• PorradaVFR
    link
    377 months ago

    Quite literally only because they would appoint someone even worse.. The House is deeply flawed.

    • @T00l_shed
      link
      27 months ago

      I know, with all the shit Johnson has done… him being the best of the worst speaks volumes.

    • FuglyDuck
      link
      English
      507 months ago

      so, McCarthy fucked them on a deal he cut, so they had no real reason to keep him around. Democrats don’t have the votes, presumably, to push their own candidate forward (though I wouldn’t be shocked if they could get one of the less psychotic republicans to join in,) so they’re not going to put their pick in, anyhow.

      Johnson didn’t fuck them and stuck to the deals he’s cut, which is why the Howler Monkey #2 is pissed.

      so, on the premise that Johnson will at least honor his deals and the next dumbass probably won’t… it’s more valuable to keep him around.

      • @TropicalDingdong
        link
        157 months ago

        so, on the premise that Johnson will at least honor his deals and the next dumbass probably won’t… it’s more valuable to keep him around.

        Oh I appreciate the realpolitik of it all, but let us not forget its an election year, maybe the most significant ever. The Democrats got what the needed from Johnson, but they really can’t appear to be playing ball ‘too hard’. Their leverage comes from him being on a string, not being confident in his position; likewise, being ‘partners’ with Republicans puts them in an awkward position (especially in the house) from a campaigning perspective. Strange bedfellows, but Democrats need to keep the “Johnson’s” at arms reach because individually, they need to win their races, and even moreso, chaos within the Republican party is marketing for Democrats moving into November.

        • FuglyDuck
          link
          English
          177 months ago

          but Democrats need to keep the “Johnson’s” at arms reach because individually, they need to win their races, and even moreso, chaos within the Republican party is marketing for Democrats moving into November.

          they also need to maintain the visage of the adults in the room. Fucking over Johnson won’t accomplish anything, and likely get a worse candidate in office. It’ll give real ammunition to any one campaigning against them and take away the accusation that the republicans are obstructionist simply to be obstructionist.

          • @TropicalDingdong
            link
            07 months ago

            Yep. They have to look both left and right at the same time, so I expect alternating narratives from honey moon lovey dovey to on the rocks romance broken, planted from both sides every 2- 3 weeks from now until November.

            Do you think the House writ large needs to pass another bill before November or was this sufficient to earn their keep?

            • FuglyDuck
              link
              English
              77 months ago

              Do you think the House writ large needs to pass another bill before November or was this sufficient to earn their keep?

              do you think there’s nothing that needs attention? no problems that require legislation to solve, no… I don’t know, aid packages to be signed. or relief for anything…?

              • @TropicalDingdong
                link
                07 months ago

                I’m speaking purely in terms of sportsball/ realpolitik, in the most cynical manner possible.

                Like, I can’t think about anything other than funding international war that both Democrats and Republicans agree enough upon to be worth bringing to the floor other than to say you tried and let it die so you can campaign on it.

                I guess my thinking is that this might have been enough for at least the Democrats in the house to run on, if they can keep the Republicans annoyed enough at it being presented as a Democratic victory, and especially if they can point to Republicans revolting against Johnson as to why they can’t get any more done for this session of congress.

                On the Republican side, the passage doesn’t seem like a victory for Republican voters. No real accomplishments other than being able to fund the Israeli genocide. I’m not sure how high that ranks of a priority that is for Republican voters. Like the genocide was fully funded, it didn’t really need the help, so it just doesn’t have the same staying power as funding the Ukrainian resistance does for Democratic voters.

                I guess my thinking is that if we go into November without another single thing getting done in the house, the W for this season goes into the D column, almost certainly. So the need to get more done is mostly going to come from the R side of aisle.

                • FuglyDuck
                  link
                  English
                  57 months ago

                  I guess my thinking is that if we go into November without another single thing getting done in the house, the W for this season goes into the D column, almost certainly. So the need to get more done is mostly going to come from the R side of aisle.

                  the issue is that the DNC has become the “Any functioning adult” party. they’re going to take a hit if they vote and congress completely seizes up. better to work someone who won’t try to fuck you over than to get somebody whose going to be worse. and congress will completely seize up.

            • SolidGrue
              link
              English
              1
              edit-2
              9 days ago

              deleted by creator

              • @TropicalDingdong
                link
                07 months ago

                Just off the top of my head? FAA reauthorization, FY2025 federal budget package, …oh that pesky temporary stopgap funding measure to re-up this summer, some election integrity bills…

                Stop gap, for sure, same with FAA. Not sure election integrity is a ‘need to have’ for the House ‘writ large’. Would be a big feather for Dems, not sure Repubs care.

                I’m still very dubious of the argument in favor of House Dems working with Repubs. Dems have finally wrangle the Repubs onto their heals, and giving out any unnecessary points seems counter productive. I think this because I think, for House Republicans, their biggest issue going into November is that they’ve got absolutely jack shit to show for their time in office, except for a few Democratic wins. From a Dem strategy perspective, it just doesn’t make sense to give the R’s anything to campaign on, and the R’s are extremely desperate for anything.

                I’d rather suffer through a few more months of a do nothing congress, and then sweep the House into a Democratic super majority than offer some fawning victory lap points to only somewhat less extreme Republicans. I think Democrats are well positioned for that, but they need anything that comes out of the House to be a clear Democratic victory. Thoughts?

                • SolidGrue
                  link
                  English
                  1
                  edit-2
                  9 days ago

                  deleted by creator

      • @Supervisor194
        link
        57 months ago

        No, not really. The thing is, Johnson is exactly like MTG only not completely fucking stupid. He knows you cut deals now so that you can still be around when MAGA-world needs a sure bet to attempt to overturn the 2024 election results (only if Trump loses, of course).

        • NaibofTabr
          link
          fedilink
          English
          27 months ago

          I mean… cutting deals is politics. The other party always has their own motives. At least it’s possible to work with Johnson.

          But also, I didn’t really mean my comment in a practical way. Anything that frustrates or upsets MTG is a win in my book.

  • @WhyDoYouPersist
    link
    English
    187 months ago

    Every one of his photos look like an AI version of House of Cards.

  • @Ledivin
    link
    127 months ago

    That’s certainly what I’d tell Republicans if I wanted them to get rid of him…

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        97 months ago

        Not wrong. The cost of WW3 would likely be higher than if Ukraine can handle the dictator for NATO.

        The Iraq and Afghanistan war is estimated to have Cost the US 4-6 Trillion Dollars. Over 20 years meaning 200-300 billion each year plus American lives.

        Thus far, we have given 75 billion. Plus, another 61 billion. Totaling 136 billion for 2 years. Far less than the Iraq, Afghanistan war we fought for 2 decades. Bonds, no Americans’ lives sent over to be lost. The Ukrain funding is definitely worth the cost.

        The Isreal war is another story. “Before You Embark On A Journey Of Revenge, Dig Two Graves” — Confucius

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          77 months ago

          Imagine if that funding for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars went into subsidising health care instead. Nobody ever asked how they’re going to pay for it.

          And Israel is making the same mistake the US made after 9/11. The Taliban actually offered to rendition Osama Bin Laden to stave off an invasion, and I’m not sure anyone but the hawkiest of hawks wouldn’t have taken that deal knowing what we know now.

  • @RapidcreekOP
    link
    37 months ago

    Ms. MT Greene has been deactivated….

  • @CharlesDarwin
    link
    English
    27 months ago

    Marge should just come out and say it: she’s Putin first, not America first.