Yep, because of course, they want this chaos… if things are chaotic, it’s far easier for them to get what they want, which is a right wing take over of all of the state, so they can impose their theocracy on the rest of us…
I think that @sqlrob means that why shouldn’t some GOP members cross the aisle to vote for Jeffries? Why is it the responsiblity of the Democrats to be the ones to compromise their principles and vote for a speaker who would not be materially better than the far right? As @anon73430903 - it’s not like Cheney, etc, aren’t in favor of ending women’s bodily autonomy or tax cuts for the wealthy? It’s far easier to get 5 vote from moderate republicans, but once again, the Democrats are the ones expected to sacrifice for “the good of the country” when it’s been the GOP who are the ones who actually pose a danger. The biggest difference between the vast majority of the GOP conference and the far right, is just the insurrection. They majority of that conference is largely in favor of imposing the exact kind of regime on us that the far right wants, they just want the cover of democracy to impose their will on us.
I’d argue it’s not about easy or hard, it’s about not expecting the Democrats to the only adults in the room? Over and over again, we’re told that the GOP can’t help what they do, and that it’s on the Democrats to do the work of governing, but that’s bullshit. The GOP members of congress applied for the job of governing just as much as their Democratic colleagues, and I personally find it offensive that the blame is always, always laid at the feet of the Democrats, as if they’re mothers wiping the snotty noses of their GOP colleagues.
It’s easier than being an unperson, which is what the Republican party have been setting up for the last 8 years. The overturning of Roe v. Wade should have been a wake up call, but some people are still dreaming that Washington is a Sorkinesque fantasy.
Personally, I am in a constant state of knurd. I see all the bad stuff happening before it does and feel like I am screaming into the void as the liberals march obliviously towards it.
When I think of liberals marching obliviously toward the void I think of Nader voters and of Sarandon’s poxing both houses. Obviously the best situation right now would be for 5 Republicans to vote in Jeffries, and for the Freedom Caucus to be banished to the wilderness (ideally, literally), but I see that as less likely than for the holdouts to give up and vote in Jordan. Think of how many NeverTrumpers have caved; you think they’re not going to cave for Jordan?
And I think of the endless game of give and take. We give, and they take. Socialists are expected to meet half way with liberals, liberals are supposed to meet halfway with moderates, moderates meet halfway with conservatives, now we have conservatives meeting halfway with fascists. We are told to lower our expectations and have watered down versions of what we want and end up with atrocities.
Your solution is a death sentence for many, but because it isn’t for you it is something else you will meet halfway on.
That analogy may not apply here though, Jordan has never been nearly as popular within the Republican Party as Trump and the party isn’t committed to supporting Jordan as their only shot at the office the same way they were committed to supporting Trump after he won the party primary in 2016.
Different situation, different math, different options.
So it’s revenge? Kill LGBTQIA, disenfranchise POC, destroy womens lives. It doesn’t matter that a large amount of them couldn’t vote for Nader because that happened 23 fucking years ago, and they were either too young or not even born yet.
And people wonder how intergenerational feuds start.
Those all sound like things that having Jordan as speaker would accelerate. So I would hope to lessen that possibility, and I’m not yet convinced that Dems bloc voting Jeffries is necessarily the best way to do it.
Those all sound like things that having any Republican as speaker would accelerate. I mean, if the moderate Republicans are too scared of MAGA to vote for a Democrat, then they aren’t going to offer any resistance to MAGA if they are speaker.
It really is… of course, any politics is gonna have some compromise and give and take, but we sure as shit should not be negotiating over people’s rights to exist and live in safety and security, which far too many centrist seem willing to do…
Pretty much ALL of the GOP is pretty okay with this shit. The whole party is trash right now and resistance is the only correct tactic.
Voting for slight less fascists isn’t the way to do it either…
This exactly. The so-called moderates are unwiling to vote for, work with, or support anyone who is on the other “team” because the whole GOP has descended into pointless, violent tribalism. they see what has happened to anyone who has worked across the aisle, and are scared shitless. I’m not just talking about getting voted out of office. People were getting death threats over the Jordan fight for not supporting him. I’m glad they stood up to him in private, but they really need to start standing up to the fascists IN PUBLIC, in larger numbers, or this will continue. If even GOP do that, it will have an impact and could start the purging of the party of these elements.
This comment ^ crystallizes something for me: The GOP believes the Democratic party is a woman. Always being blamed for what the GOP does, always being expected to clean up the GOP’s messes, etc - it’s patriarchy in the abstract form of political parties.
