606
submitted 11 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) called for Republicans to “get their act together” and elect the next speaker while slamming the “extremists” within their party.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] [email protected] 115 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Traditional Republicans have a name.

Its called "Democrat".

What used to be "the left" is now just a more moderate, reasonable right.

What used to be "the right" is not even on the spectrum anymore, its become a populist extremist reactionary fascism. It's so far off the chart its on an entirely separate piece of paper.

Jeffries needs to just accept this fact and ~~walk across the floor~~. Liberals are now Conservatives, and Conservatives are now Nazis.

Edit: Misread that Jeffries was a Republican, the fact he's a Democrat changes the context a bit. He's absolutely right but he's basically just talking about what I re-iterated above, but its the republican "traditionals" that need to walk across the floor and stop associating with Nazis if they dont wanna go down with that ship.

The extremists they are associating with are just going to Crabs in the Bucket them, clawing them down with them when things go under. If they were smart they'd drop the screaming children and walk over to where all the adults have gone.

[-] [email protected] 17 points 11 months ago

What do you mean by walk across the floor?

[-] [email protected] 29 points 11 months ago

Sitting for too long is a problem for everyone. It's good to get up and walk around at least every hour.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago
[-] [email protected] 21 points 11 months ago

I think he means that Jeffries needs to stop pleading with the extremists (and walk back to his side of the house and stop even trying)

[-] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago

Ah, I thought it was walk across the aisle to save the people who can't even sort their own damn house

[-] [email protected] -1 points 11 months ago

Well I disagree vehemently with that; the only way to get things done is to talk.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago

You don't get anything positive done by negotiating with fascists, paleoconservatives and some of the worst libertarians and liars of no fixed ideology in the world.

Listening to them at all inevitably leads to outcomes much worse than no change.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

No, there's genuinely no advantage to negotiating with the nutcase section of the GOP. The only thing that achieves, over the past 30 years I've been watching politics, is shifting the Overton Window further to the right.

Democrats are already center right Republicans, they don't need to move further right

[-] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago

We're going to dance. Don't speak.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago

I know what you're saying so please stop explaining. Don't tell me 'cause it hurts!

[-] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

I know you're good. I know you're real good.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

Hush hush, DARLING!

[-] [email protected] -1 points 11 months ago

Well, the political calculus suggests Jeffries only needs 5 Republicans to become speaker. That would be a wild display of incompetence by Republicans, which they have provided several examples recently, but that one would be a real gem. One for the history books

[-] [email protected] 8 points 11 months ago

I love how a hot take from someone who didn't even know Hakeem Jeffries is a Democrat has 100+ up votes. Lemmy is so ridiculously uneducated.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

Whether he is a Democrat or Republican doesnt really impact the overall point of my statement mate, it's tangentially related but not foundation to what I said.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 11 months ago

But it brings into questions your ability to have any informed opinions whatsoever.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago

Even ignoring the part where you didn’t realize Jeffries is a Democrat, this is just not a fair characterization of Democrats at all, as if they’re all the same.

Democrats in congress represent a broad spectrum from quite liberal to moderate conservative. Even by European standards.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

I will just have to disagree. I think when you get down to brass tacks, basic stuff like human rights, freedoms, autonomy, etc are largely bipartisan.

For example, between traditional conservative and liberal discussion in a successful country where religion has been removed from the equation, they would both very much agree that women should be allowed to have bodily autonomy and be allowed to have abortions up to a reasonable limit, lots of countries typically go with 3 months. And thats just for healthy pregnancies, when it comes to physical problems usually the limit is removed.

The actual discourse between a liberal and conservative traditionally should be "who is going to pay for that abortion", not if it can even happen at all.

The fact we havent even gotten that far in political discussion in the united states now means we are losing the ability to even benchmark how liberal vs conservative the Democrat party is, because we are no longer really debating "who is gonna pay for x/y/z", its now being debated "should we even allow people to do x/y/z"

Which is no longer a Conservative vs Liberal discussion. It's a traditional Authoritarian vs Libertarian discussion.

And if all the discussion has become purely Authoritarianism vs Libertarianism, we have gone completely off the rails because the United States is supposed to be a largely libertarian (within reason) government. It used to be the literal benchmark for Libertarianism, being extremely progressive in human rights. Letting your nation arm itself? Being one of the earliest countries to include women in voting? Every step of the way countries used to lag behind the US as it abolished slavery, brought it's races and cultures together, women were walking topless down the street, people could own pretty much anything they wanted to via legal channels, you name it.

For the longest time whenever the discussions came up, it was more about $$$, who paid for what, what would vs wouldn't be taxpayer funded. And a lot of stuff used to be taxpayer funded. The USPS used to be one of the shining examples of what a well oiled taxpayer funded system could look like.

But over time that has walked backwards and degraded, the Conservatives have largely completed their goal of slashing and hamstringing nearly every taxpayer public system of the US, the country is at best on life support now. Every single public system you can think of in the US is barely functioning at best, straight up privatized at worst.

Like the US has private prisons now, lol.

It stopped being a Conservative vs Liberal debate decades ago, it's now pretty much entirely Authoritarian vs Libertarian now. The country stopped fighting for public funding and now the fight has shifted to fighting for basic human rights, the very principle the country was founded on hundreds of years ago.

The US has become the very precise thing the founding father's explicitly tried to escape from.

this post was submitted on 13 Oct 2023
606 points (98.2% liked)

politics

18869 readers
3957 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS