Next Speaker of the House? (14 Viewers)

[MT15]

There’s a lot of doubt that Kevin McCarthy will be able to get enough votes to become Speaker. It certainly won’t happen on the first ballot. Already Boboert and MTG are publicly at odds over it.

Maybe this is worth it’s own thread to watch. One person mentioned is Scalise.

 

[J-DONK]

Please expound on how the Democrats "LET" the republicans steal the seat that the senate refused to fill after Scalia died.

That entire list is full of loaded questions. I voted for Bernie twice. The DNC did stack the deck against him. Did that keep him from being the nominee in 2016 or 2020? No, it was his inability to capture a significant amount of the southern black vote.

 

[SystemShock]

Your premises are (generally) factual.

But the argument is a non sequitur. Your conclusion that the current state of the Republican party is somehow the fault of the Democrats is absurd and does not follow from your premises.

Who said anything about the state of the Republican party?
I am talking about the general state of things. If I gave you the impression I was talking about the state of the Republican party, then I didn't explain myself properly.

Really, my point is simply that the Democrats have not done enough or anything at all when they could do something to change the course of things.

 

[Optimus Prime]

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said Tuesday the notion of separation of church and state was a “misnomer” and that the nation required “everybody’s vibrant expression of faith.”

Johnson made the comments in an interview with CNBC’s “Squawk Box” after host Andrew Ross Sorkin asked about an image of the lawmaker praying on the House floor earlier this year.

“When the founders set this system up, they wanted a vibrant expression of faith in the public square because they believed that a general moral consensus and virtue was necessary,” Johnson said. “The separation of church and state is a misnomer, people misunderstand it.”

“Of course, it comes from a phrase that was in a letter that Jefferson wrote, it’s not in the Constitution,” he continued. “And what he was explaining is they did not want the government to encroach upon the church — not that they didn’t want principles of faith to have influence on our public life. It’s exactly the opposite.”.............

MSN

 

[Huntn]

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said Tuesday the notion of separation of church and state was a “misnomer” and that the nation required “everybody’s vibrant expression of faith.”

Johnson made the comments in an interview with CNBC’s “Squawk Box” after host Andrew Ross Sorkin asked about an image of the lawmaker praying on the House floor earlier this year.

“When the founders set this system up, they wanted a vibrant expression of faith in the public square because they believed that a general moral consensus and virtue was necessary,” Johnson said. “The separation of church and state is a misnomer, people misunderstand it.”

“Of course, it comes from a phrase that was in a letter that Jefferson wrote, it’s not in the Constitution,” he continued. “And what he was explaining is they did not want the government to encroach upon the church — not that they didn’t want principles of faith to have influence on our public life. It’s exactly the opposite.”.............

MSN

And the real agenda: Christian Theocracy…

 

[cuddlemonkey]

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said Tuesday the notion of separation of church and state was a “misnomer” and that the nation required “everybody’s vibrant expression of faith.”

Johnson made the comments in an interview with CNBC’s “Squawk Box” after host Andrew Ross Sorkin asked about an image of the lawmaker praying on the House floor earlier this year.

“When the founders set this system up, they wanted a vibrant expression of faith in the public square because they believed that a general moral consensus and virtue was necessary,” Johnson said. “The separation of church and state is a misnomer, people misunderstand it.”

“Of course, it comes from a phrase that was in a letter that Jefferson wrote, it’s not in the Constitution,” he continued. “And what he was explaining is they did not want the government to encroach upon the church — not that they didn’t want principles of faith to have influence on our public life. It’s exactly the opposite.”.............

MSN

So we have a Speaker that doesn't understand the definition of "wall" or "separation".

 

[Taurus]

Which one is the absurd part?

Is not true that many non-Republicans voted for Trump?
Is it not true that many Sanders followers didn't vote for Hillary?
Is it not true that the DNC shoved Hillary down everyone's throats?
Is it not true that Hillary stunk up the 1st and most importantly the 3rd debate?
Is it not true that Democrats' votes could've kept the devil they knew in McCarthy by voting him to stay? Especially knowing the alternatives (and they had to know, right? Or are they THAT incompetent?
Is it not true that Democrats' votes kept George Santos in the House?
Are you going to sit there and tell me that, for the most part, Democrats just cry about things the Republicans do, but just throw their arms up in the air and do nothing?


Please point out, which one is the absurd part?

We don't know if there was anything effective the Dems could have done about SCOTUS. Granted, the reason we don't know is that they didn't seem to try.

The DNC didn't ram Hillary anywhere. The sad truth is that Sanders couldn't get minorities to vote for him for love nor money. There's a strategic discussion to be had on whether or not dark red states that will never, ever play a role in selecting a Democrat President should have a role in selecting who that candidate is. If it were up to me, they wouldn't.

Now, if you want to rail on the Dems for not fighting hard enough or trying everything in the arsenal to stop the GOP from doing these heinous things, I can get behind that. If a single twatwaffle Senator can cripple the entire military command structure, surely there was something the Dems could've done to stall ACB's confirmation.

As for the Speaker debacle, I don't buy it being the Dems at all. In fact, I applaud them. McCarthy's a lying scumbag, incapable of negotiating in good faith. So the Dems took a shot that maybe, by some miracle, the Reps would replace him with someone who's at least an honorable RWNJ who keeps his promises.

To the "fighting with all you have" point, I see no reason to keep George Santos around when you have the opportunity to punt him. I know for a fact if the parties were reversed 'Ol George would be unemployed with a swiftness.

If you think of it like the Dems are the guard dogs whose job it is to keep the craven coyotes of the GOP at bay, I'd agree that Casper the Pyrenees would be ashamed of them.

 

[DaveXA]

Lol.

 

[FullMonte]

We don't know if there was anything effective the Dems could have done about SCOTUS. Granted, the reason we don't know is that they didn't seem to try.

Wouldn't ANY action on Scalia's replacement have required the Senate majority leader to bring the matter up to the floor?

 

[Taurus]

Wouldn't ANY action on Scalia's replacement have required the Senate majority leader to bring the matter up to the floor?

That's what I don't know. The Senate has some arcane rules (See Tuberville, Tommy) that allow a minority or a single Senator to inflict great pain on the majority. Could the Dems have done something similar? Maybe you lose anyway, but at least you go down swinging.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

That's what I don't know. The Senate has some arcane rules (See Tuberville, Tommy) that allow a minority or a single Senator to inflict great pain on the majority. Could the Dems have done something similar? Maybe you lose anyway, but at least you go down swinging.

They couldn't because they used the nuclear option on judges under Obama to get them through Congress. Because of that there was no way to force a vote. They took away all the power of the minority on judges.

The problem is so much is done under the auspices of “traditions and norms”. Now that the Republicans have gone full facist none of that matters to them anymore. In our political atmosphere right now the Democrats have brought a pebble to a bazooka fight. They are playing a whole different game than the Republicnas.

 

[coldseat]

They couldn't because they used the nuclear option on judges under Obama to get them through Congress. Because of that there was no way to force a vote. They took away all the power of the minority on judges.

The problem is so much is done under the auspices of “traditions and norms”. Now that the Republicans have gone full facist none of that matters to them anymore. In or political atmosphere right now the Democrats have brought a pebble to a bazooka fight. They are playing a whole different game than the Republicnas.

That was only for lower court judges in the Obama administration. It was the Republican's that used the nuclear option for SC justices to get Gorsuch appointed to the bench.

Also, that was after years of Republican obstruction on all lower court judge appointments. They were attempting and very much succeeded at doing what Tuberville is trying to do now with the military. It worked because as soon as Trump became president, Republicans filled all of those lower court vacancies with a flood of right wing conservative/unqualified judges and now we have the mess that we do with the courts. Democrats should have acted sooner with the nuclear option to prevent the worst of it, but "norms and tradition" got in the way.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

That was only for lower court judges in the Obama administration. It was the Republican's that used the nuclear option for SC justices to get Gorsuch appointed to the bench.

Also, that was after years of Republican obstruction on all lower court judge appointments. They were attempting and very much succeeded at doing what Tuberville is trying to do now with the military. It worked because as soon as Trump became president, Republicans filled all of those lower court vacancies with a flood of right wing conservative/unqualified judges and now we have the mess that we do with the courts. Democrats should have acted sooner with the nuclear option to prevent the worst of it, but "norms and tradition" got in the way.

I should have been more clear on the point about the nuclear option. The excuse Republicans used for the nuclear option on SCOTUS was that the Democrats did it with lower court judges. You're absolutely right on all counts. The courts are an absolute train wreck now.

 

[Huntn]

Not only Republicans voted for Trump.
Hillary got owned in the 1st and last debate.
Many Democrats refused to vote for Hillary, who was imposed on all by the DNC.
Many refused to vote because they felt Bernie Sanders got the shaft from the DNC.


And the Dems let them. Honorable mention goes to RGB for not knowing when to quit.


McCarthy could've stayed SotH if Democrats would've voted to keep him, and don't allow the Republicans to select anyone else.

Funnily enough, Democrats voted to keep George Santos in... go figure...



It's not shifting the blame, I am pointing out the unwillingness and inability of the Democrats to play the political game; I am highlighting that throwing your arms up in the air and saying "oh, well, there's nothing we can do, we go high when they go low" when there's actually things that could be done, has significantly contributed to how things are today.

Remember the 4 types of sin: thought, word, deed, and omission.

I partially agree with you. I’m most disturbed by a group of people who faced with a clear choice Hillary or Trump, decided to step on the rake, and chose the incompetant, corrupt, moronic, ignorant, myopic, anti-Democratic, fascist, racist by convenience, anti-constitution, narcissist, sociopath Peice of work and Party for all the wrong reasons or because they are plagued by all the negatives of self destructive human character, could not resist the flame.

 

[MT15]

This is the guy who when asked about his lack of any bank accounts on his financial disclosures said he was of modest means? Fork him.

 

[DaveXA]

This is the guy who when asked about his lack of any bank accounts on his financial disclosures said he was of modest means? Fork him.

Yeah, I mean, unless it was a family gift or something. I mean, I have a gold watch that was passed down from my dad. Depends on how he got it.

But yeah, doesn't really pass the smell test.

 

[MT15]

 

[bird]

I’m stunned.

Not.

 

[DaveXA]

I’m stunned.

Not.

Yeah, not surprising for sure, lol.