Romney’s up for reelection in 2024, indeed, at which point he’ll already be 77 years old. Turns 78 shortly into the 2025-2031 term. He’s wealthy independent of his political career (CEO of Bain back in the day and all that), he and his family are all financially covered for any reasonable needs the rest of his and their lives. So he has no pressing need to enter the former-official-lobbyist world after leaving the Senate either. His incentive structures are entirely different from the average politician, even the average Senator.
4 Likes
Oh, sure. Just appeal to common sense of Republican voters! Because that worked so well these past 4 years. After 74 million of these fuckers thought another 4 more years of Trump would be a great idea?
3 Likes
Well those Democrats really proved that actions have consequences didn’t they? They made a point about how they were forced to hold this Impeachment because of how egregious the president’s actions were, but now we have a precedent that the President can’t be convicted even with completely outrageous behavior.
At least it was done quickly so we can get back to actually solving problems and confirming appointments.
1 Like
This reads a lot like “let’s elect a millionaire because they won’t be bribeable”, which has been proven repeatedly to be completely wrong.
2 Likes
Of the seven:
Collins, Murkowski and Romney have enough personal popularity in their states that they don’t need to worry about a Trumpist primary challenge. Murkowski even managed to get elected as a write-in candidate after losing a primary to a Tea Partier in 2010.
Burr and Toomey have already said that they don’t intend to run for re-election in 2022, so don’t care.
Sasse has been critical of Trump since 2016, describing him as “creepy” and a “megalomaniac strongman”, and comparing the 2016 Republican convention to a “dumpster fire”. Despite this, he doesn’t seem to have faced much of a challenge in the 2020 primary- possibly because Nebraska’s farmers didn’t like Trump’s trade war with China.
So that just leaves Cassidy as the only real surprise. And he doesn’t have to run again until 2026 (like Sasse).
5 Likes
I don’t know.
I rather like having a president who just does his job, rather than create controversies in order to get splashed all over the news every minute of every day.
The idea of not needing to worry about what sort of destructive things the president is going to do to ruin the country rather appeals to me.
1 Like
If they hadn’t at least tried then they’d be complicit too.
There are the fights you have because you know you can win and there are fights you have because it’s better to take a stand than to let evil go unchallenged.
13 Likes
Yea, more evidence of this shit timeline. Here’s a thought: the current President could be in the news for positive things. Howboudat?
4 Likes
And control of the Senate, and President Biden.
Every state in the union has their ultra-conservative corners. Stop blaming it on southerners, especially those of us who just literally gave control of congress to the less insane, non-seditionist party.
16 Likes
Yes! 
(And I’m happy to see you. 
)
11 Likes
IIRC, Taylor Greene ran basically unopposed; the Democratic counterpart quit the race.
So I don’t think it’s fair to judge all the voters in that district when they didn’t have another option to vote for.
(It’s wrong anyway, as no candidate ever gets 100% of the votes and therefore isn’t everyone’s choice. I’ve lived under Republican officials I never voted for and sure as hell never represented my interests, so I know that pain.)
10 Likes
Agreed. However, you had pretty open KKK activity up into the 1990s, as well as other hardline racist groups.
But of course, people want to paint everyone there like that, as well as everyone in the south. That bullshit I’m getting pretty fed up with.
9 Likes
Yes, and not direct instructions… And I agree with everyone there was plenty of evidence.
21 Likes
There were 8 other candidates in the primary she won, and she had nearly double the votes of the runner up.
Biden won Georgia by less than 12K votes.
It’s a good thing, but we’re not talking about a state with “ultra-conservative corners”. We’re talking about a state that’s red AF the moment you leave Atlanta.
Not just Atlanta, all the major urban centers in Georgia lean blue. Hell, even California would be overwhelmingly red if you only counted the areas outside of major cities.
10 Likes
It sure is a good thing that all the people live in the cities.
2 Likes
This is true, but the population distribution in California is also significantly different.
There’s only 5 cities in Georgia over 100K, and they make up around 10% of the population of the state.
California has 75 cities over 100K and that population is nearly 50% of the state total.
The United States is kind of strange in this respect. Major cities are often surrounded by unincorporated areas that are not technically considered a part of the city, but are contiguous with the city and are (for all intents and purposes) part of the urban built-up area of the city. The city of Atlanta may only have 500,000 people, but the urban area (which includes both unincorporated areas and adjacent suburbs) has 5,000,000 people, which is half the population of the state.
From Wikipedia: “More than one half of metro Atlanta’s population is in unincorporated areas or areas considered a census-designated-place (CDP) by the census bureau.”
3 Likes
