You often hear Democrats like Pelosi say we "need a strong Republican Party," but am I missing it or don't you hear the reverse on the right? President Clinton governed well to the right of President Biden but no Rs say they pine for Clinton's Democratic Party.
That said, some of what Pelosi was referring to was always "normal" presidency stuff, the lack of which made Trump harder to work with, like tweeting that the deal he negotiated was bad.
You do hear "JFK wouldn't recognize this party," as some point out, but I tend to hear that in the context of tax cuts. That said, anyone who raised taxes to the level that JFK left them at would be labeled a communist.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Looking back at this week, most significant development in "what the GOP stands for" is probably Romney-Cotton endorsing a minimum wage hike "while ensuring businesses cannot hire illegal immigrants." That's European party of the right energy nbcnews.com/politics/congr…
"Welfare state and higher wages, sure, but not for illegal immigrants" is the territory Rs have carved out post Trump. That's a climb-down from "welfare state, no," the pre-Trump ethos.
Do it yourself, take a look at the arguments and amendments flying at the Democrats' most popular bills. You rarely see one without a GOP effort to make Democrats vote against denying benefits etc to "illegals," which in campaign ads will become "they voted to give illegals" etc.
Can't find tweet but I'm 99% sure I dunked on Adler with the "Mayor Quimby in Jamaica" screenshot.
Cruz has not been telling people "do not travel to Mexico" from a place in Mexico but Adlergate was a huge story, I'm legitimately surprised that it didn't affect his vacation/optics plans.
I tackled this in the Trailer - Biden being president changes the calculations, but a lot of people lost their shirts after seeing "re-open" rallies at state capitols last year and thinking "this is the New Tea Party." (Including Trump!)
This thread captures the emerging “Reichstag Fire” theory that Pelosi purposefully rejected security so that the Capitol could be attacked. Unsure how her support for a 9/11 Commission-style probe fits into this
Honestly, this feels inevitable. If an event seems to benefit one party politically, a conspiracy theory develops that the party secretly planned the event. Same fever dreams happened after Oklahoma City bombing, and more famously after 9/11.
Conspiracy theories also work better if they seem familiar. Pelosi giving some sort of “stand down” order to let a riot happen — shades of the “did Clinton issue a stand-down order and let Benghazi happen.” It’s a cozy conspiracy blanket.
The original "Dean Scream" was Neil Kinnock shouting "we're all right!" a bunch of times at a rally before the 1992 UK election.
No, I don't know why you follow me, either.
It was considered a huge gaffe (Labour lost an election they were expecting to win) for Kinnock to be super excited.
I can never decide whether Kinnock was a great orator (the speech Biden plagiarized was very good tbf) or just Welsh. You want gravitas? Welsh accent, buddy.
The mismatch between what you can remove a president over (nothing, apparently) and what you can remove a mayor or governor or whatever is so vast. Rod Blagojevich was impeached and barred from holding any office again by his own party!
This really it's partisan; it's a function of a presidential system, where voters elect a quasi-sovereign who, in addition to governing, represents the nation like a king or queen. Same with Bill Clinton - a governor in his position would have quit so his LG could take over.
We all hate the "West Wing" now, but there is a very true plot point in an early season where a focus group finds that people would want their governor to resign if he concealed an illness... but, it turns out they're forgiving if a president does it.