The congresswoman quipped that in attempting to avert a shutdown Republicans were “run[ning] around the House like a Roomba, until they found a door that House Democrats opened”

    • dhork@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      1 year ago

      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?

      • Lotus Eater
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Unfortunately it sounds like he’s trusting exactly Kevin McCarthy 💀

        President Joe Biden on Sunday urged House Republicans – particularly Speaker Kevin McCarthy – to keep their word on government funding and aid to Ukraine after he signed a bill that narrowly avoided a shutdown.

        • dhork@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.

    • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

    • WagesOf@artemis.camp
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

      • BlemboTheThird@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.

          • TheHiddenCatboy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            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. :)

          • BlemboTheThird@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            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

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          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.

    • MacGuffin94@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

    • Seasm0ke@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      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”

    • OpenStars@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      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.

    • Unaware7013@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Right now? The Democrats have mccarthy over a barrel. They should not be talking about ousting him. They should be talking about how cooperative he was and list very specific things he agreed to. Make it abundantly clear that he is following up on his side of the bargain with the implication that he will be removed otherwise. Talk about how they have their differences but, when push came to shove, they prevented a republican led shutdown AND have the following packages on the table for an immediate vote.

      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…

    • billy_bollocks@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      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.

    • dudinax@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      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?