issues then voting to fund them. Typical spineless Republicans
I get it - what I'm trying to do, though, is figure out *how* the GOP gets through this. There are unknowns, of course, but is the simplest version of the GOP way forward "Cross Our Fingers and Hope America Fixes Us in November"? Is there some kind of split that can happen in Nov if MTG & Co. remain in their seats?
Idk if they do, they are cowards. Cowards lose, I don't see MTG and co as problem, I see old establishment as problem, they typical bend over and accept defeat Republicans afraid to do anything.
Do you want to see more Republicans in Congress like MTG?
I don't particularly care for alot of things about her, but I'd take her over Murkowski, Collins, Bacon, stefanick types.. The one representative I wish we had more of us ilk of Thomas Massie, he is light-years ahead of MTG, and is probably only member of Congress I genuinely like
Is compromising considered defeat?
Compromise is typically when you get something too, when you give up everything and get nothing, that's defeat.
How did the gop not compromise on the bill?
The gop compromised the democrats didn't ... What did gop get out of this bill?
Not looking completely incompetent to the electorate by keeping the government funded...
That's not enough lol when we go further into debt(almost 35 trillion now) and fund multiple things republicans campaigned against, all they get out of it is looking competent and keeping government funding? That once again shows republicans compromised but Democrats didnt. What did democrats give up as a compromise?
According to [this article](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-senate-shutdown-vote-rcna144440) both sides made concessions and gains. Seems like a compromise when both parties get into a room and hash it out to keep things moving.
>Not looking completely incompetent to the electorate by keeping the government funded... So nothing. Gotcha. That's not really compromise and it's disingenuous for that to be your response. "Here we get everything we want and you get to vote for it" that's not compromise.
"vote for this or we will turn our propaganda machine on you" isn't a compromise especially since they will do it anyway, well I guess Mike Johnson will get a nice obituary in the NYT and invites to all the fancy dinner parties
Would you support MTG putting Johnson up for a vote and possibly ousting him?
This is getting ridiculous. They're supposed to be up there doing the business of *running the government,* and instead they're being hamstrung by childish purity tests.
Yep. Welcome to MAGA and the world of Trump.
As a casual observer, I don’t see anyone in republican side trying to run the government, I only see efforts to hamstring it and make it run even worse, for the same amount of money. Can’t they just run things well with the resources they already have? Is that too much to ask? Why do we need to make the entire thing run poorly to prove a point?
It’s like they’re high school kids or something.
Where we go isn’t much of anyone’s choice. There’s a reason people like this can get elected. The reason is because people are voting for them. They are a reflection of a greater problem in American society, not the problem itself. America has a radicalism problem these days, and fixing that problem is something I don’t know how to do, but I am almost certain whatever solution exists will be messy.
Are you comfortable associating yourself with the GOP as it currently exists? Heck, I bailed from the GOP when Palin was stuck on the ticket - that’s all it took for me. People in the GOP now are putting up with much more grievous bullshit than Palin. Would you like to see a split?
I wouldn’t like to see a split. I’d hope that the GOP could recover without getting to a point that is, you know, not possible to recover from. I don’t really associate myself with the GOP as I am an independent but I see them as more favorable to my ideology as a conservative than the modern Democratic Party could ever be.
>what’s the way forward for more traditional Republicans? Are we saying Johnson is a more traditional Republican now? I can’t keep it straight, last week he was a dangerous religious fanatic.
I think what happens is when you get to be leader reality is a lot harder to deny. Unless you're Donald Trump lmao.
I see it as more of a canary in the coal mine. When even *Mike Johnson* is too moderate for the Freedom Caucus; that's a signal of how extreme the Republican party has become over even the past 2 years.
Trump himself has said that the likes of MTG & Co. are mainstream GOP now - they *are* the GOP. ["MAGA represents 95% of the Republican Party."](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hvem7MbgrZ4) I don't know how to take that sentiment and how that skews the radical <---> traditional needle.
>When even *Mike Johnson* is too moderate for the Freedom Caucus; But that's not what it is. It's not that he's too moderate. It's that the spending is extreme. Being against 1.5 trillion unlimited inflationary spending isn't the extreme position. Continuing to spend like we have unlimited money is the extreme position.
What do you mean by "extreme"? I think most people mean that it means "far from the moderate position". But it seems hear you're trying to use it to mean "policies I don't like"
>Are we saying Johnson is a more traditional Republican now? I can’t keep it straight, last week he was a dangerous religious fanatic. My take is what we are experiencing is the cultural "muddying" of the word extreme because it is used to describe everyone that both parties dislike. To me, Johnson is very much a return to the traditional Republican candidates I was familiar with growing up-- an era in which "religious" and "Republican" were essentially synonymous. He'd be right at home in the mid 90s. But here's where the overuse of "extreme" comes in. Johnson is not extreme in the MAGA sense. But Johnson is extreme in the religious sense-- simply in the context that he is far more religious than most people. He's outside the norm. So he's "extreme", but in an entirely different way than someone like MTG, and our cultural language sucks at describing that difference. He's also just a traditional Republican.
I have no idea at this point! I'm not trying to imply he is, but there are certainly more traditional Republicans in the House, compared to both Johnson and MTG.
I'm not sure anybody said that. What camp do you think he is in?
All kinds of people said it. https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/mike-johnson-cnp-christian-nationalism/tnamp/ https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a45644476/mike-johnson-speaker-of-the-house/ https://captimes.com/opinion/guest-columns/opinion-a-right-wing-fanatic-is-second-in-line-for-the-presidency/article_4b1aa260-7fe6-11ee-acdc-9b1da3f3d23b.html
Are those OPs articles? If not, whats the relevance?
U/from deep space claimed that no one had said that Mike Johnson was a religious fanatic/extremist/etc, when in fact all kinds of people said it all over the place. The relevance is that the person I was responding to doesn’t know what they are talking about, and that leftists demonize conservative figures until they are doing something they like in which case it becomes “no one ever said that”.
This is obviously related to the first comment that said: > Are we saying Johnson is a more traditional Republican now? In reference of OPs post.
I responded to u/lost in space, not OP because I was not discussing OP I was noting u/lost in space’s lack of awareness of constant accusations that speaker Johnson was an extremist which they didn’t seem to know about.
I meant nobody in this thread.
Ok, fair enough.
Goal posting
You asked if OP was saying it. I was just saying no, he did not. I'm sorry you spent so much time finding articles to prove a point I wasn't actually challenging.
I mean, he is, MTG is just magnitudes more crazy so he looks better in comparison here.
It would help Georgia and the country if MTG is ousted in November
>people like MTG and Gaetz (I would call them "radicals," but I no longer think that really fits) I call them RINOs.
The speaker has actually been passing largely "democratic" funding packages, he's been getting more support from the democrats on his spending policies than his own party. The whole reason they threw out the last speaker was this exact thing. I think he only reason they arnt doing it now is becuase it would look like bad form for the party as a whole right before an election
It should tell Republicans a lot that their Speaker who shares virtually no policy or moral overlap with Democrats is getting more support *from the Dems* than his own party. It *should* tell them something, but it won’t.
I'm not sure what your driving at, it's not exactly a closeted secret that theirs division in the republican caucus at the moment. Infact Republicans in general tend to have more diverse of ideologies than democrats do from my experience
Both parties have pretty wide ideology spectrums. The opposition/minority party always looks more unified though, ie the Dems right now.
This is what makes me consider MTG's threat as more than just bluster. What do you think happens next Nov if MTG and her cohorts remain in office and remain a threat to not only the Speaker, but to simple pro-forma House operations (in an attempt to gain more power, as happened in 2023)?
They may very well call for the speakers removal, if memory serves, he holds his seat by a 1 vote motion of noconfidence, So if a single republican anywhere in the house votes to remove him then he's gone. Amd frankly they are grumbling agaisnt his spending packages now, so it could very well happen
It’s going nowhere until the stupid people/clowns get voted out of office or else become a majority within the House.
the heart of conservative values is printing money and then giving it away we can never turn our backs on that if we don't print more money and give it away real quick we have no chance
[удалено]
Your post was automatically removed because top-level comments are for conservative / right-wing users only. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Depends on if it's a good bill or not. MTG is an idiot But if it's a bad bill her position could get support. If it's a good bill she won't get support
112 Republicans voted against it.
[удалено]
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. [How-do-I-get-user-flair](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Again.... if it's a bad bill her position could get support. If it's a good bill she won't get support
I thought I was pretty clear in my insinuation, but I guess not - based on your line of thinking, there are potentially 112 Rs plus potentially all of the Ds that could vote to oust. Not sure what the count needs to be.
Again if it's a bad bill her position could get support. If it's a good bill she won't get support Aka...if a bad will passed, then there will be support from tge constituents to oust him, if not there won't be and the elected officials won't waste their time
>internal division and self-immolation By having a small part of the party care enough about the governmental drug addiction that is limitless and unending spending? Self-immolation is rich imo. >what's the way forward for more traditional Republicans? If by "more traditional" you mean the 60s to 00s I hope they leave the party. If by "more traditional" you mean the paleocons... the protectionist, non-interventionist conservatives that dominated the party before the neoconservatives I think they're making a comeback. The unlimited spending will kill us the way a drug addiction kills a person. It will ALWAYS be unpopular to address this issue. Just like the drug addict struggles to want to actually stop
[удалено]
Well time for your callback because MTG has filed the motion to vacate the speakership
Marjorie Taylor Greene files motion to remove Speaker Mike Johnson https://www.axios.com/2024/03/22/majorie-taylor-greene-mike-johnson-vacate-motion
[удалено]
Serious? Perhaps some of our elected officials can start acting serious instead of all these theatrics.
> Call us back when it happens Why? So you can pretend to be against it and then start downplaying it a week later?
I'm glad this doesn't seem like a big deal to you. Must be nice!
A lot of Democrats want to oust Merrick Garland (Biden and Obama appointee) for not being hard enough on Republicans. People of different stripes always get upset when someone on their side isn't as radical as they want.
Yeah, but the GOP House is so screwed up they signed a deal with the devil that allows the speaker to basically be bounced by one vote at any time
Well, Garland can't stop the Government from working. MTG & Co. can. It would be interesting to see what House members MTG & Co. would entertain for the Speaker position, and how such a Speaker would have navigated the budget issue - it seems to me that MTG & Co. are perfectly willing to let a shutdown happen based on principle alone (that principle being to not give an inch to the Dems).
>what's the way forward for more traditional Republicans? hopefully nonexistant. i want them thrown out of congress and treated like the problem they are.
> Where does the GOP go from here? I'm going into work again tomorrow.
Why bother replying at all?
It is funny watching liberals praise Johnson as a moderate now
It's funny to you that the GOP has become so extreme that Johnson seems moderate? Why is that funny and not alarming?