161
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by spaceghoti@lemmy.one to c/politics@lemmy.world

The crackup in the House GOP has gotten so bad that some Republicans are now asking Democrats for help in electing a speaker. So far, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), the current favorite among the right, hasn’t gotten anywhere close to the 217 votes he needs to secure the job.

With Republicans fractured and in need of saving, what should happen is that a few vulnerable members (such as those representing districts Joe Biden won in 2020) join Democrats in supporting Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), for the position. But that’s unlikely, because any Republicans who dare to do this would see their careers implode.

The next best thing, then, is a deal that both sides can accept. Republicans will have to offer meaningful concessions to Democrats to have any hope of getting their support for a consensus, relatively moderate GOP speaker.

At an absolute minimum, a compromise would tackle the core problem: That a few extreme members can propel the House into total meltdown, rendering it ungovernable. Several high-profile, non-MAGA Republicans, such as Reps. Mike D. Rogers (Ala.) and María Elvira Salazar (Fla.), have publicly called on Democrats to specify what they would need to throw the GOP a lifeline — and Democrats have several ideas in mind.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago

It would be good for the country? Or is it "party before county" with the Democrats also?

[-] jhymesba@lemmy.world 32 points 1 year ago

I like what everyone else is telling you here. This isn't party over country, you concern-trolling jerk. It's a simple fact. Jim Jordan is a piece of crap and the Repubicans have been slapping Democrats in the face every chance they get. They refuse to compromise with us. They make their decisions based on what will piss us off the most. You have no right to tell us who we should vote for.

We just need 5 Republicans to vote for Jeffries and we're out of this mess. He's a good Speaker candidate. He'll get shit done, and live up to his agreements, unlike your side (and yes, I'm assuming you're a Republican, but that's the side you're standing up for, so whatever). When he negotiates a bipartisan budget deal that includes shit neither side wants, he's going to live up to that deal, unlike your side, which wasn't satisfied with the cuts they extracted in the last negotiation and wanted more. You've proven you're not trustworthy, so why do you dare insist we compromise our principles to bail you out of a mess of your own making. We owe McCarthy jack shit because that's exactly how he treated us.

You want our help? Then put something on the table. Take the fucking Hastert Rule of the fucking table. Power-sharing, bitches. It's time because you can't govern with Team Pepe in your ranks. Live up to your fucking agreements. And this shit better be backed by hard policy BEFORE we give you our help because we know you're a bunch of lying, back-stabbing jerks looking for your next chance to 'own the libs'. I think that hard policy will be backing a Moderate Dem as Speaker. You not willing to do that? Then fuck you, fix your problems your own damn self.

[-] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago

Allowing nazis to have any power at all is bad for the country. It would be counter-productive and immoral for normal legislators to support them in any way at all.

When a nazi is doing poorly, you do not assist them. That is suicidal behavior.

[-] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago

I'm done talking with people who call Republicans nazis. It's not productive. It's like talking to Republicans who say "woke agenda".

[-] jhymesba@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago

You mean you're done talking [reality] (https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/gop-popular-front-white-nationalism/)? That you're done talking about the protection of Neo-Nazis and White Nationalists in the military? And about the deep dies Paul Gosar has with Neo-Nazis, Anti-Semites, Islamophobes, and White Nationalists and his sharing of images depicting political violence against Democrats?? Or the guy who insisted that teachers be 'fair' describing Nazism in Indiana Schools? Oh, those sources are biased and just part of the Leftist plan to attack good American Republicans by calling them Nazis, when we all know that Nazis are a Left-Wing party, right? What about Fox News in a rare moment of honesty saying that outright Neo-Nazis, complete with antisemetic rhetoric, and White Supremacists are winning Republican Primaries and running as representatives.

Not all Republicans are Nazis, for sure, but Nazis are voting for Republicans in exchange for their policies and philosophies to gain support in State Houses across the country and in Washington DC. The Right has, as a whole, embraced Trump, who is famously known for retweeting a Mussolini quote and calling it 'very good' when confronted by it. And their goal, honestly, is to completely stop minorities and gays from voting so they can set up, if not a Permanent Republican Majority, then at least a system to block Democrats from making changes until they can steal back power again.

Now, you can take your Concern Trolling and buzz off.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

This. THANK YOU.

[-] Red_October@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

Maybe without you the conversation can make some progress. Bye Felicia.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

You might not think it is productive, but it's true for a great deal of the party.

[-] Ataraxia@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago

They're openly nazis though lol wtf

[-] Cavemanfreak@lemm.ee 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Giving Republicans lifelines every single time is how they have learned that they can behave this way. If they keep doing it it will only get even worse. Why is it that the onus is always on Democrats to compromise/fix things, and not the Republicans?

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Yep. This feels like another "why won't Obama lead?!!" type of narrative.

[-] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago
[-] LilB0kChoy@lemm.ee 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Is it? Doesn’t the Republican Party hold 221 seats in the House? Isn’t it 217 needed to vote in a new speaker for this Congress?

The republicans shouldn’t need any help from democrats to elect a speaker and democrats should be voting against a speaker candidate who they feel would impede meaningful legislation or work against the interests of their constituents.

My take on it is the Republican Party can’t field a realistic candidate because they are trying to please an extreme subset of the party rather than working with democrats to find a middle ground candidate.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m sure there are reps from the Dem side that will refuse to vote for any nominee who is republican. I just think it’s disingenuous to accuse the minority party as a whole of practicing party over country when the majority party voted out their previous pick for speaker for working with the other party.

Edit:spelling, because I don’t proof read until after I post.

[-] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

Is it? Doesn’t the Republican Party hold 221 seats in the House? Isn’t it 217 needed to vote in a new speaker for this Congress?

It is - because the GOP can't get their shit together and Democrats don't want to work with them because it's advantageous to them to watch the GOP crash and burn. But the rest of us are stuck with a worsening credit rating because nobody trusts our government to do shit anymore.

I'd like to see them cut a deal that gets some concessions with moderate Republicans. Maybe a group of moderates from both side who can hash out a budget? That sort of thing. it maybe what they're trying to do - they wouldn't advertise it unless it was likely to work. But we should want the parties working together. That's how things are supposed to work.

[-] DemBoSain@midwest.social 5 points 1 year ago

Perhaps, just like every other election in the US, the person with the most votes should win. Then I'll bet Republicans could find their asses.

this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2023
161 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19170 readers
4929 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