this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2023
455 points (98.3% liked)

politics

25236 readers
3836 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 36 points 2 years ago (2 children)

The Democrats need to be doing something interesting here, not boring everyone with more and more unanimous votes for Jeffries. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results. We should be controlling the issue, not sitting back and passively observing the GOP tripping over their own dicks.

Democrats should nominate astronaut Scott Kelly for speaker in the next election. Can any GOP candidate hold a candle to Kelly?

The election after that, they should nominate a 9/11 first responder. Any GOP congressmen a better choice than any 9/11 firefighter?

There are 66 living Medal of Honor recipients. There's got to be at least one of them capable of performing the role of speaker, and any of them is worth more than the entire GOP caucus put together.

I want to see the GOP caucus unanimously rejecting true American heroes. Men and women who have fought and sacrificed for their country. I want to see them try to justify voting for some Trump sycophant that meets Matt Gaetz's approval when they have a fantastic candidate available.

When they come up for re-election, I want both their primary challenger and their democratic opponent reminding the public that they supported a weasel like Matt Gaetz over an honest-to-god American hero.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 13 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The Democrats need to be doing something interesting here, not boring everyone with more and more unanimous votes for Jeffries.

But they won't because he's Pelosi's designated replacement and party leadership doesn't want the public to consider that better alternatives might exist.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 10 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Not at all a problem: let Jeffries announce the plan. Spin it however he wants. He's still the minority leader, and if there is a partisan, Democratic majority, he will become the speaker in the next session.

In the meantime, recognizing that the Democrats are able to lead even without a mathematical majority is a major win.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

and if there is a partisan, Democratic majority, he will become the speaker in the next session.

So, announce that primaries are meaningless? I mean, progressives have always suspected it, but...

[–] JDoos@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

I mean, my progressive congress critter got in by winning an upset primary. There not meaningless, just hard.