• Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    87
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Oh ho! Wait til Fox News finds out about his tan suit! Oh man, they’re gonna drag him for weeks about that! Ha ha!

    Ahh Fox News sure does hate tan suits. And news.

      • LucasWaffyWaf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        34
        ·
        1 year ago

        God it’s so hard to believe that the same people who got outraged at Obama for having uppity fancy dijon mustard instead of honest earnest working class yellow mustard, would also go on to worship the man who shits in a golden toilet.

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      that is one hideously tailored suit. Like JC Pennies ‘mail out to adjust off the rack suits’ look better.

      he’d look more professional if he was wearing fetterman’s hoodie…

      • eestileib@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        He did just come out of a 3.5 hour screamfest, so a little rumpling is expected.

        But it’s the wrong size, the tie is hideous. Jim Jordan won the clothes battle today for sure.

    • ikapoz@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      55
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Put slightly differently. Eight members of the house can cause total gridlock because the other 427 can’t even countenance taking a single step of compromise - and not even compromise on an actual law - compromise on the person who presides over the process.

      The problem isn’t really the eight. The problem is that the process has gotten so fucked we can no longer work around a 1.8% nut job rate.

      Edit: math

      • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Democrats are open to compromise.

        They have indicated that they are willing to support empowering McHenry until January.

        Democrats are also willing to support other Republicans as Speaker, provided Republicans offer something in return.

        But they aren’t willing to support election deniers (like Jordan), and they won’t support people who previously reneged on deals with Democrats (like McCarthy).

        Not that it matters, because Republicans refuse to support anyone who needs Democratic support to become Speaker.

        • paintbucketholder@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          1 year ago

          But they aren’t willing to support election deniers (like Jordan),

          I just want to say that while people who refuse to acknowledge that Biden won the 2020 election should be rightfully called election deniers, Jordan’s role is so much more involved: he actively attempted to get the election decertified and throw the vote to Trump.

          That makes him at least one of the figureheads of an attempted coup d’etat, someone who tried to end democracy in America in order to install an unelected leader in the White House.

          If he had succeeded, America today would no longer be a democracy, a nation where the electorate chooses its representatives.

          If it was up to Jim Jordan, we would now live in a dictatorship, with Trump as the unelected ruler who would no longer be beholden to the will of the people or the rule of law.

      • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        this shit show is made by republicans, continued by republicans and is entirely republicans fucking it up. Considering McCarthy failed to abide deals he had already made, why should democrats trust him to honor a second deal?

        if republicans were even nominally bipartisan- like, you know, any reasonable body would be if the majority was led by exactly 4 votes- we wouldn’t be in this mess.

    • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      If the number of seats in the House had not been frozen a century ago, this would not be a problem as it would provide representation proportional to population (as outlined in the US Constitution), rather than artificially amplifying the voices of low-population states. As it stands, citizens in Wyoming (pop. ~577k, 1 rep) have any twice as much representation per capita than those of Delaware (pop ~1.003M, 1 rep), while both have a single Representative. Compared to California (pop. ~39.24M, 52 reps), which has a ratio of 1 rep:~755k people.

      There is, to be said, an issue of maintaining the level of proportionality originally intended (1 rep : 30k people). This would require over 11k representatives today. However, using the “Wyoming Rule”, where the number of seats is proportional to that required to provide one Representative per population of the least populace state (currently Wyoming), the number is only about 575. That’s much more manageable and would do a better job of providing equal representation and making gerrymandering harder.

      • Chainweasel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re right. To be honest the website FiveThirtyEight always fucks me up on that number for some reason

    • Dudewitbow@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      In an ideal world, the speaker is supposed to be the most centrist person, but when you have parties of hardliners and refusal to make comcessions, you get the shit thats happening right now.

  • aseriesoftubes@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t get Gaetz’s constitutional argument. The Constitution only has this to say about the Speaker role:

    The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker and Officers

    It hardly seems like a “desecration” to let the House choose a temporary speaker.

    I know, I know, it’s shocking that Gaetz is not a serious person.

    • RunningInRVA@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      His comments are probably based more on the traditions and history of the House rather than any written law, House rule, or even Article of the Constitution

  • Rapidcreek@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    1 year ago

    Remember when Republicans obsessed about running government like a business?

    In the real world, this level of incompetence gets you fired.

  • blazera@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    Its so hard to parody republicans when the reality is them using light beer in their rhetoric of federal government operations

  • TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    Gaetz/Martian: Ack! Ack ack ack! Ack ack!

    Reporter: Sir? We can’t understand you. Why are you talking like this?

    turns top of his watch

    Gaetz/Martian: TREASON! GAETZ NO VOTE! MCHENRY BAD!

    shuffles off weirdly

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz ® said he will do “everything possible” to prevent the empowering of Speaker Pro Tempore Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.).

    Gaetz was one of the eight Republicans who sided with House Democrats to remove former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif) from his role earlier this month.

    Now, as the House has gone weeks without a Speaker amid multiple crises like the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict and a looming government shutdown, some in the lower chamber have considered a resolution to give McHenry more power.

    Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), who recently faced two failed attempts to gain the gavel this week, is also reportedly planning to back a resolution to empower McHenry.

    “I will not sit back and watch a complete betrayal of the GOP base with this ‘plan’ that’s being discussed,” Boebert wrote on X.

    “I ran because I was sick and tired of politicians coming up here and cutting deals and releasing ‘holier than thou’ statements about why we just had to accept it.”


    The original article contains 281 words, the summary contains 165 words. Saved 41%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!