333

Have you noticed the rush of House Republicans calling it quits in the last few weeks?

Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) announced his exit Nov. 1. He explained that to be a member of the Republican House majority means putting up with  the “many Republican leaders [who] are lying to America, claiming that the 2020 election was stolen.”

Buck is predicting that even more House Republicans will leave “in the near future.”

The day before Buck said good-bye, House Appropriations Chair Kay Granger (R-Texas) also quit. Granger had been a leader among House Republicans who prevented the far-right, election-denying Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) from becoming Speaker of the House.

Also in October, Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-Ariz.) said she was quitting. “Right now, Washington, D.C. is broken,” she said. “It is hard to get anything done.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] wert_straffer@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

Everyone with two brain cells wants to stay away from facists, that part is clear.

What i don‘t understan is why they are vacating their parliament seat. Wouldn‘t it be better to stay and vote with the democrats?

Or better found a new conservative party? Considering there are several fed up members.

Are they only leaving the parliament or also the party?

[-] Makeitstop@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

They are leaving ahead of the elections next year. I can think of quite a few reasons why they might do that.

  • Staying means being forced to either defend the indefensible or facing backlash and challenges from the right, either of which could damage any future political ambitions they may have.
  • Getting out now leaves room for others to get elected, which keeps them from being held responsible for their party losing a seat.
  • They know how nasty things are going to get and they want out before leaving becomes too dangerous. It wouldn't be the first time that Republicans in congress were afraid that pissing of Trump's base could put them in harm's way. That was not helped by Jim Jordan supporters agitating their followers and stirring up death threats against their colleagues just to get their way during the fight to become speaker.
  • Because they are getting pushed out behind the scenes and are choosing not to fight. I'm skeptical of this but I can't say for sure that it isn't happening.
  • Because they expect the next election to be a disaster and they don't want to get caught up in it.

Basically, most reasons come down to either just wanting out, or wanting to make sure they don't ruin their future political career choices.

If they stayed and voted with democrats, went independent or switched parties, or tried to start a new party, most likely they would end up just as unemployed but with fewer friends and no followers. Going directly against the party would lead to the party itself attacking them, along with the right wing media that many of their supporters get all their info from. Most districts lean to one side or the other, and while a few politicians have made careers on being independent or moderate, the ones that had been on the Republican side of the aisle are all gone, as are those who had the courage to take a stand against Trump when it mattered.

Honestly, at this point they may actually be able to get more done by quietly coordinating with others who have left or been forced out and organizing support for whoever emerges as a viable Trump alternative in the Republican primary. That keeps them out of the cross hairs and at least increases the chances that Trump will lose either in the primaries or the general election if they can at least drag out the fight for the nomination.

If Trump loses badly, political winds could shift in the party. Or if another politician gets the nomination and goes on to win the election, they'll be in a position to push Trump's people out. That's how his people took control in the first place.

[-] wert_straffer@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

Wow, thanks for the extensive answer. Makes things much clearer. Unfortunatly I can only give one upvote.

[-] cfi@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The thing that is different about Congress is that Reps and Senators are free to vote with or against the rest of their party without any repercussions. We don't have three line whips or anything like that here, so the party system isn't as powerful. This is why Manchin could go against the Democratic Party agenda so frequently and the Democratic leadership couldn't do anything about it.

So in theory these Reps could stay Republican and vote with the Democrats, or go independent/libertarian/etc if they really want to make a break with the Republican label. Staying or changing parties really doesn't matter except in how it defines the majority party in each house, and also practically as to what legislation is likely to get brought to a vote per the Hastert Rule or the Standing Rules of the Senate.

So this all can go to explain why they're not changing parties or who they caucus with. It still leaves the question of why they're choosing to leave rather than remain and affect change from within. Answer: They don't care about the country or the party. They were here for power, the lobbying money, the post politics sinecures, etc. Now that all of that is gone, they have decided to cut and run. They are abandoning ship now in the hopes that they can get the best life raft.

[-] ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

deleted by creator

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

We have effectively two rounds of elections. In the primaries we determine who the candidate will be from either party. That candidate then runs in the general election against the other candidate.

Republicans have now run into the problem where party voters in primaries will pick candidates who can't win the general election. The Republicans retiring could possibly win another general election, but they're not extreme enough to win a primary anymore.

Plus Republicans aren't known for courageous behavior. Retiring quietly is what they do.

[-] Furedadmins@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

They are vacating now to try to come back later after the zealots infighting kills them off.

[-] Talaraine@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

They're resigning their seat but not leaving the party, as I understand it. Makes no sense at all.

I agree, we need a 3rd party terribly right now. You guys have got the edge on us in that.

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Unfortunately I think it's less likely for the Greens or Libertarians to get their shit together than it is for moderate Republicans to somehow retake their party. For them to be viable today, they needed to be financing widespread state and local races 30 years ago. And a new party is unlikely to prove viable.

I think our best option is to fight against Republicans until they're firmly defeated, and then split the Democrats into centrists and Progressives.

this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2023
333 points (98.3% liked)

politics

19104 readers
1947 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. 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