Edited, deleting initial post for not being relevant to the specific question
Your post avoids the point. We agree that the rabble cannot challenge the US military. However the average nutcase has access to more firepower than a BAR (and easier to carry). More importantly the average nutcase also has access to information and communication equipment that in the past would only have been available to the military,
Minor Dominion Voting Systems update:
Update: Trump’s WH staff is getting transition orders:
It’s been clear for a long time there is some really shady shit going on at DB in re Trump and Russia. To be fair, they’re probably not the only major financial institution with bloody fingernails, but they’re at the epicenter of the Russia-GOP-Trump nexus.
They also need to sue the crap out of right wing news outlets
The lawsuit names: Donald J. Trump for President, Inc., Sidney Powell, Sidney Powell, P.C., Rudolph Giuliani, Joseph Oltmann, FEC United, Shuffling Madness Media, Inc. d/b/a Conservative Daily, Jim Hoft, TGP Communications LLC d/b/a The Gateway Pundit, Michelle Malkin, Eric Metaxas, Chanel Rion, Herring Networks, Inc. d/b/a One America News Network and Newsmax Media, Inc.
Hoo-rah!!!
My prediction is that this will get really testy, Trump will leave office as scheduled, and he will circle the names of Republicans who didn’t support his attempt to overturn the election…and appear in their nightmares. Cocaine Mitch is safe for another six years, but if Trump somehow engineers a solid takeover of the party, then even he would be pushed out by default.
I think the guy who makes the guitar and the store that sells them would be happy you decided to help them weather this storm, so I wouldn’t feel bad about spending it.
If there’s a secondary bright spot to the next four years – the primary obviously being Trump no longer in the White House – it’s the prospect of Donnie and his large block of voters ripping the GOP apart from the inside.
This is the crux of the matter.
Question: does Mitch have total control of what gets brought to the floor for a vote? If he says “no,” is it just “no” and that’s that? Can anyone or any group overrule him on this?
If the Republican party can tear itself to pieces, great. But the concern I have is that the Republicans get smaller but more extreme and remain a viable political party.
The GOP being reduced to a barely relevant party would be great, but I somehow doubt that’s ultimately what happens. I suspect that, as it was with the Tea Party, fewer people will identify as Republican voters but will still vote for them in elections, while the party itself becomes even more extremist and still an opposition party that runs against Democratic opposition.
Very true. The stimulus is not just meant to help people who are having trouble making ends meet, it is also meant to encourage people to spend money and keep the economy running.
Perhaps the first time they will get an ethics debriefing…
Under Senate precedents, the Majority Leader decides what comes to the floor and when. Should Mitch be blocking legislation that a majority of Senators would like to come to the floor, the options are:
-
Make him not Majority Leader. This would require a majority of the Republican Caucus to vote him out and replace him with another Senator. Obviously, if it’s just a few Republican Senators that support the bill, this is unlikely.
-
Change the rules. An interesting thing about the Senate is that the authority of the Majority Leader is based almost entirely on precedent – the official standing rules barely mention the office. It’s been suggested in another thread (or maybe this thread, I lose count) that the VP sitting as President of the Senate could simply abandon the precedent that the Majority Leader is always recognized first to offer motions and allow another Senator to offer a motion to proceed to the bill in question. However, Republican Senators would be loathe to go along with this new precedent. Even if some of them may disagree with the Majority Leader on this one bill, forfeiting control of the Senate agenda to the VP would drastically undercut their power.
Thanks. IOW it’s Mitch’s ball game and nuttin’ gets voted on unless he says so, even if the Dems get their piddling 51 votes.
I floated this idea a while back… pure fantasy. What would it be like to have a Majority Leader (of either party) who actually cared about people, about easing their burdens, working for a better life for everyone? Who didn’t mind reaching across the aisle and sharing credit-- or giving it away altogether? Sigh. A fairy tale, I know.
Yeah, we know those Republicans are sticklers when it comes to respecting norms and precedents. Harris should definitely not do this. /s
I believe this is correct. Trump doesn’t care whether he “won” the election in the way we conceive it. He doesn’t care about the “truth” as we see it because everything is just a means to an end for him. The whole idea of an election is abstract nonsense to him. He “wins” if he persuades X number of people that he is a “winner” and that he gets to do whatever the fuck he wants.
To achieve that goal, he is willing to say anything and everything about the election that he he thinks in the moment will help him reach that goal.
Coming from a Westminster-based country, it is utterly mind-boggling to imagine that the Opposition wouldn’t be able to bring motions to the floor and force the Government to vote on them. Allowing one party total control over the agenda is antithetical to the functioning of a deliberative body.