McCarthy getting speaker?

152,775 Views | 2450 Replies | Last: 1 yr ago by lil99chris
BQ78
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
and it was indicative of a country in a break up that resulted in Civil War four years later.
Daddy-O5
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Parties exist because they work (at winning elections)

What is actually needed is a party within the party (and a primary prior to the primary).

Liberty-minded candidates have some sort of online primary prior to the primary. They select their candidates for each seat, and then they alone run against the establishment candidates in the primary.

Daddy-O5
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
eric76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
fka ftc said:

eric76 said:

fka ftc said:


Been watching all day and yesterday. This is a poor take.

Like many classic Rs, they value decorum and tradition over change and principles. But they are not throwing a "hissyfit".
Well said.

Holding onto our traditional values and keeping what works is preferred. If change is necessary, it should be done slowly and deliberately. Making massive changes quickly is a radical approach.
That is what I said. Now, I wish Fox was a bit more adamant about a non-McCarthy solution.

Kilmeade is breaking it down well noting at least we are seeing the sausage being made.

With D's they make tubes of **** in the Schiff SCIF then try and sell it to the public as Grade A Consolidated Sausage that you must bite into to know whats in it.
I was supporting what you said.

Conservatism is, at heart, a view of life and its institutions -- it is about maintaining our traditions and values.

Radicals, on the other hand, want to make dramatic changes in their conviction that they can make things better, but major changes are much harder to control and greatly increase the likelihood of there being unanticipated consequences.
TheEternalPessimist
How long do you want to ignore this user?
J. Walter Weatherman said:

TheEternalPessimist said:

eric76 said:

gbaby23 said:

Hopefully this shows the American people how much power a 3rd party could have. It isn't much, but it is better than voting for a uniparty stooge because they have (R) next to their name.
Exactly.

If done intelligently, such a third party could have much more power than their size would indicate.
It would force coalition government. Something we may need for accountability.

If someone is on the hard left, they should welcome this too. It makes a Socialist Party more viable to actually win seats without slapping a (D) on their name in urban cores and perhaps Vermont..


Really we should have 4 parties at this point. The freedom caucus/far right republicans, moderate/establishment republicans, establishment dems like most of the democrats in the senate and house, and the far left/quasi socialist dems like AOC, Talib etc. Would require a lot more negotiation and actually governing than what we have now.
AOC seems to agree that the speakership holds too much power.... according to Gosar.

See - common ground can be found in spite of the uniparty.
TheEternalPessimist
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BQ78 said:

and it was indicative of a country in a break up that resulted in Civil War four years later.
Great point. Very astute observation.

eric76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TheEternalPessimist said:

eric76 said:

fka ftc said:

Daddy-O5 said:


Been watching all day and yesterday. This is a poor take.

Like many classic Rs, they value decorum and tradition over change and principles. But they are not throwing a "hissyfit".
Well said.

Holding onto our traditional values and keeping what works is preferred. If change is necessary, it should be done slowly and deliberately. Making massive changes quickly is a radical approach.
I want RADICAL change --- which is the NULLIFICATION of federal law at the local and state level. Incrementalism got us into this mess.
Radical change is very difficult to control.
45-70Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
This country is too fat and lazy for a civil war.
Picard
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
BQ78
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Well that should keep the Biden agenda alive like they had stolen, not only the senate, but the house too.
lb3
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
10thYrSr said:

lb3 said:

gbaby23 said:

Hopefully this shows the American people how much power a 3rd party could have. It isn't much, but it is better than voting for a uniparty stooge because they have (R) next to their name.
This is exactly why we don't need a third party. The various caucuses are effectively third parties. Right now the Freedom Party are the last holdouts the Establishment Party needs to form their right of center coalition government.

The Establishment Party is welcome to reach out to the Moderate Democrat Party to form a centerist coalition government if the Moderate Democrat Parties' demands are more palatable than the Freedom Party's.


Under that model why have parties at all then? People could just vote for politicians and then the politicians could caucus as they please.
This is basically what we do now. Every member is allowed to vote their conscience.

The dual parties are basically Big Tents or caucuses of caucuses.
aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Daddy-O5 said:


It looks like that was from 12:30.

Has anybody asked McCarthy about this accusation? Has he denied it?
WHOOP!'91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
45-70Ag said:

This country is too fat and lazy for a civil war.
How many do you figure would have to actively participate? If the fat a lazy sit it out, can the fit and motivated not still do things? I mean, a lot of men participated in the civil war, but not everybody did.
TheEternalPessimist
How long do you want to ignore this user?
lb3 said:

gbaby23 said:

Hopefully this shows the American people how much power a 3rd party could have. It isn't much, but it is better than voting for a uniparty stooge because they have (R) next to their name.
This is exactly why we don't need a third party. The various caucuses are effectively third parties. Right now the Freedom Party are the last holdouts the Establishment Party needs to form their right of center coalition government.

The Establishment Party is welcome to reach out to the Moderate Democrat Party to form a centerist coalition government if the Moderate Democrat Parties' demands are more palatable than the Freedom Party's.
"right of center" is not an accurate description... the GOP McCarthy types have been Democrat-Lites.
45-70Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The political and economic components needed for it aren't there.

Neither is the military component.
TheEternalPessimist
How long do you want to ignore this user?
WHOOP!'91 said:

45-70Ag said:

This country is too fat and lazy for a civil war.
How many do you figure would have to actively participate? If the fat a lazy sit it out, can the fit and motivated not still do things? I mean, a lot of men participated in the civil war, but not everybody did.
Why do people think that fat guys or even guys in wheelchairs can't use a gun? I have never understood this.....

A fit person with no tactical understanding and no proficiency with firearms loses to a guy 50 pounds overweight who understands both........ every time.
WHOOP!'91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
45-70Ag said:

The political and economic components needed for it aren't there.

Neither is the military component.
How would you compare those aspects in the US to, say, the insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan? I am pretty sure there are quite a few ex-military and/or law enforcement that have a lot of guns and ammo stashed away that are pretty upset with the way things are going.

Throw in a couple of Toyota Tacomas and there could be problems.
WHOOP!'91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TheEternalPessimist said:

WHOOP!'91 said:

45-70Ag said:

This country is too fat and lazy for a civil war.
How many do you figure would have to actively participate? If the fat a lazy sit it out, can the fit and motivated not still do things? I mean, a lot of men participated in the civil war, but not everybody did.
Why do people think that fat guys or even guys in wheelchairs can't use a gun? I have never understood this.....

A fit person with no tactical understanding and no proficiency with firearms loses to a guy 50 pounds overweight who understands both........ every time.
I took him to mean metaphorically fat, like has too much to lose to run off to fight a war.
Charpie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Daddy-O5 said:


What? You want them to be partisan? They shouldn't be for anyone.
TheEternalPessimist
How long do you want to ignore this user?
WHOOP!'91 said:

45-70Ag said:

This country is too fat and lazy for a civil war.
How many do you figure would have to actively participate? If the fat a lazy sit it out, can the fit and motivated not still do things? I mean, a lot of men participated in the civil war, but not everybody did.
Participation rater of revolutionary war was about 20% until the final years of the war when it reached close to 40% of fighting aged men. This does not even factor in the number of loyalists fighting for the Crown... which among their number included the son of Ben Franklin!
Im Gipper
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

right of center" is not an accurate description... the GOP McCarthy types have been Democrat-Lites.


Wouldn't that include Trump? He and McCarthy are lined up on probably every issue, aren't they?

Is there anyone we can turn to?

I'm Gipper
TheEternalPessimist
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Im Gipper said:

Quote:

right of center" is not an accurate description... the GOP McCarthy types have been Democrat-Lites.


Wouldn't that include Trump? He and McCarthy are lined up on probably every issue, aren't they?
Maybe so. His comments defending abortion as legitimate solution for rape and incest conceived babies were VERY concerning.
TheEternalPessimist
How long do you want to ignore this user?
WHOOP!'91 said:

TheEternalPessimist said:

WHOOP!'91 said:

45-70Ag said:

This country is too fat and lazy for a civil war.
How many do you figure would have to actively participate? If the fat a lazy sit it out, can the fit and motivated not still do things? I mean, a lot of men participated in the civil war, but not everybody did.
Why do people think that fat guys or even guys in wheelchairs can't use a gun? I have never understood this.....

A fit person with no tactical understanding and no proficiency with firearms loses to a guy 50 pounds overweight who understands both........ every time.
I took him to mean metaphorically fat, like has too much to lose to run off to fight a war.
My apologies.

My point remains however.... the assumption that physical fitness in the age of firearms is required in every war situation is laughable. I have seen a LOT Of fat Ukranians and Russians in military gear fighting.
Im Gipper
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Well, that was his position when he ran in 2016, so it should not be a surprise!

I'm Gipper
Faustus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
aTmAg said:

If somebody doesn't answer what happens? Do they simply count that as not present and reduce the required vote?
The first step is to call their name repeatedly.

Psycho Bunny
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Still no speaker

TheEternalPessimist
How long do you want to ignore this user?
eric76 said:

TheEternalPessimist said:

eric76 said:

fka ftc said:

Daddy-O5 said:


Been watching all day and yesterday. This is a poor take.

Like many classic Rs, they value decorum and tradition over change and principles. But they are not throwing a "hissyfit".
Well said.

Holding onto our traditional values and keeping what works is preferred. If change is necessary, it should be done slowly and deliberately. Making massive changes quickly is a radical approach.
I want RADICAL change --- which is the NULLIFICATION of federal law at the local and state level. Incrementalism got us into this mess.
Radical change is very difficult to control.
Fair point. But if you have radical change rooted in objective truth and carried out by men who are in submission to Christ and the Word of God.... it doesn't need much constraint. Godly men constrain themselves.
aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Was there a 6th vote?

What were the results?
Bryanisbest
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Charpie said:

Y'all realize this is why democrats win, right?

Because they manage to put their egos aside and stick together to get what they want done.

The dems are sitting here laughing at the 19.

If the 19 were really speaking for the rest of the country, they would be the majority. Alas, they aren't.



They may not be speaking for the rest of the country but they are speaking for those who hate to see this country destroy itself.
Psycho Bunny
How long do you want to ignore this user?
same as the fifth.

McCarthy 201

Jeffries 212

Donalds 20

Other 0

Present 1
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TheEternalPessimist said:

WHOOP!'91 said:

TheEternalPessimist said:

WHOOP!'91 said:

45-70Ag said:

This country is too fat and lazy for a civil war.
How many do you figure would have to actively participate? If the fat a lazy sit it out, can the fit and motivated not still do things? I mean, a lot of men participated in the civil war, but not everybody did.
Why do people think that fat guys or even guys in wheelchairs can't use a gun? I have never understood this.....

A fit person with no tactical understanding and no proficiency with firearms loses to a guy 50 pounds overweight who understands both........ every time.
I took him to mean metaphorically fat, like has too much to lose to run off to fight a war.
My apologies.

My point remains however.... the assumption that physical fitness in the age of firearms is required in every war situation is laughable. I have seen a LOT Of fat Ukranians and Russians in military gear fighting.
aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Step Aside McCarthy. It's not going to happen. Free everybody to vote for who they really want.
eric76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aTmAg said:

Was there a 6th vote?

What were the results?
From https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/live-blog/kevin-mccarthy-house-speaker-vote-live-updates-day-two-rcna64153 there was a sixth vote, but it doesn't say anything about the vote count, only that there is still no Speaker.


Rip*91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
WHOOP!'91 said:

45-70Ag said:

The political and economic components needed for it aren't there.

Neither is the military component.
How would you compare those aspects in the US to, say, the insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan? I am pretty sure there are quite a few ex-military and/or law enforcement that have a lot of guns and ammo stashed away that are pretty upset with the way things are going.

Throw in a couple of Toyota Tacomas and there could be problems.



You don't have to be ex-Military and/or law enforcement to have lots of guns and ammo stashed away.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.