House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and his leadership team said they would vote to table any motion by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene to remove the speaker.
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…?
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.
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.
Toungue in cheek obviously but the point remains. I firmly agree with your point about the Democrats ability to campaign on the “Any functional adult” party, but that goes away if they elevate Republicans the level of ‘also being function adults’. Congress being seized up actually works for the Democrats so long as they can firmly pin it on Republicans, unless its explicitly a Democratic policy priority. Which is like… Maybe? But that works so hard against Johnson and the Republicans in the house; his leash just isn’t that long.
So my bet goes to stagnation, which I assess as a D’ win. If you think there is something both D’ and R’ can vote yes on going into campaign season, I’m all ears. Maybe marijuana legalization?
Abysmal political strategy. Like if you want to lose an election your party is already struggling in (as in, the Democrats are struggling), the Democrats should do exactly what you describe.
The only things on the table that Republicans are willing to work on are gigantic L’s for the Democrats. There is no issue (unless you have one you are holding back on, and again, maybe mj reform?) that Republicans would put forward that Democratic voters can support.
If they did what you are advising, Democrats would go from having ‘won’ the house game of the last 2 years (from the minority position no less), to having ‘lost’ the house game. It would be idiotic to give Republicans one iota of rope more than exactly what it takes to hang themselves.
(Tongue in cheek, I actually appreciate our discussion here.)
The problem is that people are sick of exactly these games.
We want a functional government. Breaking it… because you got the ball and are going home isn’t going to convince any centrists to flip. Progressives also don’t see them doing enough.
They don’t have to agree to things. They just need to make as much of an effort. They’ll be more successful to that with someone who won’t move the goalposts every five minutes.
We nuke Johnson, they loose a seat at the table. The next guy simply can’t be trusted. Nobody wins.
We keep that seat, we can still nuke his plans… or not. It gives them more than they had before.
This is such a persistent myth about American politics. There is basically no evidence to suggest that a ‘center’ has ever existed outside of being a convenient narrative for NPR to orbit around. You don’t win American elections appealing to ‘centrists’ (who statistically don’t exist), you win them driving out a base. We have a strongly bimodal electorate that has only gotten more and more bimodal since the year 2000.
We have 3 demographics in American in order of volume: Independents, Democrats, and Republicans. Democrats, if they want to win, need to drive their base out, and expand it (if possible).
No Republican will vote Democratic in this election. The best you can do is get them to stay home. But no quantity of political capitol will bring them to the Democratic side. Its a complete waste of resources.
Democrats can only drive out their base (go after policy positions their base wants), or bring in independents (expand to policy positions independents favor). Its just naive to the current environment to promote working with Republicans as a viable path for house Democrats. It would be completely shooting themselves in the foot.
We have 3 demographics in American in order of volume: Independents, Democrats, and Republicans. Democrats, if they want to win, need to drive their base out, and expand it (if possible).
No Republican will vote Democratic in this election. The best you can do is get them to stay home. But no quantity of political capitol will bring them to the Democratic side. Its a complete waste of resources.
this isn’t entirely true. my dad, for example, has been a life long republican who will be voting for Biden- and did in the last election.
Besides which, Biden is a centrist. he’s only progressive compared to literal, actual fascists like trump, Desantis and Abbot. that he’s also slightly more progressive than Obama or the Clintons just demonstrates the two big camps inside the big tent.
the point I’m trying to make is that no matter what your goal is, you’re going to get closer to it with a known quantity like Johnson that whatever sack of smashed asshole they find next. Democrats don’t lose anything. but they might get something if Johnson owes them. and he’d owe them bigtime.
They don’t lose anything because they can still nuke any single effort done by republicans. its how we got the Ukraine aid passed- by nuking Israel aid until they complied.
Maga republicans will lose nothing if congress gets nuked. in fact, it’ll probably make their base happy. because “Murica, Fuck Yeah!” or… something.
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…?
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.
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.
Toungue in cheek obviously but the point remains. I firmly agree with your point about the Democrats ability to campaign on the “Any functional adult” party, but that goes away if they elevate Republicans the level of ‘also being function adults’. Congress being seized up actually works for the Democrats so long as they can firmly pin it on Republicans, unless its explicitly a Democratic policy priority. Which is like… Maybe? But that works so hard against Johnson and the Republicans in the house; his leash just isn’t that long.
So my bet goes to stagnation, which I assess as a D’ win. If you think there is something both D’ and R’ can vote yes on going into campaign season, I’m all ears. Maybe marijuana legalization?
To answer the assassin goose…
Anything they can get. They’ve got more leverage with Johnson to push whatever agenda they want than they will have with who or whatever comes next.
(Edit going nuclear with the attack birds, are we? lol. )
Yeah that’s just…
Abysmal political strategy. Like if you want to lose an election your party is already struggling in (as in, the Democrats are struggling), the Democrats should do exactly what you describe.
The only things on the table that Republicans are willing to work on are gigantic L’s for the Democrats. There is no issue (unless you have one you are holding back on, and again, maybe mj reform?) that Republicans would put forward that Democratic voters can support.
If they did what you are advising, Democrats would go from having ‘won’ the house game of the last 2 years (from the minority position no less), to having ‘lost’ the house game. It would be idiotic to give Republicans one iota of rope more than exactly what it takes to hang themselves.
(Tongue in cheek, I actually appreciate our discussion here.)
The problem is that people are sick of exactly these games.
We want a functional government. Breaking it… because you got the ball and are going home isn’t going to convince any centrists to flip. Progressives also don’t see them doing enough.
They don’t have to agree to things. They just need to make as much of an effort. They’ll be more successful to that with someone who won’t move the goalposts every five minutes.
We nuke Johnson, they loose a seat at the table. The next guy simply can’t be trusted. Nobody wins.
We keep that seat, we can still nuke his plans… or not. It gives them more than they had before.
Centrists?
This is such a persistent myth about American politics. There is basically no evidence to suggest that a ‘center’ has ever existed outside of being a convenient narrative for NPR to orbit around. You don’t win American elections appealing to ‘centrists’ (who statistically don’t exist), you win them driving out a base. We have a strongly bimodal electorate that has only gotten more and more bimodal since the year 2000.
We have 3 demographics in American in order of volume: Independents, Democrats, and Republicans. Democrats, if they want to win, need to drive their base out, and expand it (if possible).
No Republican will vote Democratic in this election. The best you can do is get them to stay home. But no quantity of political capitol will bring them to the Democratic side. Its a complete waste of resources.
Democrats can only drive out their base (go after policy positions their base wants), or bring in independents (expand to policy positions independents favor). Its just naive to the current environment to promote working with Republicans as a viable path for house Democrats. It would be completely shooting themselves in the foot.
this isn’t entirely true. my dad, for example, has been a life long republican who will be voting for Biden- and did in the last election.
Besides which, Biden is a centrist. he’s only progressive compared to literal, actual fascists like trump, Desantis and Abbot. that he’s also slightly more progressive than Obama or the Clintons just demonstrates the two big camps inside the big tent.
the point I’m trying to make is that no matter what your goal is, you’re going to get closer to it with a known quantity like Johnson that whatever sack of smashed asshole they find next. Democrats don’t lose anything. but they might get something if Johnson owes them. and he’d owe them bigtime.
They don’t lose anything because they can still nuke any single effort done by republicans. its how we got the Ukraine aid passed- by nuking Israel aid until they complied.
Maga republicans will lose nothing if congress gets nuked. in fact, it’ll probably make their base happy. because “Murica, Fuck Yeah!” or… something.