Jump to content

Disfunction Junction, What's Your Function, House Republicans? Embarrassment To The Nation


Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, JaCrispy said:

I’m talking about when everyone compromises, the little guy tends to get screwed in favor of big corporate donors…

 

I don’t know who will come out on top for the Republican speaker, but it is nice to see some people standing up to the big donor politicians, to protect our borders, reign in spending, etc…

 

Its refreshing to see that there are still people who won’t just bend over to the elites…👍

 

 

So, in your opinion, government shut down would help the elites

 

Because that’s where we’re headed with the Republicans

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Pokebball said:

You mean party partisanship. I wish there were a dozen common sense, do what's good for the country, on both sides. The House would work so much better. The partisanship ruined the House decades ago. The Dems following Gaetz is simply the latest proof of dysfunction.


That is what our electoral system has incentivizes. If you want to fix the result, you need to fix the actual cause of the problem and reform how we do elections. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ChiGoose said:

 

It's weird because traditionally the Dems have been the party of trying to herd cats while the GOP has been much better at voting as a solid bloc.

 

That seems to have flipped in recent years.

 

I think a large part of what's keeping the House GOP caucus in disarray is that they feel beholden to the MAGA wing. We saw this when dozens of them voted against Jim Jordan in a secret ballot after having voted for him on a public ballot. There is no platform, no goals, no ideals. Just a requirement to be completely owned by MAGA. That makes compromise within the party difficult and compromising across the aisle verboten.

It would be foolish to reach across the aisle to the political enemy for all accept those in districts that waffle between red and blue.  The status quo of today’s political debate is that other side is trying to destroy America.  Both sides claim you can’t trust the outcome of elections, that illegitimacy abounds, and that most assuredly @#$#s with confidence people have in government.  
 

It’s an age-old strategy, it tends to work reasonably well until the mood changes. For now, it just is where we’re at.  

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JaCrispy said:

Look what compromising on the immigration has done for inner city black and brown people of this country…it certainly hasn’t helped…

The complete and lack of compromise seemingly leaves this issue in continual purgatory, they never do ***** about it on either side.

1 hour ago, JaCrispy said:

Look how compromising with their insurance donors has kept Medicare for all away from the people…

 

This is absolutely true, talk about having no balls and just going half way and tripping over your own feet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This disfunction junction is what happens when a party abandons all principle and purpose and becomes a personality cult. They can’t even agree on a platform for what they believe in. They don’t know what they believe in, they don’t know what they want as a party. The Trumpers are afraid of choosing the wrong person who would upset the orange king. The moderates are finally standing up against the radicals. 
 

Dems and Pelosi had the same margin of majority and still managed to function fine. At this point they might as well renominate McCarthy. What a mess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Pokebball said:

You mean party partisanship. I wish there were a dozen common sense, do what's good for the country, on both sides. The House would work so much better. The partisanship ruined the House decades ago. The Dems following Gaetz is simply the latest proof of dysfunction.

 

1 hour ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

It would be foolish to reach across the aisle to the political enemy for all accept those in districts that waffle between red and blue.  The status quo of today’s political debate is that other side is trying to destroy America.  Both sides claim you can’t trust the outcome of elections, that illegitimacy abounds, and that most assuredly @#$#s with confidence people have in government.  
 

It’s an age-old strategy, it tends to work reasonably well until the mood changes. For now, it just is where we’re at.  

 

This is what First Past The Post electoral systems always devolve to. It's just much worse in our current social media / technology environment.

 

The only thing that has a chance at breaking the mold is rethinking how we do elections to empower the voters and incentivize cooperation, not polarization.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, JaCrispy said:

It’s not really discipline when Dems, being the minority, had nothing to lose with their vote for Jeffries….anybody can do that…

 

Discipline is knowing your vote might put you in the minority, but you stick to your principles- unlike people like the Squad, who ran on challenging the Dems, but fell in line out of fear…👍

No.  That's more courage than discipline.  The people that put the squad in their place practiced party discipline.  However, the Republicans that ousted McCarthy weren't courageous at all as he was the most conservative speaker since Gingrich.  They now get more attention now and fundraising money because they can claim they're anti establishment (whatever that is nowadays) in exchange for hurting the GOP's optimistic outlook for 2024.  They're selfishness could potentially be disastrous for the country.  Gaetz and those Republicans that voted with him are clowns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Cult 

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/10/24/i-killed-him-how-trump-torpedoed-tom-emmers-speaker-bid-00123329Just hours after Rep. Tom Emmer (R-Minn.) won the Republican Conference’s nomination to be House speaker on Tuesday, former President Donald Trump took to Truth Social to deride the congressman as “totally out-of-touch with Republican Voters” and a “Globalist RINO.”

He then got on the phone with members to express his aversion for Emmer and his bid for speaker.

By Tuesday afternoon Trump called one person close to him with the message, “He’s done. It’s over. I killed him.”

Just minutes later, Emmer officially dropped out of the race.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, JaCrispy said:

I’m talking about when everyone compromises, the little guy tends to get screwed in favor of big corporate donors…

 

I don’t know who will come out on top for the Republican speaker, but it is nice to see some people standing up to the big donor politicians, to protect our borders, reign in spending, etc…

 

Its refreshing to see that there are still people who won’t just bend over to the elites…👍

 

 

Its laughable that you think the GOP is going to do what you suggest above. AFA as both "protecting our borders" and 'reighning in spending"  - neither of these will be substanively dealt with without legislation. This means a bipartison effort. The MAGA GOP has made it clear this will not happen.

 

So much for the little guy. 

 

Big Corporate Donors? You can thank Scalia for scuttling  any control of that under the guise of "textulism" - The cruel joke is that the GOP got the "little guy" to buy in that this was good for him. Bravo

Edited by TH3
  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, TH3 said:

Its laughable that you think the GOP is going to do what you suggest above. AFA as both "protecting our borders" and 'reighning in spending"  - neither of these will be substanively dealt with without legislation. This means a bipartison effort. The MAGA GOP has made it clear this will not happen.

 

So much for the little guy. 

 

Big Corporate Donors? You can thank Scalia for scuttling  any control of that under the guise of "textulism" - The cruel joke is that the GOP got the "little guy" to buy in that this was good for him. Bravo

 

Yeah, it's the MAGA GOP that will prevent securing the border.  Good one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, TH3 said:

Its laughable that you think the GOP is going to do what you suggest above. AFA as both "protecting our borders" and 'reighning in spending"  - neither of these will be substanively dealt with without legislation. This means a bipartison effort. The MAGA GOP has made it clear this will not happen.

 

So much for the little guy. 

 

Big Corporate Donors? You can thank Scalia for scuttling  any control of that under the guise of "textulism" - The cruel joke is that the GOP got the "little guy" to buy in that this was good for him. Bravo

Oh, don’t get me wrong- I have ZERO faith in Republicans…I am not beholden to any political party…

 

Thats why I appreciate when things get shaken up a bit, to snap people out of the trans they are in, and cause people to think twice about why, what they are doing, is not working…

 

Its not a great situation, but it is certainly better than the status quo, imo…👍

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Meet Mike Johnson - the fourth Speaker Designate for the House,

receiving 127 votes from the GOP conference.

Mike has a Liberty Score of 74%.

He’s from the state of Louisiana and has served in Congress since 2017.

His voting record is mostly solid.

He was instrumental in getting the Texas Amicus Brief going in 2020

and voted AGAINST certifying the fraudulent 2020 election.

He has not voted in favor of any funding for Ukraine other than the initial funding bill.

He supported Trump’s ban on terror-prone nations.

He served as a member of Trump's legal defense team during both the 2019 and 2020 Senate impeachment trials

He’s extremely conservative on social issues.

In 2022, he introduced the Stop the Sexualization of Children Act,

which would prohibit federally funded institutions from promoting child sexualization and transgenderization.

 

He’s actually a great pick, though we just don’t hear much about him.

I like Mike. How about you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

An election denier? 

 

I.e. a POS 

funny how thats the current talking point.

 

when almost ever dem politicians did the exact same about the 2016 election

 

Does that mean all those voices are also POS?

 

Including the current DEM house lead and the last one.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Tommy Callahan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

There Is an Eerie Calm in the House Ahead of Today's Speaker Vote

By Joe Cunningham

 

FTA:

 

The feeling coming out of D.C., though, is that the chaos may finally be at an end. Johnson is poised to become the Speaker, and barring any more agents of chaos, the House will have its most conservative Speaker in decades.

 

 

https://redstate.com/joesquire/2023/10/25/there-is-an-eerie-calm-in-the-house-ahead-of-todays-speaker-vote-n2165530

 

 

.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Looks like some Dems are going to sit out the vote to allow him to get a majority with fewer Republican votes. I hope they extracted something in return for that favor 

Yes votes on war funding?

 

that guy has a record of advocating for civil liberties. that about all I know of him.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

As you can see from the usual suspects here, having an actual conservative as speaker is causing them to spout their little lies again.

 

 

 

"election denier"  When all their votes went to Jeffries who denied the 2016 results.

 

and don't get me started on "denier nancy" who served as speaker.

 

Well. lefties will be lefties   hypocrites

 

 

 

.

  • Agree 1
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Tommy Callahan said:

Then realize the DEM house members were voting for the "Big Lie" Jefferies at every vote. while their fans and pacs pushed the narrative about "They are election deniers"

 

 

 

While I disagree with Jeffries' statements, complaining about the legitimacy of an election and actually trying to overturn an election are very different things.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, JaCrispy said:

News flash Tibs- everyone’s an election denier…ON BOTH SIDES!

 

Get over it…😉

 

Sad Get Over It GIF

 

4 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

Hit the Show More tab

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Democrat Minority Leader

 

Now THATS how you deny an election !

 

 

 

Yeah Jeffries questioned the legitimacy of a President who didn't win the Popular vote, as well as bringing the real issue of Russian interference in the election. At the time there was a big push to investigate what Russia did and if Trump worked with them because lets face it he didn't do himself any favors in that department. What Jeffries didn't do was actively vote to overturn the election which isn't something Mike Johnson can say.

  • Eyeroll 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Warcodered said:

 

Yeah Jeffries questioned the legitimacy of a President who didn't win the Popular vote, as well as bringing the real issue of Russian interference in the election. At the time there was a big push to investigate what Russia did and if Trump worked with them because lets face it he didn't do himself any favors in that department. What Jeffries didn't do was actively vote to overturn the election which isn't something Mike Johnson can say.

Another election denier appears.

 

What was Mueller?  impeachment?  mobs forcing the orange dude into a bunker while K Harris called him illegitimate.

 

the revisionist history is off the chart.

 

 

 

 

  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...