“I want to say to the American people, the United States Senate will not be intimidated. We will not be kept out of this chamber by thugs, mobs, or threats. We will not bow to lawlessness or intimidation.” - @senatemajldr
@senatemajldr “The United States and the United States Congress have faced down much greater threats than the unhinged crowd we saw today.”
@senatemajldr “This failed insurrection only underscores how crucial the task before us is for our republic.”
@senatemajldr “Now we’re going to finish exactly what we started. We’ll complete the process the right way, by the book, we’ll follow our precedents, our laws, and our Constitution to the letter. And we will certify the winner of the 2020 presidential election.”
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Mitt Romney pulling no punches: “Now, we gather due to a selfish man’s injured pride, and the outrage of supporters who he has deliberately misinformed for the past two months and stirred to order this very morning..."
What happened here today was an insurrection incited by the President of the United States.”
“Those who continue to support his dangerous gambit by objecting to the results of the democratic election will forever be seen as being complicit in an unprecedented attack against our democracy.”
This is the sort of thing the GOP went through circa 2013 - 2016 and the press had no trouble noticing that it was a product of magical thinking. politico.com/news/2020/10/2…
"NARAL Pro-Choice America president Ilyse Hogue said Feinstein 'offered an appearance of credibility to the proceedings that is wildly out of step with the American people.'" This claim is simply not true. Pound sand.
Left unsaid is how the minority members might have conducted themselves differently. Because when folks like Whitehouse went full Oliver Stone and Hirono accused her of homophobia, it landed with a laughable thud. The activist class wants a rabbit out of a hat.
This is a fascinating little artifact of this cycle. There's a lot to parse in here, but my fav is this little nugget: "Independents' 52% support for Barrett's confirmation is identical to what it was for the woman who she would be replacing, Ginsburg."
The cult of the independent-minded voter is a silly one. We're always tempted to paint them as the sober, clear-eyed antidote to ideological/partisan excess. In fact, they mostly vote on personality type and don't have many set policy preferences.
Plenty for a conservative not to like in Michelle Obama’s speech, but it was masterful nonetheless.
It was billed as uncharacteristically partisan, and it was. And it was a culture war speech, with sins of omission in the first half and commission in the second. But those are blemishes in an otherwise tonally refreshing appeal to universal values. Voters respond to that.
If your assumption is that general election voters who recoil from partisan warfare are conflict averse, and actually resent ideological witch hunts and desire racial rapprochement (which they do), this is the kind of stuff that moves you.