What happens to the Republican Party now? (2 Viewers)

Thread Attachment browser

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
    MT15

    MT15

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Mar 13, 2019
    Messages
    23,858
    Reaction score
    35,226
    Location
    Midwest
    Offline
    This election nonsense by Trump may end up splitting up the Republican Party. I just don’t see how the one third (?) who are principled conservatives can stay in the same party with Trump sycophants who are willing to sign onto the TX Supreme Court case.

    We also saw the alt right types chanting “destroy the GOP” in Washington today because they didn’t keep Trump in power. I think the Q types will also hold the same ill will toward the traditional Republican Party. In fact its quite possible that all the voters who are really in a Trump personality cult will also blame the GOP for his loss. It’s only a matter of time IMO before Trump himself gets around to blaming the GOP.

    There is some discussion of this on Twitter. What do you all think?



     
    weird story

    Same group Sheriff Joe Arpaio belongs to
    =================
    Lander County, Nevada, is shelling out $2,500 for lifetime membership to a controversial, far-right law-enforcement group, The Daily Beast has learned. For their money, residents will get some lapel pins, a plaque, and a big party featuring an alleged participant in the Jan. 6 attack on the United States Capitol.

    A former mining boom community in the Nevada desert, Lander County is the rural home to fewer than 10,000 residents. But after a 4-1 vote by its board of commissioners, it’s the first in the nation with a dubious distinction: Lander will become a county-level member of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, a right-wing group that promotes sheriffs as the last bastion of freedom and safety in Joe Biden’s America......

     
    don't think this needed it own thread

    wasn't sure where to put it

    Could anything be done about this - if you miss a certain number of votes there are consequences? Being removed from any committees you serve on? Miss a higher amount of votes you can't run for re-election?
    =============================

    North Carolina Republican Rep. Madison Cawthorn has missed more votes -- 16.2% -- than any other freshman member of Congress, according to Quorum data first reported by Axios.

    In fact, the five biggest vote-missers among House freshman members are all Republicans, with Cawthorn followed by Georgia Rep. Andrew Clyde (missed 13.4% of votes), Wisconsin Rep. Tom Tiffany (8.5%), Florida Rep. Scott Franklin (7.8%) and New York's Chris Jacobs (5.6%).

    (Worth noting: New York Rep. Jamaal Bowman is the freshman Democrat who has missed the most votes in this Congress, at 2.82%).

    Cawthorn's spokesman explains it away by noting the congressman was off getting married for a few days last month. But a four-day absence doesn't fully explain the sheer number of missed votes by Cawthorn.

    None of this is by accident. Cawthorn, the youngest person ever to be elected to Congress in modern history, has been crystal clear on how much he values the nuts and bolts of legislating and voting (very little) and how much he prioritizes building his personal brand (a whole lot).

    "I have built my staff around comms rather than legislation," wrote Cawthorn in an email to his colleagues the same month that he was sworn in to Congress.

    Which pretty much says it all. Cawthorn views his seat in Congress not as a perch to pass legislation (or even vote regularly!) but rather a springboard to raise money, get on TV and be a player in Trumpworld.............

    Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene is perhaps the best example of this trend. She has been stripped of her committee seats due to her past statements and actions and yet has become one of the most recognizable Republican members of Congress due to her antics.

    The trend, unfortunately, within the Republican Party is toward more Cawthorns, more Greenes and more Matt Gaetzs and fewer people who view their jobs as working on legislation -- and voting on it..........

     
    Last edited:
    MT15 said:
    New Atlantic piece:

    Click to expand...


    Important paragraph in this article
    =========================

    The mindset that this gives rise to in MAGA world is something like this: We are victims of a monstrous injustice. Our revered leader, Donald Trump, was removed from office by illegitimate means. It was done by those who are determined to destroy us, and to destroy our country; they cheated their way to power. Nothing like this has ever happened before in American history, and we must employ every available weapon at our disposal to undo this historic abuse of power, this coordinated assault on our rights. If others won’t protect us, we will take matters into our own hands. We would prefer it not to be violent, but sometimes violence is a necessary recourse, and we are in uncharted territory. We will do what we must. After all, we are victims of “THE CRIME OF THE CENTURY.”

    This is how the road to political violence is paved.

    Trump himself, during his remarks before and on January 6, understood that he did not need to explicitly call for violence in order to provoke violence. If his supporters accepted the arguments he made at face value, violence became, in their minds at least, the only patriotic response.........
     
    insidejob said:
    He just blows wherever the winds go too.
    Click to expand...
    austinpowers.jpg
     
    Article about how GOP warning signs were ignored in 2012
    ==========================================

    The essay described congressional extremists, their rejection of truth, a party turning into authoritarians or "an apocalyptic cult." It bore a striking headline:

    "Let's just say it: The Republicans are the problem."

    It didn't mention Marjorie Taylor Greene, the deadly January 6 insurrection or Donald Trump's Big Lie. In fact, the words "Donald Trump" did not appear at all.

    Published in 2012, that Washington Post piece demonstrates more than the foresight of its political scientist authors, Tom Mann of the center-left Brookings Institution and Norm Ornstein of the center-right American Enterprise Institute. It shows the disease within the Republican Party had spread long before Trump metastasized it.

    Their conclusions -- that the GOP had become "ideologically extreme, scornful of compromise, unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science, dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition" -- did not gain wide acceptance then. Many journalists joined leading Republicans in dismissing them.

    "Ultra, ultra liberals" whose views "carry no weight with me," sneered Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell.

    "I thought they overstated things," Republican Charlie Dent, then serving his fourth term in the House from Pennsylvania, recalls now.

    "People like me were thinking, 'Yeah, there are some kooky people around, but c'mon,'" says William Kristol, who was then editing the conservative Weekly Standard magazine. With John Boehner as House speaker and Mitt Romney winning the GOP presidential nomination, Kristol saw the Republican mainstream still in command.

    Facing reality​

    All have since gotten slugged by reality. What ailed the party in 2012 has worsened.

    Kristol's magazine, having diverged from Trump-era orthodoxy, no longer exists. Of his earlier sources of reassurance: Boehner fled Congress to author a book decrying his colleagues' dysfunction; Romney has become a pariah as the only Republican senator who twice voted to convict Trump on impeachment charges.

    Dent, now a CNN political commentator, quit the House after moderates like him became further marginalized. McConnell was shaken by violence inside the US Capitol for which he declared the defeated Republican President "practically and morally responsible."

    "I don't get much satisfaction out of being right," says Mann, now retired in California. "A country, and a system, like ours has to have two strong governing parties. The fact is, we only have one."

    "It's a grim picture for the foreseeable future," adds Ornstein. "We have a serious risk of losing our democracy."................

     
    That is the TX house, I was confused for a minute. Not the US House. I guess I’m tired, lol.
     
    Saintamaniac said:
    IMO, there are no Republicans currently holding office that truly feel that the trump republicans are a threat to the country. If they did, they would do something along the lines of what someone mentioned previously and stop caucusing with the Republicans and help Democrats pass legislation that would put an end to what state republicans are currently trying to do.

    That action by itself would ensure the continuance of the democracy we have come to know. I'm not saying they have to become democrats or get on board with everything democrats stand for. In fact, that action would actually help begin the process of re-establishing a Republican party built on true conservative ideals and principles. It would neuter the trump party.

    I'd love nothing more than to have 3 or 4 republican senators come on board with democrats to pass voter rights and the infrastructure bills. That action would probably give moscow mitch the turtle mcconnell a heart attack.
    Click to expand...
    The problem is they aren’t against republican legislation, just morons that make them look bad.
     
    MT15 said:
    That is the TX house, I was confused for a minute. Not the US House. I guess I’m tired, lol.
    Click to expand...
    Either way that is ridiculous. Big government is bad? These people believe in nothing beyond authoritarianism. The anthem has no place at sporting events, period. There is nothing patriotic about a sporting event.
     
    bird said:
    Either way that is ridiculous. Big government is bad? These people believe in nothing beyond authoritarianism. The anthem has no place at sporting events, period. There is nothing patriotic about a sporting event.
    Click to expand...

    I don't disagree that there's nothing particularly patriotic about a professional sporting event, particularly one that pits two teams from the same country against each other. I think in the rest of the world, they only play anthems in international play (competitions between national teams of two or more countries) or championship games.

    It has, though, become customary in North America and that's fine, it's a free country. But good lord compulsory national anthem playing is definitely fascist-y. Technically its a statutory contract requirement, if you don't have a contract with the state, you don't have to do it. But these days the state is entangled into all sorts of venue-management, incentive, and other deals. What legitimate interest does the State of Texas have in making the playing of the national anthem compulsory for its pro-team contractual partners? This is just more red meat bullshirt.

    Query whether a new state requirement for state contracts can be written into existing contracts by statute, I suspect it cannot. In other words, the law only applies to contracts signed after the statute's effective date. It may also raise First Amendment issues, though the contract framework is different than a broadly applicable law, I'm not sure how that works.
     
    Last edited:

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Register

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Share this page

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom