Marjorie Taylor Greene to resign in January

[Desk trauma]

MT Green was thrown under the bus as was Schumer by the far radical left on the left side.

She spent years screaming at people and they don’t rush to her aid? Odd that.

 

[Hans Blaster]

The level of "looniness" is irrelevant. You think whatever Trump-endorsed and approved candidate that runs to fill that seat is going to be less looney?

It's not just the Epstein stuff, she's also been against unconditional funding of Israel, and has been on the side of preserving ACA subsidies. (those are two issues that seem pretty important to some of the democrats, and it's unlikely they'll get another deep red district republican who agrees with them on that)

The only difference between Marjorie and the rest of the GOP House is that she wasn't an abject coward with complete fealty to Trump.

As far as "not bringing her into the tent"... that sounds like the approach of people who'd rather "lose with their principles" than actually score some political/legislative victories.

She didn't want in.

The GOP welcomed plenty of high profile Democratic types into their tent despite policy disagreements.

RFK Jr and Tulsi Gabbard would be examples of that...

Two pro-choice former Democrats-turned-independents.

Keeping in mind, whatever looniness you perceive in MTG, the pro-life perception is that abortion is literally murdering babies.

And they still brought them into their tent anyway.

"RFKjr"s only "political currency" was his bad health policy ideas and his anti-vax movement. Trump's pulling him in with an offer to let him trash US public health policy for few votes was a savvy one. He probably moved some voters, particularly of the "moderate" but anti-vax persuasion to Trump and all we have to pay is the next deadly outbreak.

Gabbard is a loon and the rarest of international sycophants -- an Assad-ist. (And a putinist, it would seem.) I can't even think of a constituency that she would influence, except perhaps the centrist, but-both-siders who are fooled into thinking that Trump is a coalition builder and the Dems are purists. She shouldn't be within 10,000 miles of classified information.

 

[Lukaris]

She spent years screaming at people and they don’t rush to her aid? Odd that.

Respect for someone doesn’t mean denial of their faults. I respect Schumer, although I can’t stand his politics but thank the Lord for the golden rule. Politics fall within the area of our fallen nature.

 

[BCP1928]

Has no one considered the possibility that she realized, as a Christian, what she was doing and repents of it?

 

[Desk trauma]

Has no one considered the possibility that she realized, as a Christian, what she was doing and repents of it?

The Least likely explanation.

Her resignation is scheduled for a day after she qualifies for retirement benefits. Off into the sunset to enjoy her insider trading windfall.

 

[BCP1928]

The Least likely explanation.

I'll agree it isn't very likely, though it would be unChristian of me to rule it out entirely. Still, it is interesting that MAGA Christians won't consider it.

Her resignation is scheduled for a day after she qualifies for retirement benefits. Off into the sunset to enjoy her insider trading windfall.

Looks like she beat Trump at his own game. Well played!

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Nah. I’m just gonna laugh and be glad she’s gone. They did this to themselves. All those years of loyalty to Trump have amounted to absolutely nothing. I think Republicans need to see what their loyalty to this man gets them. Nothing.

Personally, I think an even bigger even more MAGA candidate, more obsequious to Trump, would be easier to beat than someone who’s shown at least a tiny bit of independent thought on the right. People are starting to tire of this slavish mindset that everything has to go through him before anyone can do anything for themselves. It’s going to tear the GOP apart. It’s already starting to.

I think you're misunderstanding some of the cultural aspects of the deep south in the deep red rural counties.

A democrat won't get that seat. So I followed the timeline back for that area she currently represents (obviously district lines get redrawn over time, so there's not a 100% perfect historical line), but the last time a Democrat represented that kind of area, it was a very different kind of Democrat (think "pre-Southern Strategy" kind of Democrat -- if you catch my drift)

 

[ThatRobGuy]

"RFKjr"s only "political currency" was his bad health policy ideas and his anti-vax movement. Trump's pulling him in with an offer to let him trash US public health policy for few votes was a savvy one. He probably moved some voters, particularly of the "moderate" but anti-vax persuasion to Trump and all we have to pay is the next deadly outbreak.

Gabbard is a loon and the rarest of international sycophants -- an Assad-ist. (And a putinist, it would seem.) I can't even think of a constituency that she would influence, except perhaps the centrist, but-both-siders who are fooled into thinking that Trump is a coalition builder and the Dems are purists. She shouldn't be within 10,000 miles of classified information.

Political currency wins elections evidently... you DO want the Democrats to win, yes?

As far as who Gabbard does or doesn't support...there are people on the democratic side who were pro-Iran, were there not?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

And how do you make such an effort when you have no idea she is going to do it?

She can announce she's leaving, she hasn't left yet...she's still there until January.

Someone announcing their intent to not run again, but then reversing course, isn't unheard of in politics.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4290891-here-are-the-house-incumbents-not-running-for-reelection-in-2024/

Rep. Victoria Spartz (R-Ind.) in February said she will seek another term in the House, nearly a year after she announced she would retire to spend more time with family. She said she decided to continue fighting for her constituents given the “challenging times for our Republic.”

Rep. Mark Green (R-Tenn.) similarly changed his mind, just two weeks after saying he would retire at the end of his current term. He said the reverse in choice came after he fielded calls from various people.

 

[johansen]

Political currency wins elections evidently... you DO want the Democrats to win, yes?

at some point you have to let the chips fall where they may.

its not our job to be the morality police, or insist that tax dollars be spent effectively. people are complacent and you have to let them be complacent to the point they get hurt before they wise up and change their ways.

teach your children the games both sides play and invest your money instead of donating it to political campaigns, you'll have more left over at the end of your life.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

at some point you have to let the chips fall where they may.

its not our job to be the morality police, or insist that tax dollars be spent effectively. people are complacent and you have to let them be complacent to the point they get hurt before they wise up and change their ways.

teach your children the games both sides play and invest your money instead of donating it to political campaigns, you'll have more left over at the end of your life.

I still feel like I have a vested interest in wanting both parties put forth the best they have to offer and hashing it out.


If, in my lifetime, If I could see a presidential race to the effect of "Jared Polis vs. Charlie Baker" or something similar...I'd be a happy camper.

I want to see a presidential election that
A) makes me think it's worth my time to go to the polling place to begin with
B) is a tough decision because I'm trying to decide who's better between two decent options, instead of having to do the "lesser of two evils" routine.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Political currency wins elections evidently... you DO want the Democrats to win, yes?

I do and nothing you have proposed regarding MTG or Georgia-14 will do that.

As far as who Gabbard does or doesn't support...there are people on the democratic side who were pro-Iran, were there not?

I didn't know Iran was the subject or why we would care. You brought up Gabbard under the patently absurd notion that saying "good riddence" to a bad actor like Tulsi is some how the Dems having purist notions about their coalition. I know you know what those things are because you have discussed them ad nasueum, but none of them have a single thing to do with the politics of MTG.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I do and nothing you have proposed regarding MTG or Georgia-14 will do that.

Sure it could... if they played it right.

Disenfranchised Southern voters have switched teams before when they felt slighted by the mainstream members of their party.

There's the opportunity for a "Southern Strategy 2.0", but instead of being rooted in racism like the first one, version #2 could be rooted in economic populism.

I didn't know Iran was the subject or why we would care. You brought up Gabbard under the patently absurd notion that saying "good riddence" to a bad actor like Tulsi is some how the Dems having purist notions about their coalition.

Russia and Assad weren't the subject either, and you brought those up, so figured "undesirable foreign entanglements" was fair game.

The Dems do have unrealistic purity standard.

Ezra Klein (who's Democratic) has referred to it as a "toxic purification process"


Just as an example:

I can point to several Republican House reps, Governors, and Senators who are pro gay marriage.

Can you name any Democratic Reps or Senators who are against SSM?

I'm pretty sure Dan Lipinski and Joe Manchin were two of the last ones left... they ran Manchin out of town (for that and his opposition to Biden's Build Back Better plan), and primaried Lipinski and got him out of there due to his views on those types of issues.

On the flip side, when the Respect for Marriage act of 2022 came up
39 republicans voted for it


And on issues like abortion, there are pro-Choice republicans at high levels of politics... I'm pretty sure Henry Cuellar is the last remaining pro-life democrat in congress, as the rest have been pretty much purged.

The democrats seem to have a longer list of red-line "dealbreaker" issues, evidenced by them running someone like Kyrsten Sinema out of town as well.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

Now Liz Cheney will have a friend.

Anyone who disagrees with President Trump is not welcome in the Republican Party. The new Republican Party emphasizes loyalty to one individual rather than to any ideas.

 

[BCP1928]

Political currency wins elections evidently... you DO want the Democrats to win, yes?

A Democrat or a non-MAGA Republican.

As far as who Gabbard does or doesn't support...there are people on the democratic side who were pro-Iran, were there not?

Gosh, do you mean that Democrats take up a variety of opinions on different issues? Who knew?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

A Democrat or a non-MAGA Republican.

In that particular district, you're not going to get a non-incumbent in either of those categories.

Gosh, do you mean that Democrats take up a variety of opinions on different issues? Who knew?

I was simply replying to them bringing up that Gabbard was too "pro-Assad" (claiming it was a disqualifier)

People are allowed to have varying opinions (obviously), but only one team seems to increasing draw red lines and perpetually expand the list of non-conforming positions that go in the "dealbreaker: you can't be in the party anymore" column.

 

[BCP1928]

In that particular district, you're not going to get a non-incumbent in either of those categories.

I was simply replying to them bringing up that Gabbard was too "pro-Assad" (claiming it was a disqualifier)

People are allowed to have varying opinions (obviously), but only one team seems to increasing draw red lines and perpetually expand the list of non-conforming positions that go in the "dealbreaker: you can't be in the party anymore" column.

Those are MAGA Republicans. Democrats do it too, but they are just an inferior example of it.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Anyone who disagrees with President Trump is not welcome in the Republican Party. The new Republican Party emphasizes loyalty to one individual rather than to any ideas.

Define "welcome"?

Rand Paul and Thomas Massie are still holding steady, are they not?

Fitzpatrick, Lawler, Collins, Murkowski... all on that list as well.

Popularity within one's own state & district can weather the storm of Trump not liking someone.

In the cause of Rand Paul and Massie, they have a bit of a ideological cult following of their own from the Libertarian minded folks that seems to resonate with people.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Those are MAGA Republicans. Democrats do it too, but they are just an inferior example of it.

No, MAGA republicans pretty much have only had one red line and one deal-breaker, that being, you have to worship the ground Trump walks on... They seem to be flexible and fluid on some of the other social issues.

Whereas, the Dems will kick you out for reasons including:
"you're not anti-Assad enough and don't support intervening in Ukraine, peace out" (Gabbard)
"you don't share our views on abortion, you're gone" (Dan Lipinski)
"we don't like your vaccine stances, bye bye" (RFK Jr)
"You're not sufficiently pro-LGBT and voted with republicans one too many times, adios muchacho!" (Manchin)
"You didn't go along with the build back better plan, how dare you...hit the bricks sister!" (Sinema)


Meanwhile, on the inverse:
GOP still have several hawks who support intervening in Ukraine, several pro-choice people, a mix of pro and anti vaccine types, dozens in congress and senate who support gay marriage... none of which have been ran out of town with pitchforks for those positions.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

Anyone who disagrees with President Trump is not welcome in the Republican Party. The new Republican Party emphasizes loyalty to one individual rather than to any ideas.

Sure. Trump is the GOP's Nancy Pelosi.