Kevin McCarthy, and the weird phenomenom of the Democrats fueling the Right Wing Extremism

[QuebecOverCanada]

Kevin McCarthy, who is the first Speaker of the House to be ousted, was a Republican with more or less Centrist views that could find agreements on many issues with the Democrats.

He has been ousted with an unanimity of the votes of the Democrats, who voted alongside 8 Republicans. The 8 Republicans are considered to be at the far Right of the GOP in general.

This isn't the first case of Democrats making life easier for the extremists of the opposite party. In 2015, many Democrats helped Trump win the GOP nomination, leading to the victory of the GOP in the 2016 election. They thought, at first, that giving the spotlight to the extremist contender would guarantee an easy 2016 bid for Hillary Clinton. It was an obvious mistake.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/11/hillary-clinton-2016-donald-trump-214428/

Now, History seems to rhyme again. We have seen an unanimous vote from Democrats to further radicalize the GOP. Will it be a winning strategy, this time?

Will it help ordinary Americans?

Will the GOP implode more than it already is? Are we about to witness a second coming of Ross Perot?

[robosmith]

16 minutes ago, QuebecOverCanada said:

Kevin McCarthy, who is the first Speaker of the House to be ousted, was a Republican with more or less Centrist views that could find agreements on many issues with the Democrats.

He has been ousted with an unanimity of the votes of the Democrats, who voted alongside 8 Republicans. The 8 Republicans are considered to be at the far Right of the GOP in general.

This isn't the first case of Democrats making life easier for the extremists of the opposite party. In 2015, many Democrats helped Trump win the GOP nomination, leading to the victory of the GOP in the 2016 election. They thought, at first, that giving the spotlight to the extremist contender would guarantee an easy 2016 bid for Hillary Clinton. It was an obvious mistake.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/11/hillary-clinton-2016-donald-trump-214428/

Now, History seems to rhyme again. We have seen an unanimous vote from Democrats to further radicalize the GOP. Will it be a winning strategy, this time?

Will it help ordinary Americans?

Will the GOP implode more than it already is? Are we about to witness a second coming of Ross Perot?

The Democrats were never going to help McCarthy without a cooperation deal, after the impeachment inquiry double cross.

[QuebecOverCanada]

1 minute ago, robosmith said:

The Democrats were never going to help McCarthy without a cooperation deal, after the impeachment inquiry double cross.

May you elaborate on the cooperation deal? I'm not sure to get all that implies.

[robosmith]

8 minutes ago, QuebecOverCanada said:

May you elaborate on the cooperation deal? I'm not sure to get all that implies.

It means not pursuing an impeachment inquiry AND complying with the previously agreed upon budget deal that the MAGA fringe doesn't like.

AKA, power sharing.

[QuebecOverCanada]

25 minutes ago, robosmith said:

It means not pursuing an impeachment inquiry AND complying with the previously agreed upon budget deal that the MAGA fringe doesn't like.

AKA, power sharing.

OK I see, I have not been following politics as much as I've been in the past few months.

We'll see if this will lead to a less right-wing Speaker. Because it would be bad for the Democrats if this unanimous vote would cause the US to shift righter.

[CdnFox]

36 minutes ago, QuebecOverCanada said:

OK I see, I have not been following politics as much as I've been in the past few months.

We'll see if this will lead to a less right-wing Speaker.

Of course it won't. The dems stepped in it there.  Basically the dems wanted him to be their lapdog and that's what got him in trouble with the more feverant of his party and lead to the ouster. Now they'll get someone who's more in keeping with the right wing of the party.  They were better off with the devil they had, but whatever.

[QuebecOverCanada]

47 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Of course it won't. The dems stepped in it there.  Basically the dems wanted him to be their lapdog and that's what got him in trouble with the more feverant of his party and lead to the ouster. Now they'll get someone who's more in keeping with the right wing of the party.  They were better off with the devil they had, but whatever.

The Democrats really shot themselves in the foot potentially if this doesn't work out the way they want it too. But it is likely is is a good bet.

If the Republicans suddenly find more unity, they lost the bet.

On the other hand, if the Republicans can't fight a right heir, the party is in shambles just like the GOP in the 1990s. They may even split the GOP for a third party, splitting their electoral base if it happens.

We're living in very interesting times.

Edited October 4, 2023 by QuebecOverCanada

[QuebecOverCanada]

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2024/president/us/general-election-trump-vs-biden-7383.html

Currently, Trump is ahead 1.6 points above Biden in a reelection bid.

We'll see the effect of that ousting in a few days. It will last a few months, because I think many in the GOP can be petty enough to delay everything, just to paralyze the government and have more publicity to themselves.

[Hodad]

2 hours ago, QuebecOverCanada said:

Kevin McCarthy, who is the first Speaker of the House to be ousted, was a Republican with more or less Centrist views that could find agreements on many issues with the Democrats.

He has been ousted with an unanimity of the votes of the Democrats, who voted alongside 8 Republicans. The 8 Republicans are considered to be at the far Right of the GOP in general.

This isn't the first case of Democrats making life easier for the extremists of the opposite party. In 2015, many Democrats helped Trump win the GOP nomination, leading to the victory of the GOP in the 2016 election. They thought, at first, that giving the spotlight to the extremist contender would guarantee an easy 2016 bid for Hillary Clinton. It was an obvious mistake.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/11/hillary-clinton-2016-donald-trump-214428/

Now, History seems to rhyme again. We have seen an unanimous vote from Democrats to further radicalize the GOP. Will it be a winning strategy, this time?

Will it help ordinary Americans?

Will the GOP implode more than it already is? Are we about to witness a second coming of Ross Perot?

Democrats aren't doing the kooks any favors. Gaetz is widely disliked in the mainstream GOP. He can't get the speakership. And without the Gaetz faction the Republicans don't have a functional majority to reinstate McCarthy. Which means, to get someone elected the Republicans will likely have to put someone up who can garner Dem votes.

Or to put it another way, with a fractured GOP, the Dems have leverage to get more of what they want. Better to compromise with moderate Dems than to reward the "burn it all down" faction.

[West]

2 hours ago, QuebecOverCanada said:

The 8 Republicans are considered to be at the far Right of the GOP in general.

What makes one "far right" anyway?

[QuebecOverCanada]

3 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Democrats aren't doing the kooks any favors. Gaetz is widely disliked in the mainstream GOP. He can't get the speakership. And without the Gaetz faction the Republicans don't have a functional majority to reinstate McCarthy. Which means, to get someone elected the Republicans will likely have to put someone up who can garner Dem votes.

Or to put it another way, with a fractured GOP, the Dems have leverage to get more of what they want. Better to compromise with moderate Dems than to reward the "burn it all down" faction.

Trump is widely popular according to polls, despite many indictments for even criminal charges. He could even win the popular vote if an election was going today.

Support for Ukraine is going down as well, many Americans are against donating more of their money to a war abroad.

Do you think the GOP would enlign the way you hope to, or where they poll to, at this moment?

Edited October 4, 2023 by QuebecOverCanada

[QuebecOverCanada]

1 minute ago, West said:

What makes one "far right" anyway?

Far right isn't necessarily fascist. There are many views which are deemed far left or far right that are legitimate, although I do not identify myself to one extreme or another. But far right of the GOP means being more orientated to being isolationist, more obsuctrionist, less incline to promote mass migration, less inclined to accept the election result of 2020, etc.

The other part of the GOP is for more intervention, votes more in the favor of the Democrats, voted Bills to include more immigrants in the USA, do not deny the 2020 election results etc.

There is really a part of the GOP which is far right, just the same as the far left with the Democrats.

[Caswell Thomas]

If Ross  Perot shows up it will be a miracle, he passed in 2019. I often wonder what would have happened if he had won. Its likely the GOP wouldn't have half the power or position it has now, remember Ross was about stream lining Big Business and the amount of influence that it had in government as well as making sure the American people got what they paid for in government.  The same thing could be said today, McCarthy was at least straddling the center line, but then Matt Gaetz decided along with his Slaughter House 5 that no one should be friendly or even try to compromise, its not a Team Sport with Matt, its " my ball, my court, my rules, or no one plays" and you know, while Matt and his cronies are all sitting on their thumbs and singing Weeeee! nothing is getting done, Putin is being given time to regroup and strengthen his attacks against us and NATO, and , his 5th Columnists here in the US will be proceeding on their Disrupt America Agenda ...because this is what it's really all about...

[Hodad]

5 minutes ago, QuebecOverCanada said:

Trump is widely popular according to polls, despite many indictments for even criminal charges. He could even win the popular vote if an election was going today.

Support for Ukraine is going down as well, many Americans are against donating more of their money to a war abroad.

Do you think the GOP would enlign the way you hope to, or where they poll to, at this moment?

I think there are many confounding factors that make current polling untrustworthy. And it's sending confused (and confusing) mixed signals. Clear majorities think Trump should be prosecuted. Are we to also believe that a majority think he should be elected? That doesn't add up 

I think very few people are excited about Biden. While Trump inexplicably has rabid,  unwavering support from an unreasonably large portion of the GOP. In other words, there is an enthusiasm gap. 

But the grass is always greener on the other side until you remember that the other side tried to stage a coup. Only one side is campaigning now. I don't expect a Trump advantage to survive a real, binary campaign, and outside of a third party split, I don't think he's electable anymore. Too much damage and too much baggage. .02

[Aristides]

The Dems just said you created this, we aren't going to help you fix it. Deal with your own trash.

[QuebecOverCanada]

1 minute ago, Aristides said:

The Dems just said you created this, we aren't going to help you fix it. Deal with your own trash.

Just like in 2015.

[QuebecOverCanada]

6 minutes ago, Hodad said:

I think there are many confounding factors that make current polling untrustworthy. And it's sending confused (and confusing) mixed signals. Clear majorities think Trump should be prosecuted. Are we to also believe that a majority think he should be elected? That doesn't add up 

I think very few people are excited about Biden. While Trump inexplicably has rabid,  unwavering support from an unreasonably large portion of the GOP. In other words, there is an enthusiasm gap. 

But the grass is always greener on the other side until you remember that the other side tried to stage a coup. Only one side is campaigning now. I don't expect a Trump advantage to survive a real, binary campaign, and outside of a third party split, I don't think he's electable anymore. Too much damage and too much baggage. .02

It was a very big surprise when Trump won in 2016.

I think it would be a surprise if Trump won in 2024. But it is a serious plausibility. If the economy somewhat got worse and many people were bankrupt, a large portion of the popular vote would go to Trump. Economic reasons were what gave Trump victory back in 2016. It could be what would brought him back at the White House.

[Hodad]

Just now, QuebecOverCanada said:

It was a very big surprise when Trump won in 2016.

I think it would be a surprise if Trump won in 2024. But it is a serious plausibility. If the economy somewhat got worse and many people were bankrupt, a large portion of the popular vote would go to Trump. Economic reasons were what gave Trump victory back in 2016. It could be what would brought him back at the White House.

That is all true. If things fall apart, all bets are off. Worked for Hitler.

[QuebecOverCanada]

1 minute ago, Hodad said:

That is all true. If things fall apart, all bets are off. Worked for Hitler.

You know, Trump wasn't kind of Hitlerish when he gained power. Yes you can criticize him on laws he passed and the economic orientation he took. 

But I think it's fair to say Trump also brought the Abraham Accords and the South and North Korea diplomatic restoration.

He was an interventionist, he tried a military coup in Venezuela which failed. The sanctions were atrocious to the people there, and the coup failed totally.

His presidency was a mixedbag all around, from the economic standpoint to the diplomatic perspective, which are the main focuses of a presidency. Overall, Trump wasn't that dangerous to the world stability while not being the force of good people who are fanatized by him claim to be.

[myata]

My thoughts exactly. Today is not a great day for the American democracy. Looks like Trampism is poisoning and contaminating the thinking not just of the Republicans but everybody. Why not show some adult responsibility? Why playing this childish revenge game to the last standing, that quite possibly will be someone none of the players expected?

Overall, just another demonstration: partisanship in a binary zero-sum system is already creating risks for democracy. And it may very well paint the way to the end of it.

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, West said:

What makes one "far right" anyway?

Being right of castro for most of the left these days.

[robosmith]

2 hours ago, West said:

What makes one "far right" anyway?

Attitudes like yours of course. LMAO

3 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Being right of castro for most of the left these days.

You certainly don't speak for "the left." Typical of your unwarranted arrogance to believe you do. ?

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, QuebecOverCanada said:

You know, Trump wasn't kind of Hitlerish when he gained power. Yes you can criticize him on laws he passed and the economic orientation he took. 

Hitler wasn't kind of Hitlerish the first time he was elected.

It is typical that men become more fascist as they gain more power.

 

 

[CdnFox]

 

38 minutes ago, robosmith said:

You certainly don't speak for "the left." Typical of your unwarranted arrogance to believe you do. ?

I'm just repeating what the left says.  If it sounds arrogant and unwarranted you'll have to take it up with them,  

 

[Hodad]

11 hours ago, QuebecOverCanada said:

You know, Trump wasn't kind of Hitlerish when he gained power. Yes you can criticize him on laws he passed and the economic orientation he took. 

But I think it's fair to say Trump also brought the Abraham Accords and the South and North Korea diplomatic restoration.

He was an interventionist, he tried a military coup in Venezuela which failed. The sanctions were atrocious to the people there, and the coup failed totally.

His presidency was a mixedbag all around, from the economic standpoint to the diplomatic perspective, which are the main focuses of a presidency. Overall, Trump wasn't that dangerous to the world stability while not being the force of good people who are fanatized by him claim to be.

The comparison was really to the historical parallel of the attempted coup followed by another run for election. But the playbook was also similar in many ways. The division, the scapegoating, the flavor of the rhetoric etc., even if the goals were not an overt parallel. I think we are probably lucky that Trump's only love and interest is Trump. And I do think Trump was significantly destabilizing geopolitically. Threatening to leave NATO, trying to leave WHO, starting trade wars and making bombastic threats against multiple nations. 

We give credit for making overtures to NK, but he also radically escalated tensions with NK in wildly inappropriate and dangerous ways. 

There are very good reasons that the global reputation of the United States, and particularly of our president, plummeted into the basement. Much like he was domestically, Trump was an agent of chaos on the world stage. 

Edited October 4, 2023 by Hodad