this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2023
112 points (100.0% liked)

Politics

10162 readers
279 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Safeguard@beehaw.org 6 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

Thinking about it more... It would have been an interesting tactic of the Dems to "cooperate" with some more level headed Republicans and sideline the Chaos Caucus from having anymore influence. It could have had major impact on the effectiveness of the house going forward.

As I understand it, they actually tried this. Sort of. But McCarthy was very ANTI-DEMS towards it. So they voted the way they did.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEj9pnkXei0

[–] bedrooms@kbin.social 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I think that's fair. My comment was a reaction to the opinion in the article that implied Dems enjoy the chaos for political advantage. As you probably understood, I don't like it if that was really the case.

[–] Safeguard@beehaw.org 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Agreed, that would not be beneficial to anyone really. Basically a "shitty move".

Seems like Republicans really did not leave them any other option though.

Also: the reporting of the New York Times has really nose-dived in quality the last few years.