187
submitted 11 months ago by very_well_lost@lemmy.world to c/usa@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] adespoton@lemmy.ca 43 points 11 months ago
[-] plz1@lemmy.world 45 points 11 months ago

Now the house will be motionless other than maybe subcommittee meetings and such. Until the GOP nominates a new speaker. It only took 15 attempts last time...

[-] JeSuisUnHombre@lemm.ee 20 points 11 months ago

The mostly likely replacement at this point is probably the Democrat Jeffries, assuming the dems are still united on that front. I don't know who of the gop would be able to swing the whole party at this point.

[-] Kepabar@startrek.website 13 points 11 months ago

Highly unlikely.

Anyone with an R next to their name would be commiting political suicide to cross the isle like that.

We might see one of the more centrist Rs try to broker a power sharing deal if things get too bleak though since it's apparent the freedom caucus does not know what compromise or negotiation means.

[-] cm0002@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

It would be hilarious if McCarthy did it as an fu and then resigned lolol

[-] JeSuisUnHombre@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago

They don't have to cross the isle, they just need to abstain.

[-] Uniquitous@lemmy.one 18 points 11 months ago

Democrats pop some popcorn; Republicans tear each other to shreds.

[-] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works -2 points 11 months ago

As a libertarian, the last 7 years have been one big, depressing bowl of popcorn. I didn't agree with Obama on much, but he was at least a decent executive, but all these geriatrics in office just make me so frustrated.

My vote doesn't matter anyway because all of the positions I vote for end up going to the same party with at least 20% vote difference. So I mostly vote for the minority party if I think it'll be close, otherwise I vote for my state's mediocre libertarian candidates.

[-] Uniquitous@lemmy.one 2 points 11 months ago

I wholeheartedly concur regarding the gerontocracy. I would support an age maximum of 65 for those running for office. If you are elected at 65 you can serve your term of office but after that you're done.

[-] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 months ago

I would support an age maximum of 65

I can't agree there. I've seen 70+ yos that are more capable than 50+ year olds in handling complex tasks like policy negotiations and whatnot. So I think we should instead have an ability-based standard where you're removed if you're unfit for office, regardless of age. Perhaps that means psych evaluations by an independent org and presented to the judicial branch or some legislative committee for evaluation (I forget who has authority there).

[-] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 13 points 11 months ago

Nominate a center right speaker that some conservative blue dog Dems will vote for? That way bills are more centrist and more likely to get through a bipartisan Congress with less friction?

Nah. Let’s obstruct harder!

[-] zeusbottom@sh.itjust.works 7 points 11 months ago

More of the same obstruction.

There’s nothing to celebrate, but we’re all doing it anyway.

[-] logos@sh.itjust.works 5 points 11 months ago
[-] sylver_dragon@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

And probably will be for the rest of this Congress. Unless the Fuckwit Caucus gets enough of a clue to not drag things out again.

this post was submitted on 04 Oct 2023
187 points (99.0% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7119 readers
490 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS