(10-17-2023, 06:40 PM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ]Here you go WingerDinger since you appear to be posting to yourself on their thread.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Np0scDyIgtk
Not just posting to myself.. Showing anyone who cares to look why they should never vote democrat again..
I like to think of every post I make as pushing every democrat and rino's face into a big steaming pile of dog [BLEEP]..
Feels good!! Satisfying!!
Eat Up!!
(10-17-2023, 06:40 PM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ]Here you go WingerDinger since you appear to be posting to yourself on their thread.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Np0scDyIgtk
I hear my best jokes that way. Although, I have to admit, sometimes I let the joke finish to the punchline and laugh anyway even though I’ve heard it before.
(10-17-2023, 06:07 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (10-17-2023, 04:23 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Well, I called Rutherford's Jacksonville office. I won't vote for that dude again if he won't play ball. I think everyone needs to be calling. Not that it matters at this point. Republicans are soft.
Would you have felt the same if Matt Gaetz was your rep?
Gaetz voted out McCarthy because he went against his word supposedly. Rutherford literally said he wouldn't support anyone Gaetz was supporting. One of those is a breach of contract. The other is just pettiness. I realize that nuance is lost on you, but I'm not going to support the latter. I wish Rutheford cared half as much about single item bills as he does about defending McCarthy's honor.
(10-17-2023, 10:54 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ] (10-17-2023, 06:07 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Would you have felt the same if Matt Gaetz was your rep?
Gaetz voted out McCarthy because he went against his word supposedly. Rutherford literally said he wouldn't support anyone Gaetz was supporting. One of those is a breach of contract. The other is just pettiness. I realize that nuance is lost on you, but I'm not going to support the latter. I wish Rutheford cared half as much about single item bills as he does about defending McCarthy's honor.
Nuance is never lost on me. I see every nuance every time. It's exhausting.
It's not pettiness, it's trying to avoid setting a bad precedent.
But, at the end of the day they both put their personal preferences over the party consensus and voted against their party and against the House doing any business at all. And they both did so without any clear plans of what happens next. Either both are inexcusable or both can be excused.
I would criticize both of them for not having any plan. That's the biggest problem . I think both Gaetz's desire to hold McCarthy to his word and Rutherford's desire to punish people who go against the party's speaker are commendable, but both of them need to think about the good of the country more and both of them need to be more willing to work with Democrats. But regardless of the why, they both should have thought more than 1 step ahead.
No. This is EXACTLY what has caused Republicans to be exploited by the Democrats. They have no backbone. If Gaetz was promised things by the speaker, he has a duty to hold him to it. I have no problems with that. When my representative is asked why he won't support Jordan, and he says, I won't support anyone Gaetz supports, that is not driven by duty. What if Gaetz had supported Scalise? Hell, McCarthy supported Jordan. Get out of here. He's didn't avoid setting a bad precedent. He's going to avoid getting my vote.
Furthermore, where do you get this idea that no one can go against the speaker? AOC said she was going to do this to Pelosi but didn't. It is literally going to take more of this kind of action to take back control of congress from the establishment.
(10-18-2023, 10:42 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]No. This is EXACTLY what has caused Republicans to be exploited by the Democrats. They have no backbone. If Gaetz was promised things by the speaker, he has a duty to hold him to it. I have no problems with that. When my representative is asked why he won't support Jordan, and he says, I won't support anyone Gaetz supports, that is not driven by duty. What if Gaetz had supported Scalise? Hell, McCarthy supported Jordan. Get out of here. He's didn't avoid setting a bad precedent. He's going to avoid getting my vote.
Furthermore, where do you get this idea that no one can go against the speaker? AOC said she was going to do this to Pelosi but didn't. It is literally going to take more of this kind of action to take back control of congress from the establishment.
1) both Rutherford and Gaetz were OK with Scalise as speaker. Rutherford is fine with supporting who Gaetz supports. Rutherford's problem is more specific to Jordan.
2) I didn't say no one can go against the speaker. I said do it for the right reason and have a plan for what you do next. That plan probably includes making a deal with the other party, with how tight the numbers are in this congress.
3) you concept of 'the establishment' is no deeper than 'whoever is in power right now'. power is difficult to wield and the new speaker, whoever it is, will have to make compromises and soon you will be calling them establishment as well. Your concepts are not helping you. You need a better policy vision.
They are REPRESENTATIVES!! They're supposed to REPRESENT The People!
(10-18-2023, 11:22 AM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ]They are REPRESENTATIVES!! They're supposed to REPRESENT The People!
You must not have met many people...
(10-18-2023, 11:24 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (10-18-2023, 11:22 AM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ]They are REPRESENTATIVES!! They're supposed to REPRESENT The People!
You must not have met many people...
And you're the reason why the Republican Party now sucks..
You guys are a virus..
(10-18-2023, 11:25 AM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ] (10-18-2023, 11:24 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]You must not have met many people...
And you're the reason why the Republican Party now sucks..
You guys are a virus..
You're the one demanding your way or the highway even when our party doesn't have the Senate or the White House.
Or, simplified,
NO U!!!
(10-18-2023, 12:39 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (10-18-2023, 11:25 AM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ]And you're the reason why the Republican Party now sucks..
You guys are a virus..
You're the one demanding your way or the highway even when our party doesn't have the Senate or the White House.
Or, simplified,
NO U!!!
90% of the vote, only the traitor coward RINOS are voting rogue. They, like you and Marty, are the viruses of the country. You are the weakness that is crippling our country.
In my own personal opinion, let these viruses oust themselves with these votes. They WILL be primaried and removed.
(10-18-2023, 12:44 PM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ] (10-18-2023, 12:39 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]You're the one demanding your way or the highway even when our party doesn't have the Senate or the White House.
Or, simplified,
NO U!!!
90% of the vote, only the traitor coward RINOS are voting rogue. They, like you and Marty, are the viruses of the country. You are the weakness that is crippling our country.
In my own personal opinion, let these viruses oust themselves with these votes. They WILL be primaried and removed.
Have fun storming the castle!
(10-18-2023, 01:39 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (10-18-2023, 12:44 PM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ]90% of the vote, only the traitor coward RINOS are voting rogue. They, like you and Marty, are the viruses of the country. You are the weakness that is crippling our country.
In my own personal opinion, let these viruses oust themselves with these votes. They WILL be primaried and removed.
Have fun storming the castle!
Of course, because cowards don't lead..
(10-18-2023, 11:19 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (10-18-2023, 10:42 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]No. This is EXACTLY what has caused Republicans to be exploited by the Democrats. They have no backbone. If Gaetz was promised things by the speaker, he has a duty to hold him to it. I have no problems with that. When my representative is asked why he won't support Jordan, and he says, I won't support anyone Gaetz supports, that is not driven by duty. What if Gaetz had supported Scalise? Hell, McCarthy supported Jordan. Get out of here. He's didn't avoid setting a bad precedent. He's going to avoid getting my vote.
Furthermore, where do you get this idea that no one can go against the speaker? AOC said she was going to do this to Pelosi but didn't. It is literally going to take more of this kind of action to take back control of congress from the establishment.
1) both Rutherford and Gaetz were OK with Scalise as speaker. Rutherford is fine with supporting who Gaetz supports. Rutherford's problem is more specific to Jordan.
2) I didn't say no one can go against the speaker. I said do it for the right reason and have a plan for what you do next. That plan probably includes making a deal with the other party, with how tight the numbers are in this congress.
3) you concept of 'the establishment' is no deeper than 'whoever is in power right now'. power is difficult to wield and the new speaker, whoever it is, will have to make compromises and soon you will be calling them establishment as well. Your concepts are not helping you. You need a better policy vision.
1 Rutherford literally said he wasn't going to support who Gaetz supported.
2 Nonsense
3 Don't tell me what my concept is. Your ability to think for yourself is limited to talking points, which is why you're wrong almost every time you have an original thought. It's very easy to see what is establishment and what isn't by what actually happens. Talk is cheap. What are they voting for? Who does it help? If it's not the people, it's the establishment.
(10-18-2023, 01:54 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ] (10-18-2023, 11:19 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]1) both Rutherford and Gaetz were OK with Scalise as speaker. Rutherford is fine with supporting who Gaetz supports. Rutherford's problem is more specific to Jordan.
2) I didn't say no one can go against the speaker. I said do it for the right reason and have a plan for what you do next. That plan probably includes making a deal with the other party, with how tight the numbers are in this congress.
3) you concept of 'the establishment' is no deeper than 'whoever is in power right now'. power is difficult to wield and the new speaker, whoever it is, will have to make compromises and soon you will be calling them establishment as well. Your concepts are not helping you. You need a better policy vision.
1 Rutherford literally said he wasn't going to support who Gaetz supported.
2 Nonsense
3 Don't tell me what my concept is. Your ability to think for yourself is limited to talking points, which is why you're wrong almost every time you have an original thought. It's very easy to see what is establishment and what isn't by what actually happens. Talk is cheap. What are they voting for? Who does it help? If it's not the people, it's the establishment.
Check who voted for Scalise. They both voted for him.
Blame yourself for incomplete information. Follow better folks on social media, or just stop using it entirely.
I agree that we should judge these guys based on what they vote for. I judge them that way. And I find them to be almost exactly the same because they have only ever voted on what the speaker allows them to vote on. Do you have any examples of Rutherford and Gaetz voting differently on anything besides who the speaker should be?
Also, when I compare Rutherford to Gaetz, I'm not talking about Gaetz ending McCarthy's speakership a couple of weeks ago. I'm talking about Gaetz holding out on letting McCarthy begin his speakership in the first place. That's the direct comparison. The behavior is exactly the same.
(10-18-2023, 02:34 PM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ]This sums it up nicely..
![[Image: 20231018-143243.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/SNzCF2VD/20231018-143243.jpg)
And you have zero chance without all of the voters you mentioned above.
Unless you change the voting system to some form of ranked choice or approval voting.