Sharice Davids and Eric Swalwell voted for that? Disappointing.
From the Article:
This is a transparent, well-worn DC play. Put Democrats in a political box by forcing them to choose between voting against an antisemitism resolution so Republicans can slam them as being antisemitic and anti-Israel — or voting for the resolution, so they can hit the Party for being divided and chaotic.
It’s political theater, designed for bad-faith attack ads and Fox News clips.
but
Jewish Democrats in the House split 10 to 10. Among the NO votes were Becca Balint, Suzanne Bonamici, Laura Friedman, Dan Goldman, Sara Jacobs, Mike Levin, Jerry Nadler, Jamie Raskin, Jan Schakowsky, and Brad Sherman.
Pro tip: If Jewish Democrats in the House split 10–10 on your “antisemitism” resolution, it’s probably not actually about antisemitism.
14 Republicans and 19 Democrats were absent for the vote.
It is political theater and was absolutely designed as a trap for Democrats. Damned if you do, and damned if you don’t, so to speak. Which is why, on a bill like that, you should just vote for the right thing. You’re not going to win by trying to play the game.
True, but I can’t get upset about a pointless resolution that doesn’t make any difference in the grand scheme. I won’t bash any Democrats over it. It would be nice if folks made the right call 100% of the time, but few ever do.
Party switch coming in 3…2…1…
Warnock? WTF?
They’ve bought into the hype. Alsobrook isn’t a surprise, since I think she was a cosponsor.
REALLY… fuckin’ WARNOCK! God damn it. Not Ossoff, though? Maybe people complained about it?
I’m not sure how I feel about that. I’ll admit, Hogg did not make the best impression. He clearly hadn’t thought through the ideas he was trying to convey, and when he brought up “young men getting laid,” well, all I could do was shake my head. He may have potential in the future but I’m not sure he’s ready for the role right now.
I don’t think he’s entirely wrong about wanting more primary options. Incumbents shouldn’t be a lock-in for their seats unless their constituents want it that way, because they’re pleased with their rep’s efforts. Having more opttions in a primary helps voters have more input into what they want from the party, so I’m generally in favor of it.
I’m still on the fence about age and/or term limits, because there’s a lot to consider on both sides and I haven’t made up my mind yet. Frankly, I’m more concerned with lobbying and mega-donations from special interest groups, because that seems to have a lot more effect on congresscritters’ actions than it ought to.
Term limits will make that problem worse, because the elected Representatives will become revolving doors, and the only experience and expertise in Congress will be in the lobbyists.
AlsobrooksCryptobrooks
FTFY, as per the new style guide.
That hearing is already concluded, apparently… Some clips…
The guy questioning him is fucking unhinged…
I just unmuted this thread to post the list. Ossoff, too, unfortunately. Schiff was no surprise but Padilla is on there, too. It’s a kinda bizarre list, really.
OK, back on mute.
