this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2023
422 points (96.5% liked)

politics

19072 readers
4700 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Democrats are sick of bailing the GOP out of their own messes, and boy, are Republicans whining about it

Anyone who has paid even the slightest attention to the events leading up to the historic ouster of Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., as speaker of the House knows exactly who is to blame here: McCarthy and his fellow Republicans. For years, they've rolled out the welcome mat to Donald Trump and his wrecking crew of MAGA camera hogs, foolishly believing that they could harness the chaotic villainy without getting burned in the process. They refused to listen to former Trump "fixer" Michael Cohen when he warned Republicans in 2019 that those who "follow Mr. Trump as I did, blindly, are going to suffer the same consequences that I'm suffering."

Granted, McCarthy didn't get hauled off to prison like Cohen. But he still faced a tasty comeuppance this week when the sadistic bullies he empowered in his caucus, led by Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida, vacated his seat for no other reason than the sheer satisfaction of taking out their leader. Now shellshocked Republicans know who they want to blame for everything that has happened, and — surprise! — it's not themselves. Oh no, they're mad at Democrats for refusing to swoop in and save McCarthy from his fate.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] logicbomb@lemmy.world 124 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Hilariously, nobody can explain why it would be in Democrat interests to save McCarthy. He could have negotiated with them, but he refused to do so.

He was already reneging on the agreement he made with Biden. He unilaterally started pointless impeachment hearings on Biden, instead.

McCarthy reportedly told his own caucus that if he remained Speaker, he'd go against the Democrats even more.

All the Republicans have to do is to elect a new Speaker. Every single Congress has been able to elect a Speaker so far.

Oh and by the way, it seems that Trump cannot be elected Speaker due to some rules of the House that Republicans put in place about electing someone with felony indictments.

[–] Nougat@kbin.social 32 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Oh and by the way, it seems that Trump cannot be elected Speaker due to some rules of the House that Republicans put in place about electing someone with felony indictments.

Not saying that's untrue, but source? I'd like to look it over for myself.

Edit: Found this.

Yes, the GOP has Rule 26(a) and the Democrats have Rule 4, both of which say the speaker can’t hold the seat while under indictment. However, these rules aren’t legally binding and aren’t always followed.

[–] logicbomb@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Despite my pointing out the rule, I do actually agree with your research.

If you saw parts of the Impeachment investigation clown show that the House GOP put on, you'll see the GOP repeatedly flouting the rules, and Democrats calling them out for it. For example, IIRC Jamie Raskin pointed out that it goes against House rules to impugn the president's character, for example, they were calling him a liar, on the floor of the House, except in an impeachment inquiry. And that they weren't allowed to have an actual impeachment inquiry without a vote. These are both House rules. He was overruled by the chair with an explanation along the lines of "This meeting is to investigate Biden, so those comments can be allowed." Which obviously goes against the rules of the House.

My real, true hope for the rule is that it gives everybody an excuse to do what they want to do, anyways. I think very few people actually want Trump to be Speaker. I think even Trump doesn't really actually want the job. It's similar to the Presidency. He probably wants to be chosen, but in reality, he doesn't want to do the work. And he's happiest if he doesn't get the job, and can whine and complain that the system has been rigged against him.

The position of Speaker is all procedure. You have to attend these long boring meetings. You have to know the rules. You have to read the rules and procedures aloud from a book in front of you. Let's not forget that Trump is functionally illiterate. If he tried to actually perform that role, it might be massively embarrassing for him. He also wouldn't have time to perform the role. So if he was elected Speaker, I think he would basically hold the role in absentia.

So I agree it's possible that Trump is the next Speaker, but my hope is that the rule gives everybody a reason not to choose Trump.

[–] rbhfd@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Conspiracy theorists will claim that it was all determined long ago and they started indicting Trump to prevent him from becoming Speaker.

[–] BigMcLargeHuge@mstdn.social 15 points 1 year ago

@logicbomb @MicroWave

This is what happens when self-entitled children get elected to office and why I hate half of my fellow citizens with such vitriol.

They shit on the floor, smeared paint on the walls and then burned down the entire house.

Their take on it?

"I can't believe you let me do that. Whats wrong with you?!?!?!"

[–] scops@reddthat.com 78 points 1 year ago (4 children)

There's a junior Congressman from NC, Jeff Jackson (D) who offers really candid views of the House floor. He sent out a newsletter after the vote which provided some insight on what Dems were thinking about the vote.

The Speaker knew he was going to lose those folks, but he was hoping to peel off a few votes from the minority party.

Some folks in the minority were expecting him to reach out and say, “Hey, let’s make a deal. I’ll offer you this, and I want your vote.”

But instead, he went on TV the day before and basically said, “Here is my offer to the other party: Nothing.”

The minority party heard that from him and said, “Well, ok then, best of luck.”

That said, I’m not sure the Speaker could offer anything to the minority party. If he did, and his party found out, they’d be furious, and then he wouldn’t need six votes anymore - he would need 20 or 30 or 50.

...

My sense is that if he had felt it were at all possible for him to stay in power by working with the minority party, he absolutely would have done it - he just knew it wasn’t.

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Reading that summary just tells me that everything is for sale in congress. Votes. Elected officials. Bills. Citizens. Everyone is constantly trying to get leverage to get what they want, and the country is caught in between them.

[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 18 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I mean yeah, that's kinda the whole point of how a representative democracy is supposed to work, minus outside lobbying.

The whole crusade folks went on against pork barrel legislation basically just trashed a full half of the tools politicians can use to negotiate a consensus. Probably not a coincidence that infrastructure integrity has taken a nosedive ever since it became taboo to ask for bridge repairs to sign on for a bill.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] scops@reddthat.com 2 points 1 year ago

I'd encourage you to check out some of the other content Jeff Jackson has put out. I originally followed him on reddit, but it looks like he also uploads to Youtube. He obviously has a progressive bias, but to hear him say it, most Congress reps (both sides) will wind up the media until the doors close, then their rhetoric tones down and they get to work. The far right are the exception in that they are NOT there to be productive, and the shouting and clickbait are as deep as they go.

[–] ghostdoggtv@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The GOP is a political mafia whose donors believed they had whipped the Democrats into servitude. Good for democracy.. down with the Grand Old Pedophiles

[–] MoonStache@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Jeff is awesome. I hope he sticks around for a while.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] CaptObvious@literature.cafe 66 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I know this should provoke… I don’t know… sadness? Resignation? Concern? Righteous indignation?

But I literally cannot stop laughing. Everything is the Democrats’ fault, including Republicans’ own egos. Oh the schadenfreude!

[–] blivet@artemis.camp 16 points 1 year ago

“Now look what you’ve made me do!”

[–] Zombiepirate@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

It's like a weight lifter who only works their biceps. They have one trick, and they're discovering the limitations therein.

They got voted out by their own party and still went for that bicep curl of "blame Democrats;" It just exposes their withering weakness when it comes to actually trying to negotiate in good-faith.

[–] bquintb@midwest.social 50 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Zombiepirate@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Now this is a meme worth reviving!

[–] Evilcoleslaw@lemmy.world 49 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I think the straw that absolutely broke the camels back -- preventing Dems from even thinking of voting Present or of simply voting to table the bill -- was McCarthy's shit-slinging over the weekend about Democrats delaying the CR. He's repeatedly said "they didn't want the bill, they tried to stop it" etc etc when all they wanted was some fucking time to read goddamn bill so they knew what they were voting on.

[–] krellor@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago

Yeah, it get that politics is politics, and to work together you need to sometimes separate a little bit what is said in an interview and what you can hash out on legislation on a personal level.

But damn did McCarthy go all out calling out the Democrats that weekend after ambushing them with a 70 page bill and an hour to read it. If he hoped to get Democrats support he should have put forward a better bill or kept his mouth shut over weekend.

[–] athos77@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Not only that, but he promised earlier in the year that any bill would have 72 hours for people to read through before a vote happened. So that's another promise he blew off.

[–] Jaysyn@kbin.social 47 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

"Look what you made me do" is the language of abusers.

McCarthy lied, so his Speakership died.

Simple as.

[–] Stern@lemmy.world 39 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Reminds me of the JASTA mess from a few years back when Obama vetoed JASTA, explained why he vetoed it, then it got passed over his veto then they realized, "Oh wait this could be bad for us."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice_Against_Sponsors_of_Terrorism_Act

https://www.cnn.com/2016/09/29/politics/obama-911-veto-congressional-concerns/index.html

[–] ripcord@kbin.social 24 points 1 year ago

You left out the most relevant part where they them blamed Obamq

[–] iforgotmyinstance@lemmy.world 28 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is what happens when you have a party with no apparent goals or platform beyond opposing the other sides goals. Infighting!

[–] psmgx@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

they very clearly have a set of goals and a platform, and that platform is pander to the hyper-weathy donors who drive their politics.

and thanks to Citizens United (or the NRA) many of those are foreign

[–] Kofu@lemmy.ml 25 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Save a idiot that wanted to overturn the election? Yeah, fuck off.

[–] paddirn@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago

He already went back on the previous deal that had been made, then specifically said he wasn’t going to give any concessions in exchange for the Speakership vote. I’m not sure what was expected. Everything in Congress is very transactional or based on previous good relations, McCarthy has neither of those going for him, soooo… oh well?

[–] Conyak@lemmy.tf 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What is always surprising to me, but shouldn’t be, is that the GOP consistently displays behavior of toddlers that most parents would not tolerate in their kids. Then they turn a blind eye when our elected officials behave that way. It’s strange and sad.

[–] ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If you look at it from another angle, that of using any tactic necessary to destabilize the work of government and to bring it to a publicly screeching halt as unpredictably, insanely, and often as possible, AND you look at it from the POV of who would benefit from seeing that happen, it makes a lot more sense.

But the strange thing here is not that the GOP outed its own speaker (they did it to Boehner in 2015) nor that they made a clown show of it, nor even that McCarthy seemed to go out of his way to renege on enough deals to make it happen.

To me, the truly strange thing is that part of McCarthy's election, one of the things he agreed to in order to be elected as speaker, was the specific change in the rules that allowed him to be ousted with Just One Vote.

House rules change every session; in and of itself a rule change is to be expected. But not this one.

Yet this particular rule change was demanded of McCarthy before he could get enough votes to be elected, AND he agreed to it . . . AND lately, seemed to want to ensure it would work. He went to Nancy Pelosi privately asking her advice before blasting her in the press; he did everything in his power to ensure he got NO Dem assistance in keeping his seat when it would have been nothing for him to at least keep from shitting on them publicly, and he made sure to piss off even his own side throughout.

Another thing. Speakers come and go, and many Speakers leave and become Speaker again, like Sam Rayburn and Tip O'Neill. But with the Pelosi/Hoyer office evictions it's like McCarthy is not only burning his election down now, but making absolutely sure no one will ever suggest him for Speaker again.

All this is is to say that whoever/whatever was behind that highly irregular change in the rules regarding ousting the Speaker was planning this from the beginning of the session, and when the time came, McCarthy wanted out badly enough to force it to happen, and in such a way that he will never be Speaker again.

And now there are just 44 more days before the next shutdown, with aid to Ukraine up in the air, and a next-to-useless pro tempore speaker who really can't do shit in terms of directing his party or getting legislation to the floor: for most intents and purposes, the US House of Representatives right now is leaderless.

EDITED to add links

[–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

He gave up the speakership when he gave in to the rule that any random child rapist could put forth a motion to vacate. We all know which child rapist it was gonna be, and that child rapist didn't disappoint.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] archiotterpup@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not just Republicans. But also "centrists".

[–] samson@aussie.zone 3 points 1 year ago

Who on the house floor actually occupies this position. It's only rhetoric used in debate netween regular people.

[–] twistypencil@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It's fake, all part of their plan to get Gym Jordan in as speaker

[–] buddhabound@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Nothing like Jordan seeking the spotlight to give journos a reason to look into why his nickname is "Gym".

This couldn't possibly backfire, could it?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›