Jump to content

US midterms: Republicans narrowly win back the House


Recommended Posts

Posted
50 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I just read the linked article and I'd forgotten that Nancy loses the speaker position. Oh the joy not having to see her on tv any more.

It's getting better and better.

Careful what you wish for. Liz Cheney may replace Nancy as minority speaker. Under House rule, anyone can be chosen as speaker. That will make Rep's slim House majority more precarious to manage and vote as a unified team with more factions with different views. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

I would agree on the abortion issue.  Leave it up to the states to decide for themselves.  No federal restrictions, but also no federal guarantees. None of this "Codify Roe v Wade" nonsense.  The Democrats had 40 years to propose legislation to do so but didn't.  Too late now.

Why is it too late now? What political reason would stand in its way? The only one I can think of is that politically it's better for the Democrats to keep having the Supreme Court as an issue in elections.

  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, placeholder said:

Why is it too late now? What political reason would stand in its way? The only one I can think of is that politically it's better for the Democrats to keep having the Supreme Court as an issue in elections.

It is too late because the Dems have had 40 years of control of Congress to enact any national legislation on abortion. Especially after the Supreme Court became right leaning, it was obvious that Roe would be overturned. Yet they did nothing still.  Maybe it IS politically expedient, but it is also hypocritical.

  • Thanks 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

It is too late because the Dems have had 40 years of control of Congress to enact any national legislation on abortion. Especially after the Supreme Court became right leaning, it was obvious that Roe would be overturned. Yet they did nothing still.  Maybe it IS politically expedient, but it is also hypocritical.

Well, you start saying it's too late and wind up by saying that maybe it's politically expedient. Make up your mind.

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Well, you start saying it's too late and wind up by saying that maybe it's politically expedient. Make up your mind.

I say it is too late on a moral level, but still can be politically expedient to do now. Is that too complicated to understand.  They should have done it earler if the Dems had wanted to show any actual character or genuine concern about it.  They didnt.

  • Like 1
Posted
26 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Well, politics is about the art of the possible. And before the Supremes decided to stomp on Roe v Wade, most people took it for granted that the right to abortion was protected even though the Supreme Court had pretty much vitiated it. So, it's only now that Americans have gotten a wake-up call, that it's possible to do something about it. I think as more horror stories come in about the fatal results of strict anti-abortion laws, that will help the Democrats get the law passed. But not so likely in this Congress thanks to the Republican majority in the House.  uld enjoy watching the Republicans get twisted around on this.

I would argue that politics is the art of the pAssable, but that's just me.  

 

I actually lay a big part of the blame for the red fizzle on Sen. Graham. He stupidly proceeded with an abortion bill that was doomed to fail and only served to inflame people for no discernable reason.  He is the kind of calcified senator (on both sides) that needs retiring. Twenty years in the Senate is more than enough.

  • Like 2
Posted

The election has been executed. Please look forward to the next election...

 

Wondering whether will be one day when the population -  not only the one of the election country - will not be entertain (and distracted) by the election?

 

Posted
7 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

Hopefully they can roll back some of Biden's worst excesses.   

 

As for the committees and hearings, to be honest I think they should tread easy.  It might look too vindictive to spend months doing public investigations of various scandals and so on.  Better to use the time to press forward with sensible legislation to bring the American economy back on track.  Then let the Democrats look bad when the Senate refuses to table them, or Biden vetoes them.  Simply being obstructionist isn't the path to victory in 2024.

They will not have any other choice than "tread easy", because they have nothing.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
7 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I just read the linked article and I'd forgotten that Nancy loses the speaker position. Oh the joy not having to see her on tv any more.

It's getting better and better.

This is a genuine question (I am not American). I heard a few times on various news channels that if both Pres. Biden and VP Harris could not be President then the  Speaker of the House is next in line. Does this still apply if the Speaker is a Republican ?

  • Like 1
Posted
8 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Hurrah!

It should have been a big majority, but a win is a win. It's enough to see certain committees vanish, and to slow, if not halt, the Biden agenda.

Amd that's exactly the problem! America doesn't get <deleted> done because the opposing parties always block each other on principle instead of finding and implementing what's best for the nation! 

 

I still remember the official mantra of the republicans being "whatever Obama wants, we're opposed!"

 

America used to be looked up to by the rest of the world, the land of wonders, where everyone can go from dishwasher to millionaire, now it's a joke! They totally screwed it up with their foreign policies and their infighting. The whole place is a mess! 

 

  • Thanks 1
Posted
7 hours ago, Sparktrader said:

You need to get real. The senate was narrow. Pubs winning the house and just missing the senate. Joe is lame duck now.

 

 

Lame duck as in bipartisan support for 1. Infrastructure Framework. 2. Inflation Reduction Act. 3. Foreign Policy.

McCarthy will not get zero passages with the two Senate lead. Truth is Trump is going to cost a forth loss as in 2018, 2020 2022

  • Haha 1
Posted
1 hour ago, TKDfella said:

This is a genuine question (I am not American). I heard a few times on various news channels that if both Pres. Biden and VP Harris could not be President then the  Speaker of the House is next in line. Does this still apply if the Speaker is a Republican ?

yes

  • Thanks 2
Posted

My Son Hunter should be required viewing for all of Congress. 
A gridlocked Congress should be good for America.  Although the southern border will remain a disaster, as well as the deliberate phaseout of the fossil fuel industry.

  • Like 1
Posted
10 hours ago, Henryford said:

I never understood the American system where you can have a President and House from different political parties. Isn't that a recipe for confusion and misgovernment?

Only if they say at the outset that they will not let the will of the people or the president get anything done like they did with Obama and will probably do with Biden.  But the young people who determined these record poor gop mid term results will not tolerate that old political BS.   Its a new age.  Dinosaurs not welcome.   

We need age limits like 70 max and and competency evaluations.  

Bad ideas for gop  to even think about:

Anymore voting restrictions

Any more gerrymandering

Touching SS or medicare.

touching the green new deal, Paris accord or any solution to global warming. 

Abortion stirred up the youth, and women like a hornets nest that will never go away. 

It's ok if hunter is serving time next to Trump. 

GOP can  benefit from pointing out Bidens glaring omission of tesla in all his electric car talks.  

 

Posted
1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

It's a hit job distributed by Breitbart, a disgusting website dedicated to spreading lies and libel.

Have you seen it? 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
11 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

But there’s a problem.

 

The rational members of the GOP know that the extremism that had got a grip of the party is losing them votes and motivating the opposition.

 

Those facing re-election in 2024 need to think very carefully about what message they want to send voters in their own constituencies.

 

It’s the extremists who cost the GOP the ‘red wave’.

 

I doubt very much anyone missed that.

I'm sure they'll bear your sage advice in mind.

  • Love It 1
Posted
11 hours ago, Henryford said:

I never understood the American system where you can have a President and House from different political parties. Isn't that a recipe for confusion and misgovernment?

No sir it’s how excesses are kept in balance the dems are a bit to giving and the republicans want to take away health care and kill social security ,it’s messey and ugly at times but somehow it seems to work out in the end.personally I’m a bit bummed that progress will be slowed but on the other hand it will keep the spotlight on the republicans greed and emptiness on performing for the American people it will balance out in the end enjoy the show !

  • Thumbs Up 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...