this post was submitted on 20 Dec 2023
318 points (99.7% liked)

politics

19107 readers
2702 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) on Tuesday evening sought and received unanimous consent to confirm the promotions of 11 four-star generals that had been held up for months by Alabama Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R) to protest the Pentagon’s abortion policies.

Schumer broke Tuberville’s blockade of more than 300 lower-ranking military promotions earlier this month, but the Alabama senator insisted at the time on holding up 11 of the highest-ranking officers so as not to capitulate completely to Democrats.

Tuberville demanded at the time that the promotions of the 11 four-star generals go through regular order on the Senate floor. He wanted senators to vote on procedural motions to end debate and then vote again to confirm the military promotions individually.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Bipta@kbin.social 9 points 11 months ago (1 children)

No one should make such a risky assumption even about what they think, much less the actual outcome.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Or even if they think. Some do. Many are schemers… morally defunct crumpets, who plot and scheme all day and act all night.

But many of them have not a whit of wit, a whit-wit, you might call them. These simply… don’t… think.

(Fwiw, these aren’t traits exclusive to republicans.)

[–] Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

They don’t have wit. They have a sledgehammer and apply it to every problem.

Unfortunately those with wit are in the way, some will stay and fight while others will give in and leave. The few sane people left in the GOP after 8 years of MAGA choose to leave.

Our elections were almost hijacked last election season. Many of those with wit have chosen to leave rather than go through it all again.

Don’t underestimate the effectiveness of a sledgehammer.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Don’t fall into this trap. There are a few that are clever. Evil, yes. Unscrupulous, yes. But still clever.

Bitch McConnel’s play to stack the Supreme Court, for example.

[–] Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I’d classify that as a sledgehammer. Moscow Mitch strait up did not move forward with any of Obama’s confirmations and flipped his stance on confirmations when Trump came to office.

This was bold faced politics kicking hundreds of years of precedent to the curb.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago

Okay. But was it clever?

Sometimes a sledge hammer is in fact the proper tool. Using one doesn’t make one “dumb” and my point remains: not all republicans are dumb. Underestimate them at your peril.