• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    50
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Put slightly differently. Eight members of the house can cause total gridlock because the other 427 can’t even countenance taking a single step of compromise - and not even compromise on an actual law - compromise on the person who presides over the process.

    The problem isn’t really the eight. The problem is that the process has gotten so fucked we can no longer work around a 1.8% nut job rate.

    Edit: math

    • @BassTurd
      link
      721 year ago

      While you are kind of correct, grouping the democrats in as part of the group that won’t compromise is not fair. They’ve come to the table with demands for compromise, and they didn’t start this problem so it’s not theirs to clean up. It’s the right and moderate right that aren’t compromising.

      • Zorque
        link
        fedilink
        351 year ago

        Indeed, the problem has been that Democrats have been compromising to keep the government running for decades, and it finally came to a point where the other team decided they could start getting away with anything.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        -241 year ago

        Fault and fairness are irrelevant; they’ve never had anything to do with how government functions and damn sure don’t look to start mattering any time soon. A two party system this polarized simply will. not. work.

        • uphillbothways
          link
          fedilink
          181 year ago

          Which is exactly why it’s important not to bail the republicans out of their self imposed ongoing schism. They need to be broken up and that can’t happen unless they repeatedly fail to caucus together on even simple procedural tasks like electing a speaker. This is an ideal problem brought upon themselves to show they are already not a single unified party. Just a loose agglomeration of shit stirrers. Two bad kids in their granddad’s trench coat.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            -91 year ago

            I certainly wouldn’t say that bailing them out is the best choice, either from a moral or a practical point of view. My point was merely that the eight nutters here are not the real problem. They are merely symptom of much more grave and perhaps systemic threats to the governmental system.

            • Zorque
              link
              fedilink
              121 year ago

              … which Republicans have a large hand in perpetuating.

              I’m not saying Democrats are the saints and angels, but they’re a damn sight better than their red-faced counter-parts. What little enabling their members do pales in comparison to the enabling of the Republican party.

              Wholesale change needs to happen. And moving The Leftovers party out of it’s middle-of-the-road approach is part of that, but it’s not even close to a majority. Trying to lump the two together as some sort of “everyone in government is bad!” approach is disingenuous and antithetical to seeking change.

              If you want to see a solution, stop trying to generalize the problem. We’ve had generalized “solutions” for decades, and it’s done nothing but slow the degradation a little bit at best.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                -31 year ago

                Your assumption that I’m making an argument to moderation is fundamentally incorrect and a little insulting.

                • Zorque
                  link
                  fedilink
                  41 year ago

                  My assumption is that you’re casting too wide a net because you’re just tired of the status quo, but you don’t really know who to really blame. So you’re blaming everyone.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          They are relevant when it comes to elections. And that’s all that ultimately matters in our system.

    • @FlowVoid
      link
      English
      21
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Democrats are open to compromise.

      They have indicated that they are willing to support empowering McHenry until January.

      Democrats are also willing to support other Republicans as Speaker, provided Republicans offer something in return.

      But they aren’t willing to support election deniers (like Jordan), and they won’t support people who previously reneged on deals with Democrats (like McCarthy).

      Not that it matters, because Republicans refuse to support anyone who needs Democratic support to become Speaker.

      • @paintbucketholder
        link
        191 year ago

        But they aren’t willing to support election deniers (like Jordan),

        I just want to say that while people who refuse to acknowledge that Biden won the 2020 election should be rightfully called election deniers, Jordan’s role is so much more involved: he actively attempted to get the election decertified and throw the vote to Trump.

        That makes him at least one of the figureheads of an attempted coup d’etat, someone who tried to end democracy in America in order to install an unelected leader in the White House.

        If he had succeeded, America today would no longer be a democracy, a nation where the electorate chooses its representatives.

        If it was up to Jim Jordan, we would now live in a dictatorship, with Trump as the unelected ruler who would no longer be beholden to the will of the people or the rule of law.

    • FuglyDuck
      link
      English
      91 year ago

      this shit show is made by republicans, continued by republicans and is entirely republicans fucking it up. Considering McCarthy failed to abide deals he had already made, why should democrats trust him to honor a second deal?

      if republicans were even nominally bipartisan- like, you know, any reasonable body would be if the majority was led by exactly 4 votes- we wouldn’t be in this mess.