Scrutable

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).

plodder wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:45 am

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 wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 12, 2021 1:00 pm

plodder wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:45 am

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.

plodder wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:45 am

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.

Trinucleus wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:30 pm

plodder wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:45 am

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.

monkey wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:18 pm

dyqik wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 12, 2021 1:00 pm

plodder wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:45 am

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.

dyqik wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 12, 2021 5:18 pm

monkey wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:18 pm

dyqik wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 12, 2021 1:00 pm

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.

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.

Chris Preston wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 29, 2021 9:42 am

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.

NBCNews wrote: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."

bjn wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 29, 2021 7:53 pm

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.

NBCNews wrote: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."

dyqik wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 04, 2021 1:53 am

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.

dyqik wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 05, 2021 1:14 am

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.

dyqik wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 05, 2021 1:14 am

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 wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 05, 2021 2:56 am

dyqik wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 05, 2021 1:14 am

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.

dyqik wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 05, 2021 12:47 pm

bolo wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 05, 2021 2:56 am

dyqik wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 05, 2021 1:14 am

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.