House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) called for Republicans to “get their act together” and elect the next speaker while slamming the “extremists” within their party.
You must log in or register to comment.
Traditional Republicans have a name.
Its called “Democrat”.
What used to be “the left” is now just a more moderate, reasonable right.
What used to be “the right” is not even on the spectrum anymore, its become a populist extremist reactionary fascism. It’s so far off the chart its on an entirely separate piece of paper.
Jeffries needs to just accept this fact and
walk across the floor. Liberals are now Conservatives, and Conservatives are now Nazis.Edit: Misread that Jeffries was a Republican, the fact he’s a Democrat changes the context a bit. He’s absolutely right but he’s basically just talking about what I re-iterated above, but its the republican “traditionals” that need to walk across the floor and stop associating with Nazis if they dont wanna go down with that ship.
The extremists they are associating with are just going to Crabs in the Bucket them, clawing them down with them when things go under. If they were smart they’d drop the screaming children and walk over to where all the adults have gone.
What do you mean by walk across the floor?
Sitting for too long is a problem for everyone. It’s good to get up and walk around at least every hour.
Lol
I think he means that Jeffries needs to stop pleading with the extremists (and walk back to his side of the house and stop even trying)
Ah, I thought it was walk across the aisle to save the people who can’t even sort their own damn house
Well I disagree vehemently with that; the only way to get things done is to talk.
You don’t get anything positive done by negotiating with fascists, paleoconservatives and some of the worst libertarians and liars of no fixed ideology in the world.
Listening to them at all inevitably leads to outcomes much worse than no change.
No, there’s genuinely no advantage to negotiating with the nutcase section of the GOP. The only thing that achieves, over the past 30 years I’ve been watching politics, is shifting the Overton Window further to the right.
Democrats are already center right Republicans, they don’t need to move further right
We’re going to dance. Don’t speak.
I know what you’re saying so please stop explaining. Don’t tell me 'cause it hurts!
I know you’re good. I know you’re real good.
Hush hush, DARLING!
Well, the political calculus suggests Jeffries only needs 5 Republicans to become speaker. That would be a wild display of incompetence by Republicans, which they have provided several examples recently, but that one would be a real gem. One for the history books
I love how a hot take from someone who didn’t even know Hakeem Jeffries is a Democrat has 100+ up votes. Lemmy is so ridiculously uneducated.
Whether he is a Democrat or Republican doesnt really impact the overall point of my statement mate, it’s tangentially related but not foundation to what I said.
But it brings into questions your ability to have any informed opinions whatsoever.
Even ignoring the part where you didn’t realize Jeffries is a Democrat, this is just not a fair characterization of Democrats at all, as if they’re all the same.
Democrats in congress represent a broad spectrum from quite liberal to moderate conservative. Even by European standards.
I will just have to disagree. I think when you get down to brass tacks, basic stuff like human rights, freedoms, autonomy, etc are largely bipartisan.
For example, between traditional conservative and liberal discussion in a successful country where religion has been removed from the equation, they would both very much agree that women should be allowed to have bodily autonomy and be allowed to have abortions up to a reasonable limit, lots of countries typically go with 3 months. And thats just for healthy pregnancies, when it comes to physical problems usually the limit is removed.
The actual discourse between a liberal and conservative traditionally should be “who is going to pay for that abortion”, not if it can even happen at all.
The fact we havent even gotten that far in political discussion in the united states now means we are losing the ability to even benchmark how liberal vs conservative the Democrat party is, because we are no longer really debating “who is gonna pay for x/y/z”, its now being debated “should we even allow people to do x/y/z”
Which is no longer a Conservative vs Liberal discussion. It’s a traditional Authoritarian vs Libertarian discussion.
And if all the discussion has become purely Authoritarianism vs Libertarianism, we have gone completely off the rails because the United States is supposed to be a largely libertarian (within reason) government. It used to be the literal benchmark for Libertarianism, being extremely progressive in human rights. Letting your nation arm itself? Being one of the earliest countries to include women in voting? Every step of the way countries used to lag behind the US as it abolished slavery, brought it’s races and cultures together, women were walking topless down the street, people could own pretty much anything they wanted to via legal channels, you name it.
For the longest time whenever the discussions came up, it was more about $$$, who paid for what, what would vs wouldn’t be taxpayer funded. And a lot of stuff used to be taxpayer funded. The USPS used to be one of the shining examples of what a well oiled taxpayer funded system could look like.
But over time that has walked backwards and degraded, the Conservatives have largely completed their goal of slashing and hamstringing nearly every taxpayer public system of the US, the country is at best on life support now. Every single public system you can think of in the US is barely functioning at best, straight up privatized at worst.
Like the US has private prisons now, lol.
It stopped being a Conservative vs Liberal debate decades ago, it’s now pretty much entirely Authoritarian vs Libertarian now. The country stopped fighting for public funding and now the fight has shifted to fighting for basic human rights, the very principle the country was founded on hundreds of years ago.
The US has become the very precise thing the founding father’s explicitly tried to escape from.
with this explanation, the centrists’ mantra of both sides are the same hits the right spot.
It is absolutely wild to me that most major news organizations are completely ignoring the fact that the guy the GOP was trying to put into the speakership until a day or two ago is an overt white supremacist. Like… news anchors are straight up omitting that entire point. It’s not even being mentioned in passing comments.
he guy the GOP was trying to put into the speakership until a day or two ago is an overt white supremacist
Bruh I’m gonna need you to be more specific.
Scalise
Although I think your larger point is well made.
MSNBC reported that a few house members wouldn’t vote for Scalise because of the white nationalist bit. So it isn’t totally ignored, but then again MSNBC would never miss an opportunity like that.
I also haven’t seen much coverage of the fact that the other front runner for speaker, Jim Jordan, turned a blind eye to and likely helped cover up the sexual abuse of college athletes.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/06/politics/jordan-osu-wrestlers-strauss-invs/index.html
Goes to show what a problem Jim Jordan would be. I’d rather have the racist piece of shit
He checked his baggage at the gate, he’s clear to board now
Zero shot. But it’s a nice thought.
Liz Cheney was probably the last “traditional Republican” they had and they made an example of her. Kevin picked country over party and that led to his ousting. Who’s going to side with the Democrats now?
The craziest part about McCarthy is that (I would argue) he still choose party over country but the crazy members of the party couldn’t see that. He knew a shutdown would have been devastating for their image, but all the extremists could see was working with the enemy.
Good points. McCarthy thought he was picking party and country, but his insane coalition wouldn’t see that.
The crazies prefer hurting the other party to both party and country.
I agree, but so far the extremists have been proven right. Their way or the highway has, so far, worked for them to get them to where they are at: minority rulers within their party.
They are, but they’re also destabilizing their party with petty squabbles. They haven’t reached some kind of political equilibrium where they can keep doing this indefinitely.
The Soviet Union seemed like it was here to stay right up until the moment it suddenly wasn’t. Things happened very fast over the course of just a few days, and everyone was blindsided by it. I think the GOP might be heading for that same situation.
Definitely won’t last forever, but hard to say how long they have. Hoping things fall apart for them sooner vs later so we can actually have a functioning government.
That’s also why McCarthy took the very first opportunity he had to slam the democrats after the bipartisan vote to get the temporary funding bill through. He was trying to prove that he still hated the dems, but that wasn’t enough for his party.
Exactly. They made Liz fucking Cheney persona non grata in the Republican party. The patients are running the asylum now. There’s no one behind the wheel of that clown car.
It’s not hard to find five Republicans from a moderate district full of Never Trumpers. They would secure their seat voting for Jeffries and see their own legislation get pushed through.
If the moderates voted in the primary, perhaps.
They should, but I don’t think they do.
I would personally love to see that happen, but I think it’s unlikely. It would probably be more likely to get a more conservative compromise Democrat as speaker of the house, but only after the Republican party festers for another week or two.
So who are they and why hasn’t Jeffries been elected yet?
GOP House rules, they won’t vote until they have 217 votes.
Ok Charlie Brown, try and kick that football! I’m rooting for you.
I get the cynicism but I could see an outcome where Democrats provide support to a moderate (or Jeffries with 5 Republicans) in exchange for passing a few things with broad support. And then the speaker resigns and Republicans go back to beclowning themselves.
Something like a deal to elect a speaker for enough time to pass aid to Ukraine and Israel and another continuing resolution to keep the government open beyond the 45 days. Something like that. Then back to where we are now.
Excellent usage of the word beclowning.
Jeffries needs 5 more votes to win.
A Republican nomination needs 217.
To be fair, he seems pretty clear that the he is willing to direct the caucus to vote for an agreed upon republican, rather than seek the speakership himself.
Right. Republicans would never agree to a Democrat speaker. They would rather watch the country burn down than to do that.
Now there is an endless list of other things they may need to agree to for Democrats to partner.
Republicans would never agree to a Democrat speaker.
You don’t know that. Their entire house is broken. Dem’s need five. Its 100% on the table.
You think there are currently FIVE R’s in the House who are willing to put the well being of this country before their party?
HA HA.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Oh you mistake me.
I think there are 5 R’s who are dumb enough to make a show of things by voting for a Dem, just to spite their opponents within the party. Its always the dumbest people who think they are the smartest.
I quite literally think that some R’s would actually cut off their nose to spite their face to “own” their perceived opponents.
I put nothing past them and leave everything on the table.
Well, when you put it that way, it sounds plausible.
Deal with each of them individually and don’t let them know that there are four more.
The sad part of all of this is that traditional Republicans have handed the party reigns over to extremists for the illusion of maintaining power. Had they told their crazies to go pound sand and fallen behind Democrats they would likely be capable of course correcting to retain some level of competition with liberals. Instead they gave power to nut-bags who have pretty much ensured their eventual, permanent demise.
Instead they gave power to nut-bags who have pretty much ensured their eventual, permanent demise.
Which is what we can hope for, and it would be quite OK if it happens.
The only danger of a destruction of the GOP would be that the Democrats would eventually stay in power too long for their own good. This is not something against the Democrats, it is just pointing out human nature. Power simply corrupts, each and every time.
So one of the things the Democrats should do if they have sufficient pull is to get the voting system in order. Drop FPTP. Drop the way the president is elected and replace it by a more realistic one, one that actually represents the population. Remove the stupid “two senators per state” rule and replace it by one that actually represents the country - in the senate, a citizen from a flyover state has way more influence than those from the states with higher populace.
The fun thing here is that the US already had fixed these problems decades ago. Just not in their own country. When the Federal Republic of Germany (i.e. West Germany) was founded, they implemented a bicameral system and voting methods based on the known problems of the US voting system (and others, but primarily the US). Now the German system has it’s issues, too, but they are known, and a known problem usually can be fixed.
Who even are “traditional Republicans”?
“Traditional” meaning Republicans that feel the same way as the “extremists”, but with the common sense to not say it blatantly and bluntly.
Ugh you’re right
Republicans havnt fundamentally changed since Reagan pulled the republicans off the cliff, All that has changed is saying the quiet parts out loud and proud.
50 years ago they still wanted the same shit, They just hid it behind coded and colorful language and only whispered it bluntly behind closed doors with close, trusted compatriots.
Yeah you nailed it succinctly.
The challenge is finding 5 house GOP who actually care about the American people. My guess is there aren’t 5.
Well there’s Nebraska’s 2nd representative, and famous coward Don Bacon. Let it be known that when the time calls for a man to stand up for what’s right, Don Bacon will bravely turn tail and run back to whatever teet is drip feeding him table scraps.
Yup. Famous coward Don Bacon, ready to let you down.
I’m sorry what was the question?
Don Bacon is a coward
This is a little misleading. Famous coward Don Bacon? C’mon. Sure he is only known for being a spineless coward. But he isn’t that well known.
Yea I’ve never heard of him and he’s just a couple states over from me. I think.
What’s Nebraska again?
A corn wind tunnel
You say he is a pig that suckles huh? Hmm. Anyone know any famous pigs looking to shell out some cash for a suckling?
It is amazing to see those many levels of having no spine.
Poor old Republicans can’t even compromise with themselves
Maybe they should shut down the Republican party for a while to get their way.
Why would they compromise with a bunch of traitorous fascists?
Correct. Their extreme wing, the Chaos Caucus, has become too extreme even for them. Unfortunately for Republicans their majority in the House relies on the same bozos who are acting like an opposition party. So while Republicans have a technical majority they do not have a functional majority.
What’s crazy is that since the Freedumb Caucus is in such opposition to the wider body of Republicans that they’ve handed the Democrats a functional majority on several issues, including the Speakership.
The pack of idiots led by Matt Gaetz cut off their own nose (McCarthy) in order to spite their face so now the Speaker situation can only end with a candidate that has enough Bi-Partisan support to overcome them and after that happens the House is going to advance legislation that’s far more liberal than anything that would have been done under McCarthy.
Edit: It has begun.
Hope springs eternal.
Isn’t the point of the republican party to dismantle and shut down the government? Why would they “get their act together” when the literally platform on shutting down as much of the government down? This whole thing is going exactly the way republicans dream of. They have stopped any governing from happening which is the republican dream
They are ALL FOR big government. I don’t know where you are seeing them wanting the government shut down. They just don’t want a government that supports freedom for its citizens, but they’re all about ensuring governmental control.
deleted by creator
By making the government a disfunctional mess and blaming democrats and spreading misinformation while pushing everything to a corrupt supreme court. Which is what they are doing
deleted by creator
I guess I should have said ending democracy instead of ending the government.by getting rid of any functions of the government that insure democracy is the goal. Or the goal is destroying the institutions of democracy which defacto would destroy our government and institute a new type of government
deleted by creator
“But but … but then the Libs might win”
Better than being associated with those extremist white taliban, is it not?
You’re not thinking like a Republican.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) called for Republicans to “get their act together” and elect the next speaker while slamming the “extremists” within their party.
Jeffries joined PBS News Hour inside the Capitol Thursday night after Speaker-designate Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.)
“I know there are traditional Republicans who are good women and men who want to see government function, but they are unable to do it within the ranks of their own conference, which is dominated by the extremist wing,” Jeffries said.
Several far-right members who helped initiate former Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s ousting have continued to oppose solutions offered by the party.
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), for example, said she voted for Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) in the secret ballot, saying she likes Scalise but wants to see him focus on defeating cancer, which he announced as “very treatable” in August.
Democrats may nominate Jeffries as their pick for speaker, potentially placing him in a race to 217 votes against whoever the GOP ultimately decides to send to the House floor.
The original article contains 321 words, the summary contains 173 words. Saved 46%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
What world is he living in. There are none. This is the Republican Party now.
While I don’t hold out any hope for it, a splintering of one of the two parties would likely be a good thing regardless. We need more viable parties.
We need more viable parties.
Well, the only way to get there is to fix the US voting and representation systems. FPTP has to go, and all important points in the US legislative need to have proper, democratic representation instead of this “Two Senators per state, regardless how many they represent”. And while they are at it, make Gerrymandering impossible by removing the power to redrad the district maps at will. You will need an algorithmically method to draw district maps without any influence from race or political affiliation, simply based on the address of a person.
That will be a chance to stop the reduction of numbers of parties, as they suddenly get a voice for their concerns even when they “only” have e.g. 20% or just 5% of the voters. And this will also teach the parties the need to work together in a reliable way. Coalitions and stuff.
Look how other countries do it, learn what is good and what is bad with their voting systems, and implement the best solution that is acceptable.
That’s not how we’d get more parties with our voting system. If the GOP fractured because of this then there might be chaos for brief period of time, but sooner than later everything would get settled back to two parties. Our system is set up so that it just plain suboptimal to do otherwise.
That’s what he’s doing here. If Democrats calls on MAGA to unite with the GOP, they can’t do it or it’ll look like they’re following the Dems lead, and they must disagree with Dems at all costs. So by simply stating the obvious path forward for the extremists, he’s poisoning the well and making it more difficult for that to actually happen.
I would lay the blame at the feet of the extremists, not the person making a good suggestion.
Yes, but that will not please the idiots that form their base.
We wouldn’t get more parties. I’m expecting eventually the Democrat party ends up in position as the right wing party and we get a “Progressive” party (or maybe some other name) as the new left wing party. It wouldn’t be the first time this happens, but I don’t know if it’s actually possible with the way media works now and how hated the name of the Democrats is on the right.
The voting system is designed for tactical voting between two major parties. It can’t support more. That needs to change. Maybe we could see that as things shift around though. Who knows?
The time to do this was ages ago, it comes too late. The normal Republicans are the extremists, they took over the party.
The only way out of this situation is for 5 or more Rs to agree to nominate and vote for Jeffries. Otherwise there will never be a speaker until the Dems win back the house.
