276

Republicans Worry They Could Lose the House—Before the Election (time.com)

submitted 3 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

30 comments fedilink hide all child comments

When Republicans gained control of the House in November 2022, many in Washington wondered how they would be able to govern effectively with one of the slimmest majorities in history. Some Democrats even speculated if they might be able to take back the House before the term ended.

Sixteen months later, as the Republican majority has shrunk even further, House Speaker Mike Johnson is admitting that possibility. He told Fox News on Monday that there is a slim chance he could lose the speakership to Democratic House leader Hakeem Jeffries in the next few weeks amid a wave of early retirements. "That's a risk,” Johnson said of Democrats taking control of the House.

Already three Republican lawmakers have resigned from their posts mid-term—Reps. Kevin McCarthy, Bill Johnson, and Ken Buck. A fourth Republican, Rep. Mike Gallagher of Wisconsin, is expected to step down in mid-April, bringing the party’s former nine-seat majority down to just 217-213 as Republicans lost a fifth seat after George Santos was expelled from the House.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Asafum@feddit.nl 8 points 3 months ago

Not that I want them to win at all, but I think losing the house would be a godsend to the Republicans. It would be yet another fire under the asses of voters to "save America" from the Democrats...

I'm so sick of all of this. I'm so mad my candidate lost...

[-] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 15 points 3 months ago

I think losing the house would be a godsend to the Republicans. It would be yet another fire under the asses of voters to “save America” from the Democrats…

How would that logic work?

GOP Reps: "You need to vote us Republicans in so we get majority control of Congress !"

GOP voters: "err, we did. You guys quit in massive droves after passing the least amount of legislation in history. So you didn't do your jobs, then you quit, and you want us to vote you back in? Won't you just quit again?"

[-] Jimmyeatsausage@lemmy.world 28 points 3 months ago

It would work the same way it's worked for the last 30 years...Fox News will make some shit up and they'll believe it.

[-] EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 3 months ago

They don't care about what actually happens in the government. They would happily get torched under a flamethrower if they could hold a couple of immigrants down underneath them while it happens.

Or, as my grandfather used to say, and my boss when I was a teenager, "I'm a Republican. I vote for the nominee."

[-] empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 3 months ago

you are making a massive fatal flaw in logic in this comment: you're assuming repubitard voters have enough braincells to use logic, or object permanence from more than 1 week ago

they only ever react to whatever the current fox news outrage is

[-] treefrog@lemm.ee 8 points 3 months ago

You're overestimating the memory of the average voter.

[-] hanrahan@slrpnk.net 7 points 3 months ago

You've not met many republicans then ?

[-] Soulg@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 months ago

Mostly because republican voters are absolute dipshits with the memory of a goldfish who believe everything they're told on right wing TV without a second thought

[-] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 4 points 3 months ago

Talk to a Boomer who was around in the 1970s, and they'll bend your ear telling you about how they could live well off of minimum wage.

Then ask them if Reagan's 'trickle down' ever worked for them. They'll really go off telling you how great Reagan was.

[Apologies to all those who voted for Jimmy Carter et al]

this post was submitted on 04 Apr 2024

276 points (99.3% liked)

politics

18075 readers

3150 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

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.
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.
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!
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
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.
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