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
The problem is that McCarthy has already screwed Democrats over, big time. Biden made that deal with McCarthy, and then Matt Gaetz yanked the leash and Kevin came to heel, like a well trained dog.
If I were Biden, I would not trust any deal that Kevin makes. So why should Democrats bolster his position as Speaker, while they know Matt wil always hold his leash?
Unfortunately it sounds like he's trusting exactly Kevin McCarthy 💀
The President has to say they will work with whoever is in Congressional leadership, because he can't introduce legislation on his own, he only approves what Congress sends him. So of course he has to state that publicly.
In fact, I'd argue that his very public "urging" of Kevin to stick to his word was done because he has zero confidence that Kevin will, and wants to make sure if there is a protracted leadership struggle people see it as Republican infighting, and not some sort of Denocratic scheme. If he trusted Kevin, he wouldn't have had to say that.
Nobody trusts Kevin.
I think they're trying to finalize the GOP permanently splitting into two minority parties. The corporate GOP and the big lie Q crazies party.
If that happens the dems can run everything until enough of both parties can combine into a new oligarchy party.
That's impossible with the way our system is set up (FPTP). They will never fracture hard enough to abstain from voting or actually come across the aisle. The crazier, more passionate viewpoints will take charge of party, and the rest will meekly follow with the justification of "they're less crazy than the dems." Maybe some individual voters will realize that the entire party is going nuts, but for every "independent" voter who finally gets the message, 5 ignorant fools who have never voted are scared into joining the electorate by a new level of fear mongering lies about who and what is responsible for the state of the country.
With book bans being stacked upon decades of defunded public education, things are very bleak.
You realize this country didn't start with Republicans and Democrats as the dominant parties, right?
You realize that this country didn't start with any political parties at all, right? And that Washington tried to warn people against their formation, even as Adams and Jefferson consolidated power?
Like no shit things didn't instantly fall apart the second the Constitution was ratified, there's been 250 years of context, but FPTP is still one of the central causes of the stratification of elected politicians that we see today
You do realise that there have only been 6 'systems' in the United States over its 250+ year history, right? And you do realise that the only actual political party changes were the First to Second Party System (in 1828, with the Federalists dying off) and the Second to Third Party System (in 1860, with the Whigs dying off, replaced by the Republicans)? You do realise that the Third to Fourth Party System, the Fourth to Fifth Party System, and the Fifth to Sixth Party System have only been realignments of the two existing parties? You do realise that the last time a non-major-party POTUS candidate won even a single EV was in 1968? You do realise that even Ross Perot couldn't get a single EV in 1996?
You realise that this country has a system in place to prevent voters from causing effective changes? Your vote for your minor party only ensures that you get the major party most opposed to your stances in a FPTP system elected, and you end up getting nothing of what you wanted instead of just something. If you want that fixed, your first step is to get your State to join Maine and Alaska and use Ranked Choice Voting. Your second step is then to get more third party Representatives and Senators in. Then you got to change the Constitution so that the POTUS is directly elected, rather than through the Electoral College, and use RCV nation-wide for that. That's a far better strategy than relying on something that's not happened in the past 160 years. IMNSHO, of course. :)
Matt Gaetz sees a difference between the two. It doesn't necessarily matter if you or I see their policies as meaningfully different. They are willing to go to war with each other over ultimately minor things.
Another case in point is when Greene called Boebert a "little bitch". The reason? Boebert had introduced an impeachment proposal against Biden, and Greene accused her of copying exactly what she was going to do. They are not united in purpose; they want the "prestige" of being the one to press that button.
Take advantage of this. It's the biggest blind spot in extreme right ideology. They absolutely will crack apart if they're pushed enough on it. They're already doing it on their own.
Shut downs and obstruction have a history of hurting the party behind the obstruction. She knows this and is letting the GOP hang themselves.
IMHO, this is the right play. Hell, it’s the same play that the old veterans are making as well.
Unfortunately, the current politics of the congress is such that the praise from democratic side is the surest way to get him removed.
Never know, we could be witnessing some real 4D chess.
They didnt pass a new bill to avert the shutdown, they passed a 45 day extension of the old bill so these assholes can continue posturing and dick measuring until mid November.
That way, if millions of people go hungry it will be right before the holidays. Maybe that gives dems more ammo against McCarthy and gaetz IDK. "If Republicans get their way there will be millions of starving kids and also they wont have presents under the tree. GOP wants to kill Santa"
Usually I would agree but they pretty much did that with the first CR. Then Mccarthy tried to back track on promises and play strongman. They know he will do the exact same thing this time too. This puts more pressure on the far left since it makes it appear there is bipartisan support to oust him.
Maybe, but she could also just happen to be right here, on this point. What sticks in the back of my mind is that McCarthy could have ended this at any point by simply doing what he previously gave his word that he would do, which is also what the majority of both Republicans and Democrats and thus all Americans want.
Edit: what I meant by the above is that he was going to pass an actual budget - and wasn't that already agreed upon months ago, more or less? Instead, he merely passed a continuing resolution, which is not the same thing, plus he also left out support for Ukraine. Yes he avoided a shutdown, it would be nice for her to acknowledge that, but he could have done so at any time and far more besides?
The reason he cited as to why he did not is bc he would be removed if he did, except now that seems likely to happen anyway?
He gave his word to everyone, which he went back on, and in a manner that also goes back in his word in the opposite direction too, caving on issues that he previously said were impossible to give in on. He's lying to the other side, he's lying to his own side, he allows himself to come to power with an insane restriction, then does nothing to change that, then seems shocked - shocked I tell you! - when they actually want to use that option.
I have to stop short of actually judging any of that bc I don't know enough, but it does seem an absolute mess. And at this point I could see Dems wishing to see someone else in charge of Repubs, if that would actually make things easier to move forward somehow.
I want to agree with you, but McCarthy put himself over that barrel. He already renegged on a deal once, so I definitely don't think the dems should praise him for how cooperative he was (AT THE ELEVENTH HOUR, and not a moment before), and the whole shutdown fiasco was specifically his doing because he let the traitor wing of the party run the show, instead of letting actual policy people drive the discussion. Call it divided house if you want, but he was an awful speaker by any objective metric.
As for Gaetz, McCarthy is the one who ceded power to him in the first place, so its no wonder the right are trying to make him a king maker. He made the speaker bend the knee from the jump, and McCarthy hates him for it. But he's also hated by a good portion of his own party, so I don't foresee him being any kind of king maker, especially when we'll inevitably get another 20+ votes for speaker before the continuing resolution expires if he tries.
Edit: Or this could just be a 4D chess move to put McCarthy farther over the barrel, knowing that he only keeps his speakership because the dems helped him against those among them who are calling for him losing his seat, as AOC is doing here. Seems like a good way to get more concessions out of him, assuming you can trust a word that comes out of his mouth...
It might further confuse the maga, as they will have to vote according to AOC?
Having someone over a barrel doesn’t really work if the guy over the barrel doesn’t care.
I get the vibe McCarthy doesn’t want to be speaker of the house anymore, probably because of the Q crazies he has to treat like “equals” in order to secure their vote.
He's daring them to do it. He's let them push him around way more than is reasonable. Who else are they going to get who's so compliant?
That was no less true the day he got himself appointed.
Even if the strategy were to be to keep McCarthy, who needlessly manufactured this crisis, the only way for the Democrats to get anything out of him would be for almost every Democrat to vote against him.
So who's the bad strategist?