We’re 
Current Affairs General US politics (ie, not POTUS related)
- Thread starter Dylan
- Start date
- Status
We’re
“George Bush was actually a Nazi”
I think it’s just very, very difficult to find a sane candidate from the GOP these days. Additionally the Republican rebels have shown they will throw their doll out of the pram any time that a speaker tries to reach across the aisle
We’re
These interviews where MAGA people get slightly close to the truth, then make an insane U turn are so frustrating to watch. It’s like the blue collar workers who complain about conditions and pay, then pivot to say something anti-union and anti free healthcare.
Like she’s technically correct that after WW2 the west did kinda screw over Russia (well the USSR) but misses the fact that Lenin had already been screwed over by Stalin and the realistic chance for a progressive movement for the USSR died with him (and even Lenin was pretty dodgy with what he did with Makhnovschina etc) (also it’s kinda funny as a point as she’s basically sticking up for communism there).
With what she said on Bush, Nazi is a bit of a weird one given the amount of MAGA Nazis, but Bush is definitely a war criminal. However, saying she wants Putin over Biden is patently insane. These interviews always end up as a weird maelstrom of mangled history interspersed with just completely random made up nonsense
Martin Alvito
Player Valuation: £50m
I don't see who the Republicans can get 218 behind. That was the problem in the first place. A large portion of the conference will want Pelosi's rule (majority of the conference to remove the speaker) back, and won't support a candidate who will not make that rules change. The hard right will never support a candidate who will make that rules change.
That leaves two paths forward. A candidate could pick up Democratic votes by making rules concessions. However, Jeffries is walking a tightrope. He wants maximum dysfunction that leaves the House unable to do much other than pass the Senate's appropriations bills. From a policy standpoint, the best way to get that is to force some rules concessions, but then the House looks functional and that may cost him at the ballot box next fall. Presumably, he calculated all that back in January and chose to hang McCarthy out to dry, so circumstances would have to change in a way that alters that calculation.
Alternately, the Republicans could take an expansive view of the powers of Patrick McHenry as interim speaker, arguing he has the ability to run the House. There's nothing in the rules package stopping him, but it would get awkward. He can't unmake members of Rules without a majority on the floor, and the control over Rules modern speakers possess dates to the Gingrich/DeLay alliance and fundraising prowess. McHenry isn't a star fundraiser, which will probably leave a lot of members vulnerable next fall. We've already seen Nancy Mace's response to that problem: attempt to get out in front of it by switching sides.
A majority of the House can also now block more or less anything McHenry tries to do the first time he tries it. The lone exception is overseeing the election of the next speaker. The only certainty is that absolutely no one knows what's coming next. We're in uncharted waters, which are likely to get choppy.
To be fair, for the whole of McCarthy giving his own obituary I was really hoping he’d call Gaetz a pedo, but he bottled it
I think any candidate that would be prepared to make rules concessions with Jefferies would face a rebellion of even more of their caucus and a well funded hard right opponent in the upcoming primary.
i genuinely think for a significant portion of the GOP primary voters that ”fighting the libs” is a higher priority than any policy achievements. Bipartisan means RINO and sellout.
There is no way Trump tempramentaly would be able to handle the workload of a Speaker, even without the trials/campaigning.
However looks like he might flirt with the idea for a time if only to sow more chaos, shutdown the government and get attention.
- Status