The Republican Agenda 2021 and Forward

SuperMatt

Elite Member
Posts
2,088
Reaction score
4,292
First. Nepotism.

Second. It's press conferences. This guy has gone how many years without seeing one that had facts & stuff? You have to understand he might be thrown by that, and thrown by the person actually knowing her shit & ready to call you out on yours.

It's a new day hacks, get used to it.
For 4 years he threw softballs to Trump‘s minions. Now that he’s supposed to ask a “tough” question of the Dems, he has literally no clue how to do it. On Fox they set up straw men of all the “crazy liberal ideas” and they’re all in on the joke… when they have to actually take on a reasonable person who isn’t in their bubble, they are absolutely out of their depth. Jen should encourage Doocy to ask more questions.
 

JayMysteri0

Elite Member
Posts
2,807
Reaction score
5,499
It's Facebook day
159573802_10220201665052286_7352093787268602519_o.jpg

"Strangely, no one's returning my phone calls. I know they can call back, they're all getting new iPhones suddenly." 🤪
 

lizkat

Elite Member
Site Donor
Posts
2,813
Reaction score
6,308
Apparently part of the GOP agenda for 2021 and forward is to emphasize the difference between law enforcement against white folk versus against people of color? And also to emphasize rightness of derogating the latter as disrespectful of country but taking pride in the former as "patriots?"

We have GOP US Senator Ron Johnson (Wisconsin) now saying he wasn't afraid during the insurrection at the Capitol on January 6th because the attackers "love their country" but that if the insurrectionists had been members of Black Lives Matter, he'd have been concerned.


And we also have the Kentucky state senate having passed a law that criminalizes provocative speech hurled at police officers... despite the fact most legal experts say such a bill violates the First, Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments... one can hope that the governor, who happens to be a Democrat, will not sign the bill even if the Kentucky House is stupid enough to pass it next.


It occurs to me that one of the hallmarks of a dictatorship is making it a crime to insult the government. This did not escape the framers of the USA's constitution. There's a reason why the First Amendment is the first one. I remember reading that Niyazov, the first president of Turkmenistan --one of the republics declaring independence in the autumn of 1991 after the Soviet Union had collapsed-- had a law passed early in December of that same year that criminalized speaking ill of him or the new government, most of the ministers of which were men who had held similar positions in the provincial government under the USSR. Niyazov was well known and considered popular at that time in Turkmenistan, and he had observed that during the summer, over 90% of the residents still wanted a strong USSR but that by autumn a similarly high percentage had read the handwriting on the wall for the Soviet Union's dissolution, and had joined the bandwagon for independence. So by December, having been acclaimed as the republic's first president, Niyazov took care to cement his "popularity" into criminal law before it had a chance to evaporate. He ruled entirely by enforcing a cultish adoration of himself until his death in 2006, having been declared President for Life in 1999 by a Parliament that he had hand-picked. So in a nutshell the cautionary aura around laws that criminalize negative speech about a government or its agents.

Anyway that move on the part of the KY Senate is an asinine gesture meant primarily to appeal to a white supemacist component of Kentucky's voter rolls. Proper training of police officials includes teaching how to deflect verbal abuse without escalating the "conversation" and to just let it roll on by, since we do have the right of free speech in the USA: the hard limits on protected speech --including the grey area of "fighting words"-- are not as generous to "hurt feelings" as one might expect or even hope sometimes.

Still it becomes more clear now that the Republican Party is completely open and shameless about their attachment to and encouragement of white supremacy as essential in their view of how to retain power going forward. Even while Trump was president there were certain limits and talking points or phrases the GOP pols used to maintain some distance between Trump's problematic rally base and the party itself. No more. Trump isn't president now but he still has that following and the Republicans fear if they don't show a 100% buy-in to the attitudes of that base, Trump can split the party and destroy the GOP's ability to win elections for decades ahead.
 

Huntn

Thread Starter
Elite Member
Site Donor
Posts
1,015
Reaction score
1,425
The Republicans f-ed it up. The bill was $1.9 trillion, and they came back with something 1/4th the size? Come on man... I posted in another thread - 59% of GOP voters support the bill that passed the Senate. ZERO GOP Senators did. Gee, I wonder why 4 GOP Senators have ALREADY announced they’re retiring in 2022 instead of going for re-election?
Now they can be reminded by everyone when they run for re-election how they said naw, when it came to helping out citizens in need. For the Republucans out there, considering No Republican voted for this bill, please rip up your check when you get it, ok? :whistle:
 

lizkat

Elite Member
Site Donor
Posts
2,813
Reaction score
6,308
^^ yah, the Republicans don't even know how they sound to real people any more. Their talking points grow more shopworn by the day, especially those uttered by now minority leader McConnell in the Senate. McConnell's remarks upon occasion of Walsh's confirmation as Biden's Secretary of Labor:

Some Republicans expressed concerns that Walsh would favor organized labor. Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell said he opposed Walsh’s confirmation because “the Biden administration has already signaled they will ask him to implement a variety of policies that do not serve the long-term interests of a majority of workers.”

“Pro-worker prosperity does not entail having big-government politicians or big-labor bosses micromanage every aspect of the economy to suit liberal fads,” McConnell said Monday.

re my bolding: like the GOP has a clue what might ever serve long term interests of a majority of workers... the fall from grace of the middle class started in 1980 with the ascension of Ronald Reagan appealing to blue collar workers with coded racist lingo but shoving both the GOP's economic and social policy way right from where Nixon had earlier located it.

Perhaps McConnell's ability to do arithmetic is slipping too. The Senate vote to confirm was 68-29, so it wasn't just Dems voting for Walsh's confirmation.

(source Boston Globe )
 

Huntn

Thread Starter
Elite Member
Site Donor
Posts
1,015
Reaction score
1,425
^^ yah, the Republicans don't even know how they sound to real people any more. Their talking points grow more shopworn by the day, especially those uttered by now minority leader McConnell in the Senate. McConnell's remarks upon occasion of Walsh's confirmation as Biden's Secretary of Labor:



re my bolding: like the GOP has a clue what might ever serve long term interests of a majority of workers... the fall from grace of the middle class started in 1980 with the ascension of Ronald Reagan appealing to blue collar workers with coded racist lingo but shoving both the GOP's economic and social policy way right from where Nixon had earlier located it.

Perhaps McConnell's ability to do arithmetic is slipping too. The Senate vote to confirm was 68-29, so it wasn't just Dems voting for Walsh's confirmation.

(source Boston Globe )
Their base seems to understand, or have a puzzled look, but have faith. 👀
 

lizkat

Elite Member
Site Donor
Posts
2,813
Reaction score
6,308
Their base seems to understand, or have a puzzled look, but have faith. 👀

One problem is that we all have an attention span of about 15 seconds... and the other is the successful selling-in by the GOP to its base that the Democrats are the very devil when it comes to "law and order" and "right to life" and "morality". This despite all the asterisks that attach to their tired tropes in reality. Meanwhile when it comes to economic or taxation policy, their legislative efforts only serve to widen the gap between the haves and the have-nots.

A danger ensuing from the Trump era is the hollowing out of government agencies, with loss of institutional memory and abilitiy for cross-agency communication and cohesion. We don't even know yet what the Biden administration is encountering along those lines, but it will take years to repair.

In the meantime the GOP's goal has been to weaken regulatory agencies' rulemaking ability, then point to agency uselessness, defund them as "wasteful", eventually abolish agency functions in the name of efficiency and "free enterprise" and so leave industry to regulate itself. Somehow they manage to convince their base this is in voters' interests, when in fact it only serves to focus power at the top of the executive branch and inner circles of advisors.

Then when a Democrat lands in the White House or gains control of one or both houses of Congress, the GOP flips a switch and starts whining about "big government" usurpation of the people's rights.
 

P_X

Elite Member
Site Donor
Posts
2,219
Reaction score
3,991
One problem is that we all have an attention span of about 15 seconds... and the other is the successful selling-in by the GOP to its base that the Democrats are the very devil when it comes to "law and order" and "right to life" and "morality". This despite all the asterisks that attach to their tired tropes in reality. Meanwhile when it comes to economic or taxation policy, their legislative efforts only serve to widen the gap between the haves and the have-nots.

A danger ensuing from the Trump era is the hollowing out of government agencies, with loss of institutional memory and abilitiy for cross-agency communication and cohesion. We don't even know yet what the Biden administration is encountering along those lines, but it will take years to repair.

In the meantime the GOP's goal has been to weaken regulatory agencies' rulemaking ability, then point to agency uselessness, defund them as "wasteful", eventually abolish agency functions in the name of efficiency and "free enterprise" and so leave industry to regulate itself. Somehow they manage to convince their base this is in voters' interests, when in fact it only serves to focus power at the top of the executive branch and inner circles of advisors.

Then when a Democrat lands in the White House or gains control of one or both houses of Congress, the GOP flips a switch and starts whining about "big government" usurpation of the people's rights.

This reminded me of a conversation about the FDA. I was really pissed at the FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn misrepresenting convalescent plasma data in a press conf featuring him and Trump. Since this took place in the presence of Trump, and the mistakes in the statistical interpretation was so amateurish that even a 2nd year medical student is expected to be able to point out the difference, I consider it an effect of Trump. When I mentioned this to my frenemy at MR, his responses were: "Trump cannot corrupt the FDA it's already been corrupt without him." Again, in retrospect, these comments are so blatantly insane, it a sign of masochism that I continued this conversation with him.
 

Chew Toy McCoy

Elite Member
Site Donor
Posts
2,053
Reaction score
3,387
The Republicans need to just rename the party The Contrarians and have their 2 point platform. If the Democrats are for it they are against it. If something polls popular among the middle class and below they are against it.
 

Huntn

Thread Starter
Elite Member
Site Donor
Posts
1,015
Reaction score
1,425
One problem is that we all have an attention span of about 15 seconds... and the other is the successful selling-in by the GOP to its base that the Democrats are the very devil when it comes to "law and order" and "right to life" and "morality". This despite all the asterisks that attach to their tired tropes in reality. Meanwhile when it comes to economic or taxation policy, their legislative efforts only serve to widen the gap between the haves and the have-nots.

A danger ensuing from the Trump era is the hollowing out of government agencies, with loss of institutional memory and abilitiy for cross-agency communication and cohesion. We don't even know yet what the Biden administration is encountering along those lines, but it will take years to repair.

In the meantime the GOP's goal has been to weaken regulatory agencies' rulemaking ability, then point to agency uselessness, defund them as "wasteful", eventually abolish agency functions in the name of efficiency and "free enterprise" and so leave industry to regulate itself. Somehow they manage to convince their base this is in voters' interests, when in fact it only serves to focus power at the top of the executive branch and inner circles of advisors.

Then when a Democrat lands in the White House or gains control of one or both houses of Congress, the GOP flips a switch and starts whining about "big government" usurpation of the people's rights.
The GOP has become an evil, anti-democrati, anti-patriotic (if patriotism has not been redefined as looking out for your perceived self interest of holding power) organization that depends on co-conspirators and lots of dummies at home who they can appeal to based on wedge issues while they suck the life blood out of them.
 
Last edited:

lizkat

Elite Member
Site Donor
Posts
2,813
Reaction score
6,308
The GOP has become an evil, anti-democrati, anti-patriotic (if patriotism has not been redefined as looking out for your perceived self interest of holding power) organization that depends on co-conspirators and lots of dummies at home who they can appeal to based on wedge issues while they suck the life blood out of them.

It's not like the Republican Party did not see how inevitable their chosen path forward would become, particularly from the time of Newt Gingrich forward. They walked into the need for anti-democratic maneuvering with eyes wide open, embracing also the fact that they risked eventual outright fracture of their party over the so-called "Conservative Dilemma": basically that their economic policies --siding with the wealthy-- would not only widen the wealth gap between those elites and ordinary Americans, but would eventually run into headwinds at election time.

The GOP movers and shakers always knew that their anti-tax, anti-labor and anti-regulatory stances meant to attract big business and wealthy stakeholders would not appeal to the middle class if the spotlight was on such issues. So they adopted a much sharper focus on things with more emotional bandwidth, including gun rights, anti-abortion, "law and order", with dog-whistled appeals to white supremacy and xenophobia thrown in to appeal to more southern and rural voters.

And as of the 90s, the leaders of the Republican Party became relentless in enforcing platform discipline within that party, which of course led to incessant primaries from the right as time went on. Few casual followers of American politics today may remember that Nixon and even Bush 41 were both far more progressive in terms of social contract policy than the GOP became after 1992, but it's quite true that neither of those guys could even land a spot on the presidential ballots of today's Republican Party.

What's interesting now though is the fissuring of the GOP at state party levels and sometimes versus the RNC or vis-a-vis Donald Trump. Some states' party officials have swung way right in support of Trump, and the RNC continues to try to keep the pro-Trump electorate on board even while paying lip service to "rule of law" --while having winked at Trump's big lies about election fraud in 2020.

That requirement for Republican pols and officlals to thread needles in order not just to win elections but keep the party from a formal fracture puts a whole new spin on what "conservative dilemma" translates to for 2021 and forward. I mean we're talking about a party that essentially sheds / shreds aspects of our Constitution now whenever rule of law gets in the way of their need to suppress voter rights in the interests of retaining power.

For the time being, some on the far right --ever since Trump's first impeachment-- have adopted a kind of circus attitude, i.e. "pay no mind since this whole thing is obviously just theater" because it actually helps the pro-Trump cause: to reduce interest of the citizens in taking Congress seriously. It's mind boggling to realize that elected Congress critters are thus participating in an effort to make the Presidency the sole source of American federal power.

There's been an assumption there, of course, that Republicans would retain the White House, and so maybe Trump's "president for life" jokes were never really a joke, not to Trump and certainly not to his most devoted followers. So it's no wonder the uproar when American voters turned up in enough numbers in 2020 to say "uh, no" and make it stick.

The question now, even as investigations and criminal charges continue regarding the January 6th insurrection, is whether the GOP can even find a platform to replace the cult of personality they signed up for with Donald Trump. Apparently they're not sure, since over 250 pieces of voter-suppressive legislation have been thrown into the hopper at state level since the 2020 elections. So the "conservative dilemma" continues, and the answer the GOP is coming up with so far is just to bet the house on anti-democracy and to hell with policy platforms.

I'm not at all sure American voters will sit still for this. A lot of people have had epiphanies about the role of federal government since the coronavirus landed here and got shoved under the rug by Trump in the early days. People remembered better responses to negative events in past administrations, whether the problem was financial or a matter of public health. Suddenly the idea of drowning government in the bathtub wasn't so amusing any more, even as it became apparent that Trump and the GOP before him had made strong strides in that direction... the whole idea was for nobody to be home when the phone rang at an agency. So it came to pass, but as it turns out, Americans didn't like that when it became a reality instead of a goal. Now the Dems can run the table (unless they refuse to deal with the filibuster at all), and the GOP is left to try to pick up the pieces. So far it's a waiting game to see what comes of the insurrection investigations and what Trump's legal situations will morph into as he tries to plan his own future, in or out of official Republican politics.
 

Chew Toy McCoy

Elite Member
Site Donor
Posts
2,053
Reaction score
3,387
It's not like the Republican Party did not see how inevitable their chosen path forward would become, particularly from the time of Newt Gingrich forward. They walked into the need for anti-democratic maneuvering with eyes wide open, embracing also the fact that they risked eventual outright fracture of their party over the so-called "Conservative Dilemma": basically that their economic policies --siding with the wealthy-- would not only widen the wealth gap between those elites and ordinary Americans, but would eventually run into headwinds at election time.

The GOP movers and shakers always knew that their anti-tax, anti-labor and anti-regulatory stances meant to attract big business and wealthy stakeholders would not appeal to the middle class if the spotlight was on such issues. So they adopted a much sharper focus on things with more emotional bandwidth, including gun rights, anti-abortion, "law and order", with dog-whistled appeals to white supremacy and xenophobia thrown in to appeal to more southern and rural voters.

And as of the 90s, the leaders of the Republican Party became relentless in enforcing platform discipline within that party, which of course led to incessant primaries from the right as time went on. Few casual followers of American politics today may remember that Nixon and even Bush 41 were both far more progressive in terms of social contract policy than the GOP became after 1992, but it's quite true that neither of those guys could even land a spot on the presidential ballots of today's Republican Party.

What's interesting now though is the fissuring of the GOP at state party levels and sometimes versus the RNC or vis-a-vis Donald Trump. Some states' party officials have swung way right in support of Trump, and the RNC continues to try to keep the pro-Trump electorate on board even while paying lip service to "rule of law" --while having winked at Trump's big lies about election fraud in 2020.

That requirement for Republican pols and officlals to thread needles in order not just to win elections but keep the party from a formal fracture puts a whole new spin on what "conservative dilemma" translates to for 2021 and forward. I mean we're talking about a party that essentially sheds / shreds aspects of our Constitution now whenever rule of law gets in the way of their need to suppress voter rights in the interests of retaining power.

For the time being, some on the far right --ever since Trump's first impeachment-- have adopted a kind of circus attitude, i.e. "pay no mind since this whole thing is obviously just theater" because it actually helps the pro-Trump cause: to reduce interest of the citizens in taking Congress seriously. It's mind boggling to realize that elected Congress critters are thus participating in an effort to make the Presidency the sole source of American federal power.

There's been an assumption there, of course, that Republicans would retain the White House, and so maybe Trump's "president for life" jokes were never really a joke, not to Trump and certainly not to his most devoted followers. So it's no wonder the uproar when American voters turned up in enough numbers in 2020 to say "uh, no" and make it stick.

The question now, even as investigations and criminal charges continue regarding the January 6th insurrection, is whether the GOP can even find a platform to replace the cult of personality they signed up for with Donald Trump. Apparently they're not sure, since over 250 pieces of voter-suppressive legislation have been thrown into the hopper at state level since the 2020 elections. So the "conservative dilemma" continues, and the answer the GOP is coming up with so far is just to bet the house on anti-democracy and to hell with policy platforms.

I'm not at all sure American voters will sit still for this. A lot of people have had epiphanies about the role of federal government since the coronavirus landed here and got shoved under the rug by Trump in the early days. People remembered better responses to negative events in past administrations, whether the problem was financial or a matter of public health. Suddenly the idea of drowning government in the bathtub wasn't so amusing any more, even as it became apparent that Trump and the GOP before him had made strong strides in that direction... the whole idea was for nobody to be home when the phone rang at an agency. So it came to pass, but as it turns out, Americans didn't like that when it became a reality instead of a goal. Now the Dems can run the table (unless they refuse to deal with the filibuster at all), and the GOP is left to try to pick up the pieces. So far it's a waiting game to see what comes of the insurrection investigations and what Trump's legal situations will morph into as he tries to plan his own future, in or out of official Republican politics.

The GOP’s current platform is 100% fearmongering, which in a perverse way has managed to somewhat keep it as a viable party because, as you alluded to, the decades of “stick with us and our policies and everybody will be better off” has proven to be the lie it always was. To that end, the GOP does actually owe Trump a great deal of gratitude because his tactic of lie and divide with authority put some wind back in the party’s deflated sails. It shouldn’t be all that surprising that many Republican politicians are doubling down on that tactic. It’s all they have.

Unfortunately it has also exposed the true amount of rubes we have in this country. I’m not all that shocked by the white supremacists, but the proudly ignorant count is alarming, especially coming from a group of people claiming to not trust any politicians, yet they'll blindly believe the country's most successful conman (with mountains of proof of it) just because he didn't come from the world of politics. I’d say far more deplorables were created by Trump than were there before he took office. People who might have known or behaved better before suddenly went “Did you hear what he just said? We can get away with that now in a position of authority? Fuck yeah! I don’t even have to think now before I speak. This shit is going to be easy!”
 

lizkat

Elite Member
Site Donor
Posts
2,813
Reaction score
6,308
I’d say far more deplorables were created by Trump than were there before he took office. People who might have known or behaved better before suddenly went “Did you hear what he just said? We can get away with that now in a position of authority? Fuck yeah! I don’t even have to think now before I speak. This shit is going to be easy!”

.... yeah.... Trump set such a swell example. I remember saying in 2016 that I wouldn't let someone like him into my living room if I had kids in the house and that would have included his on-TV appearances. How little did I know how far I could double down on that as time went on!

And it's not like we weren't warned, but the warnings HRC offered on "the deplorables" and Trump's appeal to them was mocked all over the planet. People (and including media outlets for sure) do hear just what they want to hear, and sometimes they just want a quotable gaffe and could not care less whether the actual remark has merit or should be taken with a grain (or long ton) of salt.

Of course there were other reasons so many people chose not to vote for the Democrat in 2016. Would love to hear some of them go on record more openly than they did around their kitchen tables in 2020 though, when they had changed their minds and --in combination with not just covid-19 but major Democratic Party turnout efforts-- things went bad for Trump's re-election expectations.

Still, it must be embarrassing for any minds-now-changed deplorables to cop to having voted for Trump even once, somehow thinking that things could possibly go well for the USA with him at the helm and a raft of own-agenda cabinet picks at the ready. But Clinton had been a most-hated figure per the far right for decades, so a lot of that vote was more against her than for Trump, in my own view. Had he been more an average GOP pick running against her, say Jeb Bush or John Kasich, Hillary Clinton might have won just on reduced turnout from the right-leaners. But the pots stirred by the right against her for so long really boiled over in 2016 and helped put him over the top in 2016.

What's not surprising though as you say is how many more deplorables came out of the woodwork during four years of the Deplorable in Chief.
 

Huntn

Thread Starter
Elite Member
Site Donor
Posts
1,015
Reaction score
1,425
It's not like the Republican Party did not see how inevitable their chosen path forward would become, particularly from the time of Newt Gingrich forward. They walked into the need for anti-democratic maneuvering with eyes wide open, embracing also the fact that they risked eventual outright fracture of their party over the so-called "Conservative Dilemma": basically that their economic policies --siding with the wealthy-- would not only widen the wealth gap between those elites and ordinary Americans, but would eventually run into headwinds at election time.

The GOP movers and shakers always knew that their anti-tax, anti-labor and anti-regulatory stances meant to attract big business and wealthy stakeholders would not appeal to the middle class if the spotlight was on such issues. So they adopted a much sharper focus on things with more emotional bandwidth, including gun rights, anti-abortion, "law and order", with dog-whistled appeals to white supremacy and xenophobia thrown in to appeal to more southern and rural voters.

And as of the 90s, the leaders of the Republican Party became relentless in enforcing platform discipline within that party, which of course led to incessant primaries from the right as time went on. Few casual followers of American politics today may remember that Nixon and even Bush 41 were both far more progressive in terms of social contract policy than the GOP became after 1992, but it's quite true that neither of those guys could even land a spot on the presidential ballots of today's Republican Party.

What's interesting now though is the fissuring of the GOP at state party levels and sometimes versus the RNC or vis-a-vis Donald Trump. Some states' party officials have swung way right in support of Trump, and the RNC continues to try to keep the pro-Trump electorate on board even while paying lip service to "rule of law" --while having winked at Trump's big lies about election fraud in 2020.

That requirement for Republican pols and officlals to thread needles in order not just to win elections but keep the party from a formal fracture puts a whole new spin on what "conservative dilemma" translates to for 2021 and forward. I mean we're talking about a party that essentially sheds / shreds aspects of our Constitution now whenever rule of law gets in the way of their need to suppress voter rights in the interests of retaining power.

For the time being, some on the far right --ever since Trump's first impeachment-- have adopted a kind of circus attitude, i.e. "pay no mind since this whole thing is obviously just theater" because it actually helps the pro-Trump cause: to reduce interest of the citizens in taking Congress seriously. It's mind boggling to realize that elected Congress critters are thus participating in an effort to make the Presidency the sole source of American federal power.

There's been an assumption there, of course, that Republicans would retain the White House, and so maybe Trump's "president for life" jokes were never really a joke, not to Trump and certainly not to his most devoted followers. So it's no wonder the uproar when American voters turned up in enough numbers in 2020 to say "uh, no" and make it stick.

The question now, even as investigations and criminal charges continue regarding the January 6th insurrection, is whether the GOP can even find a platform to replace the cult of personality they signed up for with Donald Trump. Apparently they're not sure, since over 250 pieces of voter-suppressive legislation have been thrown into the hopper at state level since the 2020 elections. So the "conservative dilemma" continues, and the answer the GOP is coming up with so far is just to bet the house on anti-democracy and to hell with policy platforms.

I'm not at all sure American voters will sit still for this. A lot of people have had epiphanies about the role of federal government since the coronavirus landed here and got shoved under the rug by Trump in the early days. People remembered better responses to negative events in past administrations, whether the problem was financial or a matter of public health. Suddenly the idea of drowning government in the bathtub wasn't so amusing any more, even as it became apparent that Trump and the GOP before him had made strong strides in that direction... the whole idea was for nobody to be home when the phone rang at an agency. So it came to pass, but as it turns out, Americans didn't like that when it became a reality instead of a goal. Now the Dems can run the table (unless they refuse to deal with the filibuster at all), and the GOP is left to try to pick up the pieces. So far it's a waiting game to see what comes of the insurrection investigations and what Trump's legal situations will morph into as he tries to plan his own future, in or out of official Republican politics.
The country is at a critical juncture where Republicons have decided where they control State legislatures they can toss out any election results that don‘t favor their party, fuck the voters, fuck democracy, seize power and hold on dearly, and can imagine this as the beginning of a revolution whether it be hard or soft.
 
Top Bottom