Wow, King sure is campaigning early for his reelection. Guess it never hurts to start firing up your constituents though.
If King isn’t careful, the Republican house caucus is gonna do some math, realize that 241 Democrats isn’t that much different than 240, and that the Republicans can probably win that district back anyway…and they may vote to expel him. It’s a longshot, but he is really pissing off Republicans in both houses.
I don’t imagine that happening unless he attends a cross burning. Right now it’s just furrowed brows and feverish brow fanning.
Ejecting King will not play well with Trump’s core base, who are basically exactly the same kind of people.
Eh, I would imagine if there’s a censure vote on King in the House, a number of Republicans will vote for it. It’s a wrist-slap, but they’d be going on record.
You’re probably right. But were I in charge of the RNC, I’d need someone to talk me out of hoving him outta the nest–just from a purely strategic/tactical standpoint.
Being censured by the Democratically-held House would be a badge of honor for King. He’d fundraise off it for sure.
I don’t think they’d risk their base believing that they’re not the party of racism and bigotry. He’s just saying all the things they’re thinking anyways. Why isn’t they’re a white history month? Where’s the white version of Ebony? Why can’t we still own slaves? Typical GOP stuff.
To be clear when I say a number of Republicans in the House would vote for censure, that’s a significant number, I’d think. Over 100. But you may be right.
Well, yeah. But maybe if the center-right has more of a plan for post-Trump, it will be happier to help put Trump into the ground.
Or this:
I appreciate this has no doubt been debated in other topics, however this whole thread is evidence of why compulsory voting is beneficial… when everyone has to vote, you don’t need to pander to the fringes, you need to capture the centre.
For example, your “new-GOP” will still get votes of the crazy-right racists (as they’re not going to vote D), so the new party can instead focus on gobbling up as many undecided voters in the middle as it can.
Steve might be fucked.
Joni isn’t moderate or center-right at all. If she’s throwing him under the bus, he might be well and truly fucked.
I mean I do disagree insofar as his statements are super representative of his state…
(Shiva and the three other decent people there excepted)
Part of the state anyway. Everything in NW Iowa is terrible.
It’s sucked ass ever since we got redistricted in with these fuckwits.
Tweets are 100% meaningless. The Republican Party will not abandon King. They probably hope he gets voted out, but they will take no proactive action.
Again, it’s totally fine for Republicans to be racist. The ones in power just don’t like it when you say it out loud.
Where were these comments from the GOP before the last election? Pitiful. He’s been like this for years. They were too scared of their racist base to say anything.
Mandatory voting is one option, ranked voting is another. The latter is more likely to fly in American culture. Plus you have less concern about people who don’t care to educate themselves voting, although I realize that’s a problem we have anyway.
I honestly wonder, and this is a hypothesis that could be wrong, but our FPTP system probably makes voters not educating themselves more likely.
After all, with only two parties and many races non competitive, what sense does it make to do much research into one of the non major party candidates? Everything in our electoral system incentivized binary partisanship.
Primary elections. Local races (particularly non-partisan ones.) Ballot measures.
I was being a bit tongue in cheek. I personally do the work, but was presenting the way many people feel. Why do the work, why read about candidates. D or R is all that matters, vote for one.
It is easier for many people to just shut it down and not educate themselves. And for many of them this is not entirely irrational. In many cases the vote is foreordained. Does it make much sense contemplating the relative merits of state wide or national candidates if you are living in Alabama? Probably not. Sure the local elections may be contested and are important, but sadly the shift to national news over local has made those largely invisible. Harder to research even with the death of local papers.
So if you are living in a 70% one party district not spending much time fussing over candidates when your vote is meaningless is an understandable and unfortunate, but also somewhat rational decision.
That’s what our vote apportionment does. Turns large swathes of the country rote. And not all places have California style ballot measures.
So while, yes, it would be good to have a more informed electorate the systems and incentives in place do not make that a meaningfully likely outcome.