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
They're in a bind, but sadly, this works out very well for the MAGA wing of the party.
The MAGA wing has come out and said that they will not vote for anybody who certified the 2020 election, and there are enough of them that are willing to sit back forever and let the world burn to get their way.
The "moderate" (read: at least somewhat less crazy) wing of the party doesn't want to reward the MAGA extremeists who caused this mess in the first place, and wants someone who at the very least isn't going to turn every single issue into a toxic fireball in order to score extra likes on Twitter.
Both groups consider even thinking about working with Democrats to be political suicide, leaving that option off the table.
Which means one of three things is going to happen:
The MAGA wing caves and votes for a moderate Republican as speaker. Given their refusal to listen to anything resembling reason, I have a better chance of showing up to the next Chiefs game with Taylor Swift than them doing something rational.
At least half a dozen republicans put their own political careers on the line and work with Democrats, which will lead to an almost immediate negative reaction from their voting base and most likely the start of the end of their careers.
Rather than commit political suicide working with Democrats, the moderates cave to pressure and just vote for whoever the MAGA wing puts forward just so a warm body is holding the gavel, consequences be damned, considering it the least shitty option available.
My guess is #3. This happens not just in politics, but everywhere. When it comes down to a staredown between stubborn hardliners and moderates on any given subject, the moderates tend to blink first. I expect the same to happen here. The longer the MAGA wing is willing to vote down anyone by default without regard for the consequences and without even trying to negotiate, the more likely the moderates cave either out of exhaustion, frustration, or simply a lack of other viable options.
If there is a silver lining to this, the Speaker is also largely responsible for much of the party's fundraising. Given that we're in the "Who the hell is that?" stage of trying to figure out who that will be, I think it's safe to say that fundraising for the GOP is going to take a noticeable hit. And given the fact that opponents of some of these candidates (Boebert, for example) are outraising them by as much as 4:1, this little stunt by the GOP is going to make the uphill battle of keeping the House in 2024 a lot steeper than it needed to be. Not that I'm complaining, mind you......:D
Your #3 option is the most likely, but don't entirely rule out #2 yet, particularly if Johnson sees the same fate as Jordan. The folks who voted against Jordan got savaged by the Right Wing media, and it's entirely possible they've earned wacko primary challenges regardless of what they do next. Some of them are from competitive districts that voted for Biden in 2020. So from the perspective of their political futures, after voting against two arch-Conservatives they may feel like they can't depend on Republican Party support anymore, and have a better chance running as an Independant in a 3-way race.
Any current Republican who decides to work with Democrats is effectively leaving the party, given how Republicans operate now. But these folks may feel like their political futures are better off if they disassociate from the Republicans, particularly if they get better committee assignments out of it, and Democrats don't run strong candidates against them in the next election.
Given how they were treated after voting down Jordan, I would think this would make them more likely to just cave in and vote for whoever the MAGA wing vomits up next. We already have multiple insiders from the party confirming that multiple members have voted MAGAs way out of literal fear for their own safety or the safety of their families, up to the point where this is what probably saved Trump from being the first President to be removed from office. It's why I said #3 is most likely. The moderates will cave either out of exhaustion, frustration, or fear. Or all of the above.
Any current Republican who decides to work with Democrats is effectively leaving the party and will receive countless death threats as a result. Look at what just happened with Jordan. The political suicide of working with Dems may be the least of their problems at that point. Some of these people may feel they're in a position where voting MAGA may be their only viable option to not only save their political careers but ensure their own and family's safety as well. Their choices really are boiling down to "Vote MAGA", "Commit Political Suicide", and "Commit political suicide and be forced to hire a security detail for your family for the foreseeable future."
If these people do this, though (and again, it's not likely to happen), it will be because they are representing districts that are not as far down the MAGA rabbit hole, and they are making the political calculation that they would be better off that way. This includes taking the threats into account, but they may be representing districts where the MAGA is a minority, and more importantly, they trust local and state law enforcement to protect them.
It is fitting that Republicans refer to their internal groups as the "Five Families", becauwe they really are being run like Mafia families, with all the threats and intimidation that implies.
My bet since this clusterfuck started has been on option #4, which is that the House careens Speaker-less into another shutdown.
This is why it's important to be extreme in the other direction, or even possibly deliberately pretending to be more extreme than you actually are: because moderates (read: mainstream Democrats) are incapable of dragging the Overton Window back from the brink.
#3 leads to an omnibus since there's not enough time for a budget which leads to this process starting all over again
No, #3 leads to a government shutdown, or a budget that is gutted to the point where the government may as well have shut down.