|
sullat posted:Are there enough not-crazies to make that difficult? Just like all you need is 40 crazies to derail the speaker vote, all you need is 40 not-crazies to derail anything as stupid and politically damaging as that. Maybe, but I feel like the right wing media pressure would be enormous and it would be difficult for a Republican to indirectly defend Obama. With the primaries going on I'm sure the candidates would throw their weight behind it too.
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 15:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 03:53 |
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:The most probable scenario is Boehner staying on, which is really the worst situation for everyone in the House. Boehner hates his job and will have even less control over his conference now that he has announced his resignation. The Republican Conference simultaneously hates Boehner but can't unite around a candidate that would have enough power to replace him. I disagree. Boehner has been weak because he's always had the concern about what might prompt a revolt. Now, he doesn't care and can do whatever he wants because the only way to get rid of him is agree on a new speaker, and he's fine with leaving.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 15:39
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:I disagree. Boehner has been weak because he's always had the concern about what might prompt a revolt. Now, he doesn't care and can do whatever he wants because the only way to get rid of him is agree on a new speaker, and he's fine with leaving. Can they vacate the chair without electing a new Speaker?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 15:46
|
|
|
Rygar201 posted:Can they vacate the chair without electing a new Speaker? Not without amending the rules, which would be harder than electing a new speaker. It's arguable that the constitution requires a speaker at all times, since the constitution mentions that the house selects the position, but literally every detail about the position is left up to the house rules.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 16:20
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:Why didn't you bold "Morris told the court that the statute that makes bank robberies illegal is invalid"? Learn this one weird trick for breaking the law! Judges hate it!
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 16:28
|
|
|
nachos posted:Impeachment? Man I hope so. While it would be bad for the nation at large, I toxxed that Obama would eventually get impeached and don't want to lose ten bux. Before now that was starting to look like a pretty bad bet!
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 16:29
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:A vast majority of the Republican Conference knows that an impeachment proceeding would be political suicide. Short of a Pride's Purge, it isn't happening. Yeah, but they knew that in 1997 and it didn't stop them. And if anything, they've gotten more combative and more willing to die on stupid stupid right-wing causes since then. I honestly think there's a decent chance the next Speaker allows a vote to impeach in exchange for Freedom Caucus support on other issues.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 17:05
|
|
|
What the hell would they even try to impeach ON?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 17:06
|
|
|
What's the chance of the establishment GOP going "we're sick of this poo poo" and not funding or supporting (or even allowing) crazy tea party assholes in their (re)election bids? Basically forcing them to run as a 3rd party?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 17:07
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:What the hell would they even try to impeach ON? Occupying the white house while black.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 17:07
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:What the hell would they even try to impeach ON? PWB.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 17:07
|
|
|
SubponticatePoster posted:What's the chance of the establishment GOP going "we're sick of this poo poo" and not funding or supporting (or even allowing) crazy tea party assholes in their (re)election bids? Basically forcing them to run as a 3rd party? Super PACs will fund them. There's a billionaire for everyone.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 17:08
|
|
|
Brigadier Sockface posted:Super PACs will fund them. There's a billionaire for everyone.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 17:10
|
|
|
SubponticatePoster posted:Well sure, but can't the party itself say "you're not a Republican, go run as a LIbertarian" or something? They generally do not have that power, unless the person in question is registered under a different party.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 17:14
|
|
|
Also, even in more establishment friendly districts the GOP relies on the votes of tea party types. If they were openly told to gently caress off, the republicans couldn't win. There would need to be a party realignment to make the republicans nationally competitive again if any of the major constituencies pulled out now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 17:17
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:PWB. To be fair they impeached Clinton too. Who some say was actually the first black president because he played the saxophone.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 17:24
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:They generally do not have that power, unless the person in question is registered under a different party.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 17:28
|
|
|
SubponticatePoster posted:Huh. So anyone, as long as they are not officially registered with another party, can register as a Republican and then run for a seat? Since it's a membership thing I would think the party itself would have more control over their membership. In most cases yes. Of course you usually need to get enough signatures on a petition or whatever to guarantee being on the primary ballot. For instance, in New Jersey to get on the primary ballot for any party in a US House seat, you must get the signatures of 200 registered voters from the congressional district . To get on the primary ballot for a US Senate seat, you must get the signatures of 1000 voters in the state who are members of the applicable political party. Nintendo Kid fucked around with this message at 17:35 on Oct 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 17:32
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:A vast majority of the Republican Conference knows that an impeachment proceeding would be political suicide. Short of a Pride's Purge, it isn't happening. What do you mean by "political suicide"? Lose the house? The house GOP caucus could all run around naked on the mall throwing their feces at each other and still not lose the house.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 17:34
|
|
|
Gravel Gravy posted:To be fair they impeached Clinton too. I thought they called him black because he was being harassed by the man for no good reason?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 17:42
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:I disagree. Boehner has been weak because he's always had the concern about what might prompt a revolt. Now, he doesn't care and can do whatever he wants because the only way to get rid of him is agree on a new speaker, and he's fine with leaving. Also, if we end up in a position where Boehner is sticking around, it would become clear at that point that the Tea Coast people don't have the votes to get a new speaker in. So, yeah, at that point he would be weirdly immune to anything, because the point at which Boehner sticks around is the point at which there's no other viable option to get the votes for the Speakership. mcmagic posted:What do you mean by "political suicide"? Lose the house? The house GOP caucus could all run around naked on the mall throwing their feces at each other and still not lose the house. Lose the presidential election.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 17:42
|
|
|
These statutes are invalid *opens coat* No YOUR statutes are invalid because my fedora is bigger than yours *cue music* 
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 17:44
|
|
|
Bob Ojeda posted:
1) They are going to lose it anyway. 2) The house GOP caucus couldn't possibly care if they win the presidency or not. In fact they probably PREFER to lose it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 17:54
|
|
|
So thanks to Ben Carson, here's an opinion piece on Fox News about how the Holocaust was the Jews' fault for giving up their guns.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 17:56
|
|
|
So this means we get to have another recession with default dancing because gerrymandering has gotten completely out of control?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 17:58
|
|
|
Khisanth Magus posted:Not sure if this was posted, but the GOP committee on Planned Parenthood found no evidence of wrongdoing! Which is why, just like with Benghazi, they've opened a new committee to investigate the issue from scratch. One of these days, they'll crack that case open! It just FEELS like they're doing something illegal (they are liberals after all and liberals are always doing something illegal), so they'll just have to keep looking until they find out what that thing is!
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 18:00
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:1) They are going to lose it anyway. Really?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 18:21
|
|
|
Bob Ojeda posted:Lose the presidential election. Republicans still all but swept the Senate after the last shutdown. Voters aren't watching what's going on now and it won't matter in a year, even without an Obamacare screw up. Mitt Romney openly stated he didn't care about the opinion of 47% of the country and still got within 3% of winning the popular vote. Republicans in the House know this and it's why the Freedom Caucus is doing what it is. They get rewarded for shutting down the government? Guess we just need to shutdown harder and the presidency will be OURS! Conservatism cannot fail, it can only be failed. ComradeCosmobot fucked around with this message at 18:29 on Oct 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 18:25
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:Republicans still all but swept the Senate after the last shutdown. Yes, because midterms are exactly the same thing as Presidential elections. Also, funny thing: the Senators coming up for election next year are all from 2010, not from 2008.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 18:28
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:So thanks to Ben Carson, here's an opinion piece on Fox News about how the Holocaust was the Jews' fault for giving up their guns. I'm normally the last person to pull the anti-Semitism card, but in my opinion, it really is straight-up anti-Semitism to argue that if the Jews had just, like, got guns and tried harder, they might not have all been killed. When an entire society and its professionally trained and equipped military has decided you, and everyone like you, are going to die, it's already too late. Especially given that, thanks to the principle of collective punishment, the killing of a single Nazi was justification enough for wiping out entire towns of people. Which they were able to do pretty easily. With their guns.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 18:30
|
|
|
Combed Thunderclap posted:I'm normally the last person to pull the anti-Semitism card, but in my opinion, it really is straight-up anti-Semitism to argue that if the Jews had just, like, got guns and tried harder, they might not have all been killed. When an entire society and its professionally trained and equipped military has decided you, and everyone like you, are going to die, it's already too late. Especially given that, thanks to the principle of collective punishment, the killing of a single Nazi was justification enough for wiping out entire towns of people. The French had guns, how'd that work out for them?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
Yeah stupid Jews didn't even try to fight back.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
DemeaninDemon posted:Yeah stupid Jews didn't even try to fight back. For non phone posters
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
Brigadier Sockface posted:Really? They don't have any good general election candidates and Democrats have a huge structural advantage, so yeah.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
Boon posted:The French had guns, how'd that work out for them? They even had vastly superior guns to the germans.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 18:41
|
|
|
Asproigerosis posted:They even had vastly superior guns to the germans. They were just really loving bad at using their tanks. And at warfare in general at the time. The psychological damage from their horrendous casualties in WW1 was still affecting them when German armor was rolling through the low countries.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 18:45
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:What the hell would they even try to impeach ON? Benghazi, obviously.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 18:51
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:The segment included a number of clips of McCarthy speaking, and there is something WRONG with the guy. He has some kind of weird verbal dyslexia or something where his grammar is all hosed up and he uses inappropriate words, words that don't fit, all the time. Yeah it seems like uhhhhhhh maybe if the job title starts w/ the word Speaker, one important qualification might be the ability to put coherent sentences together. Like not even good sentences that say good things and advocate sane policies that benefit the country, more like what nouns and verbs are and what's up w/ them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 18:51
|
|
|
DemeaninDemon posted:Yeah stupid Jews didn't even try to fight back. People in the comments are actually arguing that if the Warsaw Ghetto fighters had only had more guns, they...might have won? Somehow? In my Holocaust head canon, the Jews get nukes, which is why I'm for global nuclear rearmament.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 18:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 03:53 |
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:Republicans still all but swept the Senate after the last shutdown. Voters aren't watching what's going on now and it won't matter in a year, even without an Obamacare screw up. Mid term electorates aren't Presidential electorates, and the structure of Senate races is different (which states are up, small state bias, etc) 3% is a huge margin in modern politics. Mitt Romney wasn't ever in sniffing distance of the Oval Office. Whatever loving putz they roll up against HRC is going to get similarly drubbed, unless Barack Obama rapes and kills a small child live in the Oval or something.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 19:06
|
|