Until the Republicans decide to put someone forward who didn't attempt to undermine the election, they aren't serious.
this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2023
79 points (90.7% liked)
politics
19072 readers
3962 users here now
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.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- 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. 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.
- 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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Afaik, Emmer is one of two reps in the group of 9 (now 8, after one guy pulled out of the nomination yesterday) that did not refuse to certify the AZ and PA electors in the 2020 election.
Edit: turns out he did sign the amicus brief encouraging the SC to throw the results though, which is essentially just as bad… yayyyyyyyy -_-
I think you're both right. He did a lot to support the Texas vs Pennsylvania lawsuit to remove valid ballots, but he didn't actually vote to do it. So he supported the overthrow of the election, he just didn't follow through. How the scales balance after those 2 events, I leave up to you!
In the aftermath of the 2020 election, Tom Emmer, a leading Republican candidate to be speaker of the House, baselessly said there were “questionable” practices in the 2020 presidential election.
Later, Emmer signed an amicus brief in support of a last-ditch Texas lawsuit seeking to throw out the results in key swing states.
Though he would vote to certify the results on January 6, 2021, the comments and actions show Emmer flirted with some of the same election denial rhetoric as far-right members of the Republican caucus.
Ahhh. I didn’t realize he co-signed the amicus. That’s not good.
The devil is in the details! 👹
It always is!
Pro: At least he is smart enough to have read the room and was one of the few people running for Speaker that could say they didn't vote for it.
Neutral: Seems to policy-wise be a split between a Bush and Trump era Republican, so he's slightly less bad than a full fledged MAGA, but still pretty bleh on most issues. But we all knew it was going to be a Republican, so we knew most of us wouldn't like whoever it was anyway, but it sadly could have been a number of worse choices.
Con: As a Pennsylvania introvert who loves mail in voting, screw this guy...
Tom Emmer voted to certify the 2020 election.
Oh yeah, that's not a problem. They were never serious.
I mean, arguably in the 50's or something. But since Reagan it's been a screeching clownwreck of disaster up until this very day.
January 20th, 1981 - the day American people were less important than oligarchs.
Were slaves considered Americans at the time? Might have to push the date back a little, I don't think there was ever a time in the country's history that people were more important than oligarchs.
Can you get off my nuts please? I really don't feel like dialoguing with a racist.
Lol.
Oh. You're still here.
No, but McCarthy was a loon too. This is a return to status quo loondom. Which is marginally better than 'loondom but even worse'.
Beautiful
They are rotating the designated speakers out and back into the septic tank so fast, the coming and going messages are all still in the "Active" phase. I wonder how many short-lived candidates we manage to keep in the top ten pages.
Someone go poke the Freedom Caucus and whisper "That's not your guy, is it? You shouldn't stand for this."
Hakeem Jeffries is still the top candidate, right?
He's received more votes in every Speaker election since McCarthy was installed on the 15th ballot.
By now he's received the most votes for Speaker than anyone in history, right?
@return2ozma It's pronounced "bouquet" ! Emmer means bucket in dutch.
I got this reference
I appreciate this niche joke
Even if Emmer or someone else wins in the next week or two, how are they going to keep the government open? A win necessarily means a promise to some psychopaths who will either find a way to tank the budget, or I guess just fire the new guy exactly like they did McCarthy.
I don't have much hope for what comes after budget negotiations.
The core problem that needs resolved is that the Freedom Caucus had the power to unseat an Speaker that brought a non-insane budget bill to the floor. If a Speaker is elected and that power is removed, a budget can be proposed and voted on with some Democratic support to make up for the Freedom Caucus being lunatics.
Can you imagine that precondition being allowed?