Liz Cheney is playing the long game. The current morph of the Republican Party is doomed, but there will always be a conservative party in the US. She has name recognition and is establishing herself as having principles. She will land on her feet and will be the party leader once the Trumpists are disempowered.
Don’t cry for her.
I stopped underestimating her after she won election in spite of being a carpetbagger. She ran for election about as soon as legally possible after moving to Wyoming.
No, if she got a committee assignment at all that would break your logic down. It would mean she would have lots of tiebreaking votes. Which would then mean that she would either have to be openly much more liberal or break her agreement with the dems.
To the extent that I understand your proposal, and I’m not at all confident that I do, it seems like the deal you’re proposing is that Liz Cheney will vote by her “conscience, constituency, and Constitution” on votes where her single vote won’t make a difference either way, but on votes where it will make difference, she’ll throw out the 3 Cs and just follow the orders of Democratic Party leaders. Is that right?
If it is…what would even be the point? No one in their right mind would agree to that, particularly since no one is going to vote for someone to represent them who’s subject to those rules.
What is the point of having WY represented by a GOPer who would be as bad for the Dems, and probably much worse, as Liz Cheney could be on her worst day? The house is held by Dems by a hair-thin margin now, and every seat they can maintain in the 2022 election is crucial. It’s like Manchin in the Senate–he’s a piece of garbage, ideologically speaking, but without him, a GOPer wins W. Va easily and the Dems lose their control of the Senate. Same thing here, only the Dems have more leverage over Cheney than they do over Manchin. Big picture, folks. big picture. Hell, if she’s got a brain in her head, she’d do it just to spite the GOP for two years.
No, I get why this deal would be useful for the Democratic Party. What’s the point for Liz Cheney? I mean, sure, there’s a lot more to being a Member of Congress than just votes, but that’s still kind of an important bit. Under the terms of your deal, she effectively has no vote. She’s free to vote as she wishes on votes where her vote doesn’t make a difference, but whenever her might actually be decisive, she forfeits her ability to make up her own mind and represent the interests of her constituents. Why would she agree to that?
And even if she would accept that deal, why would anyone in Wyoming vote for her? I’m a Democrat, and I wouldn’t vote for a candidate who committed themselves to subordinating their vote on my behalf to the Democratic leadership in Congress like that. And even if Liz Cheney thought your deal made sense, why would she think Wyoming voters would accept it? And if Wyoming voters wouldn’t accept it, we’re back to, why would Liz Cheney?
And how would this work in practical terms? Is it only 50/50 votes? What if she’s the balance on a 2/3 vote to impeach or override a veto? And how would she know on any vote if she’s the critical vote? Does she forfeit her ability to make up her own mind any time the Democratic Whip thinks a vote might be close? Does the House implement a special rule that the Representative from Wyoming always votes last?
Yea, all that. I’m sorry but the idea Roger_That floats would have to be based entirely and absolutely on Liz Cheney becoming nothing other than a living “F**k You Trump” lawn sign. This is not how Congress works, this is not how real politicians work – and whatever faults she may have, Cheney is a real politician from a family of real politicians, she’s not a troll-who-stumbled-into-it like Marjorie Taylor Greene or Matt Gaetz .
(And good call on what would her vote be worth, gdave – under that proposal, her vote would become not unlike the votes of the Territorial Delegates in the “Committee of the Whole” (when the House meets to propose, consider, debate and pass amendments to a reported bill, before it is put to an actual up or down vote). Delegates normally only vote in the committees to which they belong, but, when D’s have held the House under Pelosi, a rule has been adopted to have them vote in the Committee of the Whole… as long as their vote is not decisive, in which case then it’s not counted. But at least they and their constituents know going in they don’t have a vote that counts.)
Does it? I honestly don’t know how that works if you switch parties. But that really seems like putting the cart before the horse. She definitely keeps her seniority if she’s re-elected as a Republican. If she’s defeated, it’s true she loses her seniority, but…it seems like the “defeated” part is what’s important there. I don’t see how her seniority enters as a separate motivation from just keeping her seat.
I suppose, if all Liz Cheney cares about is having a seat in Congress. If she actually cares about principles and integrity, which is what this whole thing is supposedly about, I would think she might get a kick out of standing up for what she believes rather than cutting a deal to try to hold onto her seat. Not to mention which, she’d be cutting a deal to hold onto a powerless seat. She’d have no influence in the Democratic caucus. She’d be reviled as a traitor by Republicans. She couldn’t even leverage her vote on key legislation or procedural votes - by your proposed deal, she’s already sold her vote.
So why is she cutting this deal? For two more years in Congress, in a powerless position? Why would Wyoming’s voters elect her under those conditions?
I have no idea what you’re talking about with the “shorts-of-outrage” - @JRDelirious didn’t seem outraged in their post. They just seemed to think this isn’t a plausible, sensible, or workable plan. However, if Liz Cheney did, as you suggest here, make this deal in secret, and campaign under false pretenses, I, personally, would…I guess, take off my shorts of outrage? I’m not clear on how that metaphor works. I’d be outraged, is what I’m saying. And I’m not even one of her constituents.
So the deal made with the principled lady is predicated on her outrageously abandoning all principles to get the seat and accomplish nothing other than standing around being ignored by every one of her 434 colleagues for two years. As Rocky said to Bullwinkle, “that trick never works.”
OK, let’s start with # 4) since that one seems to have you most confused: JRDelirious seems to have his shorts aflame because he thinks the entire world would know and object to the details of the agreement I’m positing Cheney would work out with Pelosi. But it’s to neither Liz’s nor Nancy’s advantage to disclose the nature of the bargain they’ve worked out privately, so that one is effectively kiboshed. THE VOTERS WILL BE OUTRAGED AT THE SCUMMY DEAL!!! But if they never find out it exists, then not so much.
Until it does.
So, yeah, I’m with @Exapno_Mapcase on this one:
You’re actually seriously suggesting that two Members of Congress secretly conspire to deceive the voters of Wyoming and deprive them of honest representation. The fact that you want to conceal this information from them to avoid their outrage is itself outrageous.
And then what happens after two years? Liz Cheney is now radioactive in Republican Party circles. She has no role in Democratic Party circles, since she disagrees with them on just about everything. She can’t even stand as a principled independent, since as part of your deal she has to abandon her publicly stated principles and positions every time there’s a close vote.
And you still haven’t explained how this actually works in practice. How does she know which are the votes when she can freely but impotently vote as her conscience, constituents, and the Constitution dictate, and which are the votes when she has to violate her obligations as the duly elected representative of the people of Wyoming and give Wyoming’s vote to Nancy Pelosi?
Let it go, @Roger_That. You are like some crazy person making up increasingly unrealistic scenarios to support an original premise that will never fly.
Call me names in the Pit, please. I have a few for you.
Yeah really, your threshold for detecting garment inflammation seems to be oversensitive. Look, we get it that the concept requires to be taken as axiomatic that nobody ever finds out what deal is it that was made. But we are fighting the hypothetical mostly because it seems based on something that we have no reason to believe Liz Cheney would be willing to do nor Nancy Pelosi willing to offer.
In general I agree. It’s a silly idea that doesn’t pass the laugh test. But it is the sort of nonsense that somebody totally steeped in the cynical idea that all politics is simply the Game of Thrones and “it’s all just an amoral scam perpetrated upon the good people of the USA.” I wonder where he learned this from?
At the same time there will be another 20 reps interested in vying for the chance to sell their soul (and political future) to the highest bidder while the two party leaderships compete them down to the lowest most desperate price. Very quickly that turns into a variant the old saw about expensive women: “We’ve already established what you are; now we’re merely haggling over price.”
So until it happens, it’s impossible, and when it happens, it’s a done deal. Right? Use your imagination. Or buy one.
Modnote: Time to dial it back. This is way too much into attacking the poster and not the post. Please do not do this again.
Right, if it ever came down to that, then it stops being about Liz Cheney for the sake of Liz Cheney, and it becomes what Republican, any Republican, is willing to make a deal for actual real power, AND then at the very same time McCarthy would be intensely looking for (x+1) Blue Dog Dems to flip the other way w/o ticking off his own troops, for the same purposes.