536
AOC Says She Would ‘Absolutely’ Vote to Oust ‘Very Weak’ Speaker McCarthy
(www.rollingstone.com)
this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2023
536 points (97.5% liked)
politics
19144 readers
2175 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
They guy thinks he's much smarter than he actually is. He's good at complaining about things but then it comes to actual leadership he falls flat on his face simply because he's not smart enough to do the job effectively. People here hate Nancy Pelosi but she was unbelievably effective at keeping the party together when it came to important legislation that they wanted passed.
I know I’m stepping into murky waters here. I do believe McCarthy is a weak speaker because he can’t keep his party under thumb.
But I’m also struggling to reconcile that they came up with a bipartisan bill (granted, not a longterm one). No one gets everything they want. Isn’t that what we want balanced and working government to do?
They only did it at the 11th hour, and probably only because their donors were leaning hard on them because a shutdown would fuck up their money, along with another possible credit rating downgrade
Yes, but functional and working governments do so with reasonable deadlines and well ahead of the "fuck, we're literally out of money" point. Problem is, the republicans thrive on dysfunction and are more than willing to burn things down to hurt people, go back on agreements, and explicitly state how they don't want a functional government.
I'm of the opinion that waiting until the last possible moment is an intentional feature (in general) and NOT an accident or indicator of incompetence. Bare with me here, because I DO agree there's a lot of incompetence, but also ...
They are constantly testing the political winds, the media coverage, the social media reactions, and very much so, their donor's reactions to all of the other reactions. So they float balloons, see what happens, adjust, rinse repeat.
Or said another way, the public and private outrages are a feature, not a bug. How else would they know how far they can push things. It fucking sucks, and is a horrible way to govern, and my take makes them even scummier.
feels like you have stockholm syndrome here... they managed to not shut down the government at the 11:59 mark by actually working together, and will now go back to bickering. yes, this is what people want, but in general, not only when they're about to screw everything up.
Sounds like you're trying to naively see bipartisanship in a situation where they only came together under the threat of massive economic disaster, instead of seeing a completely disfunctional government that threatens long term economic growth by fucking around until the last possible second to actually do their goddamned jobs.
Don't pretend this circus is what the people want, because this circus is hurting people so political terrorists can do their thing and pretend ideology is more important than their constituents.
That's because they didn't. They decided to extend last year's bill 45 more days.
Congress already passed the budget. This is just the party of “government doesn’t work” trying to prove it can’t work by breaking things.