US Politics: the McCarthy Trials

[Fragile Bird]

1 hour ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

I find it impressive that "Jewish space laser" lady now doesn't want to bring in any Gazan refugees to the US because we could be importing people with anti-Semitic views.

Anyway, the House cant even pass a resolution supporting Israel, so toothless tweets are all that are left for these clowns.

No refugees from Gaza are going to accepted into the US, Palestinians have attacked too many Americans. It’s funny you mentioned this, because I was just looking up the statistics on Syrian refugees in Canada. Justin Trudeau fought his election in 2015 on the basis he would bring in 25,000 refugees by the end of the year. You may not remember this, but there was outrage in some quarters in the US, voices saying Canada was importing 25,000 terrorists. Others demanded the rules for cross-border travel be immediately tightened, because of this. 

Well, as of today about 75,000 Syrian refugees have been admitted and I don’t think there have been any issues with crime related to them. I think they’ve had a harder time settling in than some refugee groups, because there wasn’t a very big supporting ethnic community in Canada, so integration may be happening more slowly, but we keep taking in more people. It’s harder to get in for Syrians because of the worries that terrorists could disguise themselves as refugees, and the vetting process is slow as a result. Also, once Covid hit everyone suffered across the board.

But I just looked at the US numbers and only about 20,000 Syrians have been granted refugee status. Of course, part of the problem was 4 years of Trump rule. But I wouldn’t hold my breath if I were a Gaza resident, waiting for admission. And to be fair, I think a lot of people in Canada would be seriously worried as well.

[IheartIheartTesla]

It isnt a question of 'killing Americans', but more that the US recognizes a Palestinian passport only as a travel document rather than recognizing citizenship of Palestine. In essence they are stateless where the US is concerned. Right now conservatives are trying to get a bill through Congress that will ban refugees from Gaza while progressives want us to take a whole lot in; in the end nothing will happen and the status quo will be maintained. 

As far as I can tell (there may be others) regarding the states from which immigration is non-trivial are Cuba, North Korea and Iran, but even then special dispensation could be made for those seeking asylum. Hopefully (barring acts of Congress or an EO) asylum seekers can still get their day in court - but Palestine is a tricky one.

[Varysblackfyre321]

https://vxtwitter.com/NBCNews/status/1710112694206935545
Louisiana Dems  had bad night tonight I think in large part because they think they thought they could out-conservative republicans on hot button issues(crime, abortion) and needed to hamper people to the left of center.

I’ve yet to a realization of this strategy being effective recently. NY constantly moaned on being tough on crime and Hocul and a solidly blue state only won by 6 points,

Florida Dems nominated a former Republican to be its gubernatorial candidate and he got creamed.

[Many-Faced Votary]

7 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

I’ve yet to a realization of this strategy being effective recently.

It never has been effective. Democrats who are indistinguishable from Republicans will always lose to the real thing, or in the few cases where that is close to impossible, barely win and lack a mandate to govern.

The strategy is commonplace because the Democratic Party as it exists today is a right-wing party. Center-right, yes; perhaps approaching the center, as of Senator Sanders' push to the left in 2020... But fundamentally conservative.

The further right Democrats go, the more they lose. Yet they continue to spend all their resources and efforts punching to the left in primaries, and even doing the same in general elections instead of placing themselves in opposition to the GOP.

I will quote President Truman here:

Quote

I've seen it happen time after time. When the Democratic candidate allows himself to be put on the defensive and starts apologizing for the New Deal and the fair Deal, and says he really doesn't believe in them, he is sure to lose. The people don't want a phony Democrat. If it's a choice between a genuine Republican, and a Republican in Democratic clothing, the people will choose the genuine article, every time; that is, they will take a Republican before they will a phony Democrat, and I don't want any phony Democratic candidates in this campaign.

[Martell Spy]

Senior House Republican says GOP members ready to block Jordan

https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/15/politics/jim-jordan-house-republicans-speaker/index.html

Quote

 

A number of House Republicans are in talks to block Rep. Jim Jordan’s path to the speakership as the Ohio Republican tries to force a floor vote on Tuesday, according to multiple GOP sources.

One senior Republican House member who is part of the opposition to Jordan told CNN that there he believes there are roughly 40 “no” votes, and that he has personally spoken to 20 members who are willing to go to the floor and block Jordan’s path if the Ohio Republican forces a roll-call vote on Tuesday.

“The approximately 20 I’ve talked to know we must be prepared,” the member said. “We cannot let the small group dictate to the whole group. They want a minority of the majority to dictate and as a red-blooded American I refuse to be a victim.”

 

 

[Tywin et al.]

You have to wonder if they even want a Speaker. 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

You have to wonder if they even want a Speaker. 

Could Liz Cheney be a real compromise candidate?  If 8 Republicans break and vote Cheney in conjunction with Democrats she could get the speakership.  I don’t agree with her on everything but she opposes Trump, supports the Constitution, and believes in democracy.

[Ormond]

3 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Could Liz Cheney be a real compromise candidate?  If 8 Republicans break and vote Cheney in conjunction with Democrats she could get the speakership.  I don’t agree with her on everything but she opposes Trump, supports the Constitution, and believes in democracy.

This question just popped into my mind -- I know that there is nothing legally that bars someone not presently serving in the House from being Speaker, but would there be any provisions for giving such a person a salary? Or would they have to serve for free? 

[Zorral]

Liz Cheney isn't even in the House. They voted her off the island, recall?

May as well, which would be better, to get in Hakeem Jeffries, who IS in the House.

[Tywin et al.]

5 minutes ago, Ormond said:

This question just popped into my mind -- I know that there is nothing legally that bars someone not presently serving in the House from being Speaker, but would there be any provisions for giving such a person a salary? Or would they have to serve for free? 

I think so? There's an established salary and benefits for the position and I don't see any language that requires the Speaker to be a MoC to get it. 

That said Liz is very unlikely to be Speaker nor do I think she'd want to be. And that's the problem with picking someone from outside of Congress. There are sane, very conservative Republicans who could do the job, but why would they want to? They'd probably get ousted just like McCarthy.

[Bironic]

Didn't McCarthy get ousted because of the MAGA wing of his party? I mean if someone like Liz Cheney has these 8 Republicans (whom I assume will not be part of the MAGA wing, rather "moderates" from a swing district) she only needs the democrats who might back her until the elections because the alternative would be like speaker Scalise, McCArthy or Gym Jordan which is significantly worse.

But somehow I don't believe that there are 8 republicans that would reach across the isle... Maybe 30 years ago that would have been a thing, but now? I mean those guys would probably get ousted from the party immediately, or face a more conservative opponent backed by trump and big money in the primaries at the very least...

[ThinkerX]

Rumor had it that some no name back bencher republican congressman threw his name into the ring during one of the secret ballots. Had no credentials other than being 'sort of moderate' (apparently avoiding the outright nut-jobbery) - and still garnered eighty votes. If true (who knows) then that might send a shock through the Freedom Caucus. Somebody like that who is willing to toss a couple of major concessions to the D's...

[Many-Faced Votary]

22 minutes ago, ThinkerX said:

Rumor had it that some no name back bencher republican congressman threw his name into the ring during one of the secret ballots. Had no credentials other than being 'sort of moderate' (apparently avoiding the outright nut-jobbery) - and still garnered eighty votes. If true (who knows) then that might send a shock through the Freedom Caucus. Somebody like that who is willing to toss a couple of major concessions to the D's...

Protest votes against Jim Jordan in a secret ballot exclusive to the Republican conference are not remotely comparable to votes on the House floor. Neither is it politically possible for a no-name low-profile Congressperson to receive the Speakership or even a nomination for it, in any realistic circumstance.

Most importantly, there is not a single Republican who would make concessions to Democrats. Even thirty years ago, before Newt Gingrich transformed the House into the broken and bitterly partisan institution it is today, most concessions were made by Democrats to Republicans. (In House and Senate alike, though the House hadn't had a Republican majority for 40 years until 1994.)

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

3 hours ago, Zorral said:

Liz Cheney isn't even in the House. They voted her off the island, recall?

May as well, which would be better, to get in Hakeem Jeffries, who IS in the House.

You don’t have to be a member of the HoR to be speaker.  Will Republicans vote for a Democrat?

[Bironic]

1 minute ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Will Republicans vote for a Democrat?

Not an american here but one that has followed american politics since Clinton, so maybe I don't have the necessary insight.

But from my outside perspective the Republicans have turned the word Democrat from a word that describes a political opponent whom you might not agree with most of the times, but from whom you think that he genuinely wants the good for the people and for america into a word that describes an enemy, the embodiment of evil, the devil, traitors, and you don't elect the devil, the enemy or help him in any way.

So sadly to say the answer in my opinion is no.

(but I have not completely given up the hope they might elect a "sane" republican, somebody like Cheney, Kinzinger, Romney, Schwarzenegger) call me naive...

[ThinkerX]

22 minutes ago, Many-Faced Votary said:

Protest votes against Jim Jordan in a secret ballot exclusive to the Republican conference are not remotely comparable to votes on the House floor. Neither is it politically possible for a no-name low-profile Congressperson to receive the Speakership or even a nomination for it, in any realistic circumstance.

Most importantly, there is not a single Republican who would make concessions to Democrats. Even thirty years ago, before Newt Gingrich transformed the House into the broken and bitterly partisan institution it is today, most concessions were made by Democrats to Republicans. (In House and Senate alike, though the House hadn't had a Republican majority for 40 years until 1994.)

Said no name back bencher might look more appealing given the current clown show with Jordan, Scalise, and other 'names.' Not saying he'll win, but he might garner enough votes to set off alarm bells. 

[Fragile Bird]

22 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Could Liz Cheney be a real compromise candidate?  If 8 Republicans break and vote Cheney in conjunction with Democrats she could get the speakership.  I don’t agree with her on everything but she opposes Trump, supports the Constitution, and believes in democracy.

Haven't Democrats already said they aren't going to assist the Republicans out of their problem? Or do you think that only applied to McCarthy, because McCarthy said he didn't need Democratic help?

[Martell Spy]

19 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Haven't Democrats already said they aren't going to assist the Republicans out of their problem? Or do you think that only applied to McCarthy, because McCarthy said he didn't need Democratic help?

It's not their job to assist Republicans and that's not the same thing as saying they never will. Democrats (and their voters) are very policy driven. Saying we will never make a deal isn't how they operate.

McCarthy is a special case because he's long catered to the far right. He's despised so making any deal with him would definitely cause a lot of calls from unhappy constituents. 

It sounds like there are going to be talks, possibly for someone with limited powers to get the House moving again. But first Jordan is taking his shot.

[TrackerNeil]

On 10/15/2023 at 1:22 PM, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Could Liz Cheney be a real compromise candidate?  If 8 Republicans break and vote Cheney in conjunction with Democrats she could get the speakership.  I don’t agree with her on everything but she opposes Trump, supports the Constitution, and believes in democracy.

Liz Cheney becoming Speaker of the House would be the funniest goddamn thing in politics since Larry Craig and his "wide stance." 

Please, universe, let this happen.

[Tywin et al.]

3 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said:

Liz Cheney becoming Speaker of the House would be the funniest goddamn thing in politics since Larry Craig and his "wide stance." 

Please, universe, let this happen.

Listen, who hasn't behaved poorly at MSP? Such an easy airport to smuggle drugs through back in the day...  I could buy drinks there when I was in HS and one time they just let me completely bypass security which made me wonder how safe I was getting on a plane.