GOP Senators voting against Hegseth

27,834 Views | 399 Replies | Last: 11 days ago by nortex97
aTmAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:53p, 12/3/24
AG
Not sure how legit this tweet is. Just in case, call these senators if you live in their state:

Reply Quote
7
Who?mikejones!
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aTmAg • 8:55p, 12/3/24
Graham? Color me shocked that war hawk doesn't want a disruptive person into that position.

Murkowski and Collins are going to be thorns in the Republicans ass for the next four years

I think McConnell is going to prove to be a big pain too
Reply Quote
65
Ghost of Andrew Eaton
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:58p, 12/3/24
What makes this guy worth voting for?
If you say you hate the state of politics in this nation and you don't get involved in it, you obviously don't hate the state of politics in this nation.
Reply Quote
68
DX2011
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:58p, 12/3/24
AG
As you mentioned, who the hell is this source? And "won't commit" is a long way from "voting against" (OP thread title), so why are we yelling at clouds again?
Reply Quote
18
The Brazos Kid
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Who?mikejones! • 8:59p, 12/3/24
Who?mikejones! said:
Graham? Color me shocked that war hawk doesn't want a disruptive person into that position.

Murkowski and Collins are going to be thorns in the Republicans ass for the next four years

I think McConnell is going to prove to be a big pain too


Graham is a despicable person.
Reply Quote
39
atmtws
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:59p, 12/3/24
AG

Reply Quote
32
johnnyblaze36
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:01p, 12/3/24
AG
Yeah that's a misleading thread title. Even Josh Hawley who is sure to vote for Pete said today he'll be meeting with him tomorrow to talk with him and work through the process.

Although I wouldn't put it past any of those losers in the OP's tweet to deny Hegseth. Thune would be the icing on the cake and same as it ever was for these swamp creatures.
Reply Quote
9
MemphisAg1
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:04p, 12/3/24
AG
Trump voter here, but I also believe in the constitution and the Senate's role to advise and consent. If Hegseth gets confirmed, great. Fantastic.

If not, then next man or woman on deck. If he can't get 50 votes from his own party, then that's a red flag. Blame it on RINO's if you want, but there's no world in which Pete Hegseth is the only qualified nominee.

I fully support Trump's agenda to clean house and rid the DOD of its DEI infestation. But there are literally hundreds of qualified candidates who would be loyal to Trump and get the job done.

The most important thing is that he gets appointees confirmed quickly so they can execute the agenda. Banging your head against the wall for nominees who can't get confirmed is a waste of time. Ain't nobody got time for that, especially when we're trying to clean house while he's got both chambers of Congress.

Time is of the essence. Get it done.
Reply Quote
65
1 edit
General Jack D. Ripper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:05p, 12/3/24
Don't care about one loser. MAGA *****es!
Well…you sounded taller on radio.
Reply Quote
TexAgs91
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Who?mikejones! • 9:05p, 12/3/24
AG
Who?mikejones! said:
Graham? Color me shocked that war hawk doesn't want a disruptive person into that position.


If Graham wants a war wouldn't he want to rid the military of Biden's stench and bring it back to being all it can be?

Countries with weak, woke militaries don't have war hawks.
"Freedom is never more than one election away from extinction"
Fight! Fight! Fight!
Reply Quote
1 edit
Ozzy Osbourne
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:07p, 12/3/24
A who's who of squish Republicans
Reply Quote
48
TTUArmy
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ozzy Osbourne • 9:15p, 12/3/24
Ozzy Osbourne said:
A who's who of squish Republicans
The Dems had Sinema and Manchin.

We have the list in the OP.

I cringe when people say, "Republicans have a majority in the House or Senate". Do we really? Seems to be a fair amount of fence-riders and lukewarm R's to deal with on this side. Swamp is swampy.
Reply Quote
20
Old Sarge
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aTmAg • 9:19p, 12/3/24
AG
aTmAg said:
Not sure how legit this tweet is. Just in case, call these senators if you live in their state:

THESE are the people who are get-along-go-along capitulators with the other side. RINO Establishment Garbage
"Green" is the new RED.
Reply Quote
34
TAMU1990
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:20p, 12/3/24
AG
I thought there will be recess appointments
Reply Quote
3
Wes97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aTmAg • 9:20p, 12/3/24
AG
aTmAg said:
Not sure how legit this tweet is. Just in case, call these senators if you live in their state:

I can't stand Senator Turtle, Miss. Graham, or Thune,,,, But they aren't the types to kill a Republican supported nomination. They just want to lecture everyone on the importance of the Senate and its traditions. And make themselves sound/feel important.

They don't have the stones to pull a John McCain and actually caste a deciding vote on the floor against their own party (in this case to kill a nomination from a Republican President).

And don't take that as an endorsement of John McCain. I can't stand the man but at least he stood by his warped views.
Reply Quote
3
Stressboy
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ghost of Andrew Eaton • 9:23p, 12/3/24
AG
Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:
What makes this guy worth voting for?


You don't like him for one!
Reply Quote
70
Tom Fox
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MemphisAg1 • 9:28p, 12/3/24
MemphisAg1 said:
Trump voter here, but I also believe in the constitution and the Senate's role to advise and consent. If Hegseth gets confirmed, great. Fantastic.

If not, then next man or woman on deck. If he can't get 50 votes from his own party, then that's a red flag. Blame it on RINO's if you want, but there's no world in which Pete Hegseth is the only qualified nominee.

I fully support Trump's agenda to clean house and rid the DOD of its DEI infestation. But there are literally hundreds of qualified candidates who would be loyal to Trump and get the job done.

The most important thing is that he gets appointees confirmed quickly so they can execute the agenda. Banging your head against the wall for nominees who can't get confirmed is a waste of time. Ain't nobody got time for that, especially when we're trying to clean house while he's got both chambers of Congress.

Time is of the essence. Get it done.


I agree as long as after he spends significant time and resources to oust those senators at the next opportunity.

You have to send the message.
Reply Quote
8
MemphisAg1
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Tom Fox • 9:35p, 12/3/24
AG
Wasted effort and not likely to be productive. Some folks think Trump is a king; others recognize he's a president, an equal among two other branches of government. The ball's in his court to identify nominees that can get confirmed. In-fighting among Republicans is a distraction and not productive.

The opposition here isn't other Republicans. It's the Dems who want to seize more of your hard-earned income to redistribute to their socialist supporters. And those who want to push the woke agenda at every opportunity.

I align with the hard right but will also take 70% to 80% of what I can get right now and wave the victory flag. Put it in the bank and come back for the next 20% to 30%. The Dems are so much better at gaining ground while they can and then advancing from there. The Republicans spend all their time fighting each other and getting nowhere. We have to change that.
Reply Quote
18
Burpelson
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:41p, 12/3/24
Rep Senators know this is a lame duck 4 years, they are not going to fold since they will have 2 years after presidency
Reply Quote
3
Romello
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:47p, 12/3/24
Establishment scum doing what they can to resist the duly elected president's mandate.
Reply Quote
17
oldag941
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MemphisAg1 • 9:52p, 12/3/24
AG
Just like the Aggies should have kicked the field goal on 4th down.... Changes the game.
Reply Quote
4
oldag941
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:56p, 12/3/24
AG
I don't know how Trump or any of us could support Hegseth now. He wasn't honest on the "baggage" that was out there. He wasn't honest with Trump or the transition team. Who knows how accurate all of the reports are about his partying, mismanagement of non-profits, being drunk at work etc. But there is so much smoke, there is probably at least some fire out there. And apparently he wasn't forthcoming with Trump on that.

If Trump can't trust him, why should any of us?

I will say that even with all of this stuff out there, sometimes it can be offset by a strong resume or experience (including existing or strong relationships with important people in the Senate.....who will vote on you). He didn't have any of that to offset the "smoke".
Reply Quote
14
oldag941
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:57p, 12/3/24
AG
And color me crazy that I don't want to have a SECDEC prospect "having to" sit for an interview with their mom on Fox News to try and "clear things up". That's just ridiculous. Whoever is advising him has failed on multiple levels.
Reply Quote
7
oldag941
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to atmtws • 10:02p, 12/3/24
AG
Is that a good move? Perhaps in prepping him for a stronger run in '28? Wonder what the impact would be with the gap left in Florida. Open for Gaetz probably.
Reply Quote
Ellis Wyatt
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MemphisAg1 • 10:22p, 12/3/24
MemphisAg1 said:
Trump voter here, but I also believe in the constitution and the Senate's role to advise and consent. If Hegseth gets confirmed, great. Fantastic.

If not, then next man or woman on deck. If he can't get 50 votes from his own party, then that's a red flag. Blame it on RINO's if you want, but there's no world in which Pete Hegseth is the only qualified nominee.

I fully support Trump's agenda to clean house and rid the DOD of its DEI infestation. But there are literally hundreds of qualified candidates who would be loyal to Trump and get the job done.

The most important thing is that he gets appointees confirmed quickly so they can execute the agenda. Banging your head against the wall for nominees who can't get confirmed is a waste of time. Ain't nobody got time for that, especially when we're trying to clean house while he's got both chambers of Congress.

Time is of the essence. Get it done.
These pieces of **** don't challenge any democrat nominees. They need to be sent home come next election. This bull**** needs to stop.
Reply Quote
39
oldag941
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ellis Wyatt • 10:25p, 12/3/24
AG
You are leaving out the part of the equation that Hegseth is a terrible nominee. He was risky to start but has gotten worse with time as his history comes out. And it's come out without him letting Trump (and team) know ahead. If it's a good, or at least marginal, nominee (like at least one that Trump can trust), I believe the senate math would be better.
Reply Quote
10
Ellis Wyatt
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to oldag941 • 10:33p, 12/3/24
and Merrick Garland is still destroying lives. There is no excuse for this. The senate does not nominate for these positions.
Reply Quote
9
oldag941
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:39p, 12/3/24
AG
But the Senate provides "consent". And let's make all of this moot by nominating a strong candidate rather than a weak one to start. And then as time goes by, more baggage becomes public. A strong nominee wouldn't give any wiggle room to issues with the "consent" requirement of the Senate.
Reply Quote
3
Tom Fox
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MemphisAg1 • 11:00p, 12/3/24
MemphisAg1 said:
Wasted effort and not likely to be productive. Some folks think Trump is a king; others recognize he's a president, an equal among two other branches of government. The ball's in his court to identify nominees that can get confirmed. In-fighting among Republicans is a distraction and not productive.

The opposition here isn't other Republicans. It's the Dems who want to seize more of your hard-earned income to redistribute to their socialist supporters. And those who want to push the woke agenda at every opportunity.

I align with the hard right but will also take 70% to 80% of what I can get right now and wave the victory flag. Put it in the bank and come back for the next 20% to 30%. The Dems are so much better at gaining ground while they can and then advancing from there. The Republicans spend all their time fighting each other and getting nowhere. We have to change that.



You change that by targeting those that are preventing conservatives from taking major gains when they have the reins of power.

When it comes to keeping more of my hard earned money, Republicans are only marginally better than dems on that front. A few percentage point here or there. We need a flat tax or consumption tax. Progressive taxation is theft.

Taxation, free speech absolutism, and the 2nd amendment are what matters.

If the taxation piece isn't handled soon, I'll just vote to bring in the reset even faster.
Reply Quote
4
AtticusMatlock
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:21p, 12/3/24
Halperin and Spicer were talking about this on their show this morning. A lot of GOP Senators have been telling people behind the scenes they are not comfortable with the pick. It is likely way more than the people listed here. It's not because of his ideas about Department of Defense reform. It's about managerial experience in general combined with a lot of the personal issues.

There was an article in the New Yorker published this week that talked about financial mismanagement within the veterans organization he was running. When you have difficulty managing the finances of a relatively small organization it's not going to translate well to an 800 billion dollar budget. This is at a Department that constantly fails audits.

Halperin thinks he will pull out before the nomination process even gets going.
Reply Quote
6
mjschiller
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:33p, 12/3/24
AG
John Curtis is worse than Romney. He is a lying marxist scumbag.
Reply Quote
6
aezmvp
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to AtticusMatlock • 11:46p, 12/3/24
I unfortunately think they're right. The problem is that McConnell wanted to have a Senate where he could with two or three pals control things. The GOP should have 3 more seats but nope, no money spent.

Heeseth isn't an ideal candidate but the issue with most flag ranks is that they are too embedded in the system. DoD is in need of a major overhaul and yes we need some real managers and so forth near the top but we have to get back to a foundation of competency and we need someone to clean out the stables.
Reply Quote
2
GAC06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aezmvp • 11:49p, 12/3/24
AG
Don't need a flag rank for nominee, just someone with relevant experience running an organization of that size and complexity
Reply Quote
2
BusterAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MemphisAg1 • 11:59p, 12/3/24
AG
Quote:
But there are literally hundreds of qualified candidates who would be loyal to Trump and get the job done.
True. but most of them are career politicians that want to stay that way. Not a lot of lifetime government employees looking to reduce the size of the government.
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms … disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes… . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”

--Thomas Jefferson
Reply Quote
4
aggiebq03+
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ghost of Andrew Eaton • 12:01a, 12/4/24
Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:
What makes this guy worth voting for?

The incoming POTUS who was elected with what can only be called a "mandate" wants him in the position.
Reply Quote
12
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.