Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

The Everything 118th Congress Thread


@DCGoldPants

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, tshile said:

Well. In the house. 
 

the senate just voted unanimously to let the dems fill Fiensteins seats on committees with majority party (dem) members. 
 

the senate is at least somewhat functional and has a little bit of professionalism to them. 

 

They aren't in charge in the senate so they get to follow if they choose, not lead, and last time GOP had full control of the White House and both sides of the Capital building it's hard to argue what was worse, this or that...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Renegade7 said:

 

They aren't in charge in the senate so they get to follow if they choose, not lead, and last time GOP had full control of the White House and both sides of the Capital building it's hard to argue what was worse, this or that...

Ok but they voted unanimously to do that, they didn’t have to, but they did. 
 

they are clearly on a different level than the house.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

Curious, is there a current example of good governing at the State level by the GOP that you can point to?

 

Let's back up for a second, what's happening in the House is so ineptly pathetic they can't even pass anything that would be looked at as the typical terrible **** we see at the state level, like concerning abortion.

 

This is truly unprecedented...

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Renegade7 said:

 

Let's back up for a second, what's happening in the House is so ineptly pathetic they can't even pass anything that would be looked at as the typical terrible **** we see at the state level, like concerning abortion.

 

This is truly unprecedented...

 

It's almost like the Party is broken. 🤔

  • Thanks 3
  • Haha 1
  • Super Duper Ain't No Party Pooper Two Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which metaphor works better?

 

Jim Jordan twisting in the wind like a Halloween skeleton hanging from a front porch on a windy day.

or

Jim Jordan getting repeatedly whacked like a pinata that won't bust open.

 

 

Either works for me. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
  • Super Duper Ain't No Party Pooper Two Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Thread text:

 

I am not a Congressional insider, and I spend most of my time worrying about states. But I have to say this Jim Jordan fiasco is such a window into how election denialism impacts everything, including the Republican caucus. Think about it:

 

How rogue the Jordan effort really is. That Republican reminded me of something we all have known—that the way it usually works is that whoever wins the majority caucus vote for speaker, wins the Speakership. Why?

 

Because those on the losing side of that majority Caucus vote have always agreed to accept that election loss, and then together vote for the winner when the entire House vote for who the speaker takes place between all the members of both parties.

 

So what is happening here? Jordan lost the vote for Speaker within his caucus. But some of those who voted for him now refuse to vote for the person who beat him (Scalise, terrible for other reasons) in the broader vote of the whole House.

 

They say they will only vote for Jordan then as well. They insist that he be Speaker even when he LOST the caucus vote to be speaker—when he couldn’t even get a majority of his own party to support him. Sort of like losing a primary but insisting you get to win the general.

 

Of course, true to form, Jordan also thinks he should get to be Speaker even though he failed to win the election he ran for Speaker. He is hoping that by refusing to play by the rules, and bullying people to submission, he will win even when he lost.

 

It’s yet another example of the mindset of election denialism. Through brute force tactics, breaking rules and conventions, and outright threats, you get to secure power even when you lose in a democratic process. You just refuse to accept the results, then win anyway.

 

It’s also a reminder of just how dangerous Jim Jordan is. Whether it’s January 6, or his own Speaker Election, this is what he does and this is what he will do. Refuse to give up power even when he lost. It’s also a reminder of why we all have to stand up to this.

 

Why would you ever let Jordan or his allies reduce your winning vote to 💩 by letting the guy who lost end up winning? Why would Scalise ever agree to that?

 

All of this shows that what Jordan is trying to pull off is as dangerous as who he has BEEN, for years. To let him succeed here would be one other example of election denialism in action, and working. And while I’m appalled that so many are willing to let him get away with it, I’m glad and hopeful that enough others will stand up to stop it. I appreciate their leadership to call it out. And when this is over, I hope they’ll apply the same attitude to all other efforts to deny the results of fair elections. END

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, tshile said:

Ok but they voted unanimously to do that, they didn’t have to, but they did. 
 

they are clearly on a different level than the house.

 

Knee deep or waist deep doesn't make a difference to me...its hard for me go give credit for that when they're typical MO has been opposing for the sake of dysfunction to blame on democrats and get more seats.

  • Thumb down 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Knee deep or waist deep doesn't make a difference to me...its hard for me go give credit for that when they're typical MO has been opposing for the sake of dysfunction to blame on democrats and get more seats.

 

I don't see anything wrong with giving credit when they don't do that...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Califan007 The Constipated said:

 

I don't see anything wrong with giving credit when they don't do that...

 

To each their own...

 

I have higher standards with respect to the damage being done by that course of action.

 

GOP didn't make a platform for 2020 election and McConnel blocked the equivalent for the senate in 2022 midterms.

 

https://www.axios.com/2021/12/03/mcconnell-no-agenda-midterms

 

Their job isn't to throw Dems bones every once in a while, that's not governing.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

To each their own...

 

I have higher standards with respect to the damage being done by that course of action.

 

GOP didn't make a platform for 2020 election and McConnel blocked the equivalent for the senate in 2022 midterms.

 

https://www.axios.com/2021/12/03/mcconnell-no-agenda-midterms

 

Their job isn't to throw Dems bones every once in a while, that's not governing.

 

Giving them credit when they do something right, is not the same as forgiving or forgetting all the times they did something wrong.

 

 

  • Thumb up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Califan007 The Constipated said:

 

Giving them credit when they do something right, is not the same as forgiving or forgetting all the times they did something wrong.

 

 

Don't let them off the hook, then...

 

For all we know McConnell is just acting nice to limit potential damage to his numbers in the next election. 

 

The math favours them getting the Senate back, but this is the same dude who helped get GOP in this mess in the first place. 

 

Don't let them off the hook, keep count if you want...dont expect him to met anyone halfway if he's majority leader again.

  • Like 1
  • Thumb up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

 

 

 

Didn't Buck vote against Jordan?...if so, why is his name on that letter asking people to vote FOR Jordan? lol...What am I missing?

 

 

 

2 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Don't let them off the hook, then...

 

For all we know McConnell is just acting nice to limit potential damage to his numbers in the next election. 

 

The math favours them getting the Senate back, but this is the same dude who helped get GOP in this mess in the first place. 

 

Don't let them off the hook, keep count if you want...dont expect him to met anyone halfway if he's majority leader again.

 

Who's letting them off the hook? lol...For me, being "on the hook" is not simply them receiving constant criticism no matter what.

Edited by Califan007 The Constipated
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Califan007 The Constipated said:

 

Who's letting them off the hook? lol...For me, being "on the hook" is not simply them receiving constant criticism no matter what.

 

Know who you dealing with and don't expect the same in return...

 

In a perfect world, I get it, in this one where McConnell won't denounce threats against his own colleagues in the House because it force him to do the same with Trump, no, I'm not yet in the mood for "giving credit where credit is due" with them...

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Destino said:

They should choose Ron Rivera. Everyone wins.


Yeah, he was here all last year and we never knew how good he could legislate.
You have to understand that this is year 3 of our house rebuild and you have to give us time.

Well, we are going to lose a lot because he is finally legislating and doing a good job but we’ll lose because he is legislating. He’s young.

 

This one might be true:

the previous boss created a lot of chaos. We couldn’t just legislate, we had to defend him and all the crap he has piled on our shoulders. We will be way better when we draft rookies that can play instead of being overridden by the boss. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...