The future of the US Republican party

[Woodchopper]

I’ve seen people call for the Republican Party to purge the Trumpists.

But in the other news from Thursday 138 Republican members of the House, or 65% of the total, voted to dispute the election results, as did Cruz and other senators. In surveys a majority of Republican supporters state that Trump was the rightful victor in the 2020 election.

We might be looking at a purge, but the moderates being kicked out by the Trumpists. The latter being better organized, more ruthless, and deluded (which helps in the short term).

Maybe we should start betting on Invanka to be Republican nominee in 2024.

[bjn]

Nearly half of Republicans supported the attack in the Capitol.

In a survey of 1,397 American voters by YouGov, a pollster, more Republicans said they supported the actions of the pro-Trump extremists than opposed them (45% to 43% respectively). In contrast, nearly every Democrat polled, and two out of three independents, said they opposed the rampage (see chart).

This will hopefully fracture the Republicans, but it is terrifying that a significant minority of the country supports the violent rejection of a properly* conducted election.

*“Properly”, apart from all the legal gerrymandering and voter suppression that overwhelmingly backs the party of the seditious rebels.

[plodder]

Big problem for them.

Ultimately it comes down to solid leadership and a clear vision. I think one problem is that, given the highly compressed and frankly weird nature of politics, it doesn't tend to attract the kind of talent it needs, so we're always left with sweaty hopeless cases who would struggle to hold down a senior position in the real world of work.

[dyqik]

Big problem for them.

Ultimately it comes down to solid leadership and a clear vision. I think one problem is that, given the highly compressed and frankly weird nature of politics, it doesn't tend to attract the kind of talent it needs, so we're always left with sweaty hopeless cases who would struggle to hold down a senior position in the real world of work.

The problem then is that the Republican party is entirely defined by what it's against: government interference in markets, provision of basic services, and evangelical christian white culture; lack of government interference in reproductive healthcare, and non-white culture; consequences for free speech by right wing white men; lack of consequences for free speech by non-right wing white men.

It needs an actual vision first before it can have a clear one.

[monkey]

Big problem for them.

Ultimately it comes down to solid leadership and a clear vision. I think one problem is that, given the highly compressed and frankly weird nature of politics, it doesn't tend to attract the kind of talent it needs, so we're always left with sweaty hopeless cases who would struggle to hold down a senior position in the real world of work.

The problem then is that the Republican party is entirely defined by what it's against: government interference in markets, provision of basic services, and evangelical christian white culture; lack of government interference in reproductive healthcare, and non-white culture; consequences for free speech by right wing white men; lack of consequences for free speech by non-right wing white men.

It needs an actual vision first before it can have a clear one.

They're conservatives. They're naturally against stuff, so they can keep things the same, or "return" to a romanticised past. That's not a problem for them, that's what they are, so that's not their problem. You can also frame all those things as positives (as they do): e.g. you're not anti abortion, you're pro life, or you're not anti-regulation, you support the free market.

[Trinucleus]

Big problem for them.

Ultimately it comes down to solid leadership and a clear vision. I think one problem is that, given the highly compressed and frankly weird nature of politics, it doesn't tend to attract the kind of talent it needs, so we're always left with sweaty hopeless cases who would struggle to hold down a senior position in the real world of work.

There's an Arthur C Clarke book where the US selects its the President at random from the electoral total roll as they had realised that anyone who wanted the job was completely unsuited to doing it.

[dyqik]

Big problem for them.

Ultimately it comes down to solid leadership and a clear vision. I think one problem is that, given the highly compressed and frankly weird nature of politics, it doesn't tend to attract the kind of talent it needs, so we're always left with sweaty hopeless cases who would struggle to hold down a senior position in the real world of work.

There's an Arthur C Clarke book where the US selects its the President at random from the electoral total roll as they had realised that anyone who wanted the job was completely unsuited to doing it.

Having seen the US population, a random selection from it is probably also likely to be unsuitable for the role.

Maybe there could be 9 randomly selected participants in primaries for the Democrat, Republican and Independent parties, who go into an election.

Of course, there'd have to be a cost to coming third in each phase, to make sure that no one tries to nobble their own campaigns.

[dyqik]

Big problem for them.

Ultimately it comes down to solid leadership and a clear vision. I think one problem is that, given the highly compressed and frankly weird nature of politics, it doesn't tend to attract the kind of talent it needs, so we're always left with sweaty hopeless cases who would struggle to hold down a senior position in the real world of work.

The problem then is that the Republican party is entirely defined by what it's against: government interference in markets, provision of basic services, and evangelical christian white culture; lack of government interference in reproductive healthcare, and non-white culture; consequences for free speech by right wing white men; lack of consequences for free speech by non-right wing white men.

It needs an actual vision first before it can have a clear one.

They're conservatives. They're naturally against stuff, so they can keep things the same, or "return" to a romanticised past. That's not a problem for them, that's what they are, so that's not their problem. You can also frame all those things as positives (as they do): e.g. you're not anti abortion, you're pro life, or you're not anti-regulation, you support the free market.

While you are correct that the anti-policy can be turned into a policy, the feature of being against it for anyone but yourself makes that harder.

[monkey]

The problem then is that the Republican party is entirely defined by what it's against: government interference in markets, provision of basic services, and evangelical christian white culture; lack of government interference in reproductive healthcare, and non-white culture; consequences for free speech by right wing white men; lack of consequences for free speech by non-right wing white men.

It needs an actual vision first before it can have a clear one.

They're conservatives. They're naturally against stuff, so they can keep things the same, or "return" to a romanticised past. That's not a problem for them, that's what they are, so that's not their problem. You can also frame all those things as positives (as they do): e.g. you're not anti abortion, you're pro life, or you're not anti-regulation, you support the free market.

While you are correct that the anti-policy can be turned into a policy, the feature of being against it for anyone but yourself makes that harder.

Not really, they've been doing that for decades, often successfully. But after Bush they allowed the far right to come up out of the sewer and wheedle its way into the mainstream, first through Sarah Palin and Tea Party, then further right through Trump. With that their message has become more abstract, about "values" and culture rather than policy (anti or not). It's culminated with Trump campaigning the last election with basically no policy.

They can return to their normal levels of wrongness. But they need to face down the far right monster they created and nurtured. Unfortunately it seems that too many are scared of it.

[Bird on a Fire]

So, there's this:

Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, has told associates that he believes President Trump committed impeachable offenses and that he is pleased that Democrats are moving to impeach him, believing that it will make it easier to purge him from the party, according to people familiar with his thinking. The House is voting on Wednesday to formally charge Mr. Trump with inciting violence against the country.

At the same time, Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, the minority leader and one of Mr. Trump’s most steadfast allies in Congress, has asked other Republicans whether he should call on Mr. Trump to resign in the aftermath of the riot at the Capitol last week, according to three Republican officials briefed on the conversations.

While Mr. McCarthy has said he is personally opposed to impeachment, he and other party leaders have decided not to formally lobby Republicans to vote “no,” and an aide to Mr. McCarthy said he was open to a measure censuring Mr. Trump for his conduct. In private, Mr. McCarthy reached out to a leading House Democrat to see if the chamber would be willing to pursue a censure vote, though Speaker Nancy Pelosi has ruled it out.

Taken together, the stances of Congress’s two top Republicans — neither of whom has said publicly that Mr. Trump should resign or be impeached — reflected the politically challenging and fast-moving nature of the crisis that the party faces after the assault by a pro-Trump mob during a session to formalize President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s electoral victory.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/12/us/m ... hment.html

Trump getting dumped like hot sh.t off a shovel.

[Stranger Mouse]

If McConnel was that bothered he would recall the Senate and he hasn’t.

The might go through the Senate in three months

Ooooh. They just got their sixth Republican

[Stranger Mouse]

Bit of light relief

https://twitter.com/silentkil_er/status ... 08449?s=21

[Chris Preston]

This is the future of the Republican Party

Greene has been appointed by the Republicans to the House Education Committee. Republicans have started to rally back around Trump, with House Minority Leader meeting Trump in Florida. Rubio introduced a bill to declare Trump's impeachment illegal and 45 Republican Senators voted for it.

It seems that the Republicans are unwilling to take advantage of the opportunity Trump has given them with the storming of the Capitol to purge themselves of Trump. So long as Trump is part of the Republican Party he will be the 2024 Presidential nominee. He is also now completely unelectable. Demographics are against the Republicans unless they change who they appeal to. It seems the current leadership is not interested in doing the hard yards.

[Bird on a Fire]

Excellent news.

[Herainestold]

This is the future of the Republican Party

Greene has been appointed by the Republicans to the House Education Committee. Republicans have started to rally back around Trump, with House Minority Leader meeting Trump in Florida. Rubio introduced a bill to declare Trump's impeachment illegal and 45 Republican Senators voted for it.

It seems that the Republicans are unwilling to take advantage of the opportunity Trump has given them with the storming of the Capitol to purge themselves of Trump. So long as Trump is part of the Republican Party he will be the 2024 Presidential nominee. He is also now completely unelectable. Demographics are against the Republicans unless they change who they appeal to. It seems the current leadership is not interested in doing the hard yards.

I am not sure he is unelectable. The Republicans are working out how to control the government without having a majority.
Congress favours the Republicans and it is likely they can take permanent control of both houses. Then they just have to leverage the control of Congress with the control of election apparatus in the Republican states.Then even if Dems win the presidency, the states can refuse to certify and pry it away. The 2020 election, while not being successful, shows the way.

The end result will be a permanent Trumpist faux democracy a la Putin.

[bjn]

Well the Republicans really don't like democracy and are now quite open about it. They want the Arizona state legislature to be able to override the result of an election.

The Republican chair of Arizona's state House Ways and Means Committee introduced a bill Wednesday that would give the Legislature authority to override the secretary of state’s certification of its electoral votes.

GOP Rep. Shawnna Bolick introduced the bill, which rewrites parts of the state's election law, such as sections on election observers and securing and auditing ballots, among other measures.

One section grants the Legislature, which is currently under GOP control, the ability to revoke the secretary of state's certification "by majority vote at any time before the presidential inauguration."

[jimbob]

meanwhile

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/clusters ... ire-2021-1


Jewish Space Laser caused the 2018 California wildfires

[jdc]

Well the Republicans really don't like democracy and are now quite open about it. They want the Arizona state legislature to be able to override the result of an election.

The Republican chair of Arizona's state House Ways and Means Committee introduced a bill Wednesday that would give the Legislature authority to override the secretary of state’s certification of its electoral votes.

GOP Rep. Shawnna Bolick introduced the bill, which rewrites parts of the state's election law, such as sections on election observers and securing and auditing ballots, among other measures.

One section grants the Legislature, which is currently under GOP control, the ability to revoke the secretary of state's certification "by majority vote at any time before the presidential inauguration."

Excitingly, it seems you can track bills on Azleg. HB2720, if you want to keep an eye on this one.

[dyqik]

The House Republicans just voted 145-61 to keep Liz Cheney in her leadership role, after she voted for impeachment.

This was a secret ballot, so now we know that most of them don't believe what they say in public.

And later in a public ballot, they'll probably also vote to keep the Jewish-space laser/9/11 truther/Election was stolen/pro-insurrection QAnon representative in her committee roles.

[Herainestold]

The House Republicans just voted 145-61 to keep Liz Cheney in her leadership role, after she voted for impeachment.

This was a secret ballot, so now we know that most of them don't believe what they say in public.

And later in a public ballot, they'll probably also vote to keep the Jewish-space laser/9/11 truther/Election was stolen/pro-insurrection QAnon representative in her committee roles.

So only a third of the Republican House Caucus believe in sedition and dictatorship. Fewer than I had thought but still way too many for a democracy.

[dyqik]

And 199 of 210 Republicans think that it's right to keep someone who thinks schoolchildren faked being murdered by a gunman on the Education Committee.

[bolo]

And 199 of 210 Republicans think that it's right to keep someone who thinks schoolchildren faked being murdered by a gunman on the Education Committee.

They don't necessarily think it's right. They just think it's best for their political careers. Is that better or worse? Discuss.

[Vertigowooyay]

And 199 of 210 Republicans think that it's right to keep someone who thinks schoolchildren faked being murdered by a gunman on the Education Committee.

Oh come on now, it's unreasonable to hold someone to account for things they said and believed as long ago as January 2021.

[dyqik]

And 199 of 210 Republicans think that it's right to keep someone who thinks schoolchildren faked being murdered by a gunman on the Education Committee.

They don't necessarily think it's right. They just think it's best for their political careers. Is that better or worse? Discuss.

They think it's right to do that for the sake of their political careers.

[Herainestold]

And 199 of 210 Republicans think that it's right to keep someone who thinks schoolchildren faked being murdered by a gunman on the Education Committee.

They don't necessarily think it's right. They just think it's best for their political careers. Is that better or worse? Discuss.

They think it's right to do that for the sake of their political careers.

They are looking at the immediate short term, ie the next election and not getting primaried. As a long term strategy it is not too bad, because the end result is a Republican party semi-permanent dictatorship, probably under one of the Trump offspring. Harnessing the energy of fanatics -no matter how strange their world view - works because fanatics are so committed and not easily dissuaded.