this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2023
339 points (97.7% liked)

politics

18998 readers
2795 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] _number8_@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago (4 children)

they're still doing this bullshit? can't they vote on something useful?

[–] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 40 points 11 months ago (1 children)

They literally can't until they successfully vote for a new Speaker. Our entire system of government relies on the elected officials doing their job and constituents holding them to that.

But there's an entire party with talking points that the government in general just doesn't work for 50 years, so now we're at the point where people that grew up hearing that all the time, and being elected based on that theory, have to not do their job to prove it true.

The issue is that with a FPTP voting system where it inevitably results in two major parties, just a handful of politicians can grind everything to a halt. This was inevitable and easily predicted, but the GOP has a knack for not only ignoring but actively trying to insist reality isn't happening so they let it get to the point where a handful of MAGATS can hold the entire country hostage.

[–] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

This isn't necessarily the fault of FPTP. If anything, proper parliaments are generally even more unstable, since a governing coalition involves a lot more distinct interests cooperating. The last Israeli government, for instance, collapsed after a single member abandoned the coalition. You also have situations where one of the coalition parties withdraws.

The primary difference between Congress and parliaments is at what point the coalitions form. In modern parliaments, many different ideological groups all run their own independent elections to gain seats in parliament, and then complex negotiations occur to form a majority coalition that establishes the government and opposition groups. In Congress, that coalition building happens before elections ever occur. You still have a bunch of distinct ideological groups, but they've already sorted themselves into two broad coalitions, the Democrats and the Republicans. That's why each party has a lot more ideological diversity within it than European parties.

What's been so interesting about this is that it's essentially Congress devolving into a parliament, which is fun for political nerds and for people who enjoy watching Republicans suffer.

[–] TotallynotJessica@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

It always frustrates me when people project assumptions from more parliamentary systems onto the US. They assume that Democrats and Republicans are uniform, when many smaller factions exist. Those smaller groups can grow in number and power, influencing the party line. Neoliberalism has become less of a norm in the Democratic party while limited social democracy gains ground. Fascism dominates the Republican party as neoconservatives lost ground.

The president usually rules for the party, bending their stated opinions to fit the party line. Bush Sr. called Reagan's fiscal policy "voodoo economics," but still tried to stick with what worked for Reagan when elected. Their actual views shine through more when they have too make tougher decisions where the party consensus isn't strong enough. Trump was unique in how he molded Republicans to fit his image, but even he followed the party line when they resisted his more outrageous ideas.

I don't like the two party system, but it's not as damning as people would think. I hate the ways corruption has been legalized, but even countries with stricter laws get ruled by shady interests. Better systems help, but they're not foolproof.

[–] Chainweasel@lemmy.world 38 points 11 months ago

No, they can't.
They're the General Obstruction Party
Their entire purpose is to keep the government from doing anything useful

[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 23 points 11 months ago

Not without a speaker. The speaker is the one that brings things to the floor to be voted on. That's why it has never happened before. Everyone understood the extreme consequences of not having a speaker.

[–] VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

They actually can't. Afair they literally aren't allowed to vote on anything substantive until they have a speaker. Of course, that suits most of the GOP just fine.

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

That's not necessarily true, but is the premise they're currently operating under.

The truth is, it isn't actually spelled out exactly what powers the interim speaker has

[–] VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf 5 points 11 months ago

Yeah, as per the last update, he can preside over appointment of a real speaker, he can send everyone on vacation and he immediately appointed himself emperor of offices