politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Not if the Dems agree to vote to keep him. He could play this like an intelligent human being and still keep his job, so long as he's willing to weather a bit of right-wing media blowback for the next few months. He just has to strike a bipartisan deal, like he's supposed to.
That seems a tall order given his long history of biting the Dem's hands every time they reach out. This is a problem of his party's own making and stems from not honoring their earlier agreements around the debt ceiling.
Besides, they can't agree to something he hasn't (and won't) ask for.
I don't disagree. I'm just saying Dems could offer to vote to keep him in his position in exchange for a bipartisan deal. That doesn't mean they capitulate completely, just that they offer him something he wants (his job) in exchange for something they want.
I didn't say they've asked or are responsible for agreeing to anything, please follow the whole thread. I was responding to someone who said he'd lose his job if he worked with Dems on a bipartisan deal. He wouldn't if they threw him the bone of a vote to keep him if his caucus moves to vacate him as Speaker. I'm not commenting on the likelihood of anything like this happening, simply that it's possible.
Working with the Dems will make his next Primary difficult, he hasn't got that long before that comes around again. This is what he, and a lot of the more moderate republicans are really scared of, being cut off from the grift by their own party.
You're right, but it's certainly a calculation that will change as pressure mounts. Is the political cost of working on a bipartisan compromise bigger than the cost of a shutdown he'll be blamed for? Right now, maybe not. Over time? It might very well get there. It's a lose-lose proposition at the moment, he just has to decide which loss he's more afraid of.
Why the hell should they??
To have a functioning government. There's 0 chance there will be a democratic speaker. There's a pretty good chance nothing works, and normal people don't get paid for weeks or months if bipartisanship is out.
To have a functioning bad government.
Bipartisanship is suicide in the long run.
The choices are the status quo or worse. There is no option for better that they're rejecting by using bipartisanship to pass a clean CR.
The status quo is going to kill everyone everywhere forever.
And how does not making a deal with McCarthy to pass a clean CR help with that exactly?
Whatever deal they make will mean more money for the military, more money for drilling, more money for mining, more money for deforestation, and more money for brinkmanship.
America has to stop destroying the world.
A lot of that falls under essential services and will continue to be done whether or not the money is there. Additionally, if the democrats had a super majority and trifecta, do you think that would actually change?
There won't be any new projects approved, though, and that coubts for something.
But yeah, even if the government was 100% Democrat they'd do the same shit, because America's evil is bipartisan.
You want to look like an unhinged melodramatic who shouldn't be taken seriously?
Because statements like that are how you look like an unhinged melodramatic who shouldn't be taken seriously.
It's the Internet, no one takes anything seriously here 🙄
Leaving that aside, extraction of fossil fuels is going to fucking kill everyone and has bipartisan support. Also making war with Russia and pushing for war with China, two nuclear powers. Also filling the ocean with plastic, chopping down the forests, making new pandemics in factory farms, and many other new horrors.
If you aren't alarmed you aren't paying attention.
Mmmk