The GOP: Not What It Used to Be

[clueliss]

Um - okay then Virginia GOP

Kansas Girl who may have voted for Dole at least once.  Dole and Nancy Landon Kassabaum - back when folks actually worked across the aisle once in a while. 

[GreyhoundFan]

8 minutes ago, clueliss said:

Um - okay then Virginia GOP

Kansas Girl who may have voted for Dole at least once.  Dole and Nancy Landon Kassabaum - back when folks actually worked across the aisle once in a while. 

They're trying to avoid nominating Amanda Chase, self-proclaimed "Trump in heels". A primary would let her get the nomination with about 30% of the votes, unlike a convention, which would require 51%. She and her buddies have blocked the idea of a convention. The Virginia GOP is a mess.

BTW, Chase refuses to wear a mask in the state senate chambers, so she has to sit in a small plexiglass cubicle. She calls it her box of freedom. Yes, my eyes keep rolling.

 

[GreyhoundFan]

"Awkward scene highlights GOP choice on Trump"

Quote

When members of a party’s congressional leadership hold news conferences, there is a premium on working from the same playbook. That is decidedly not what happened Wednesday with House Republicans.

In a scene that quickly became awkward, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) was asked whether former president Donald Trump should speak this weekend at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). McCarthy didn’t miss a beat, responding, “Yes, he should.” But then the question was posed to the No. 3-ranking Republican, Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.), who had been one of 10 Republicans who voted to impeach Trump last month.

“That’s up to CPAC,” Cheney said, offering the kind of diplomatic response one would expect. But then she went on: “I’ve been clear on my views about President Trump and the extent to which, following Jan. 6, I don’t believe that he should be playing a role in the future of the party or the country.”

Cheney’s answer was the latest evidence that she’s not content to let her vote to impeach lie and move on. She has decided to press on with distancing herself and attempting to distance her party from Trump, despite a failed attempt to remove her from her leadership role. It was a significant break from McCarthy’s response, and one she didn’t have to emphasize.

And in a lot of ways, the split it demonstrated inside House GOP leadership epitomizes the party’s dilemma and the trio of choices that lie in front of it — as exemplified by its top three leaders.

Cheney is the one proposing the big break with Trump. Among the historic-but-still-relatively small number of Republicans to truly try to leave him behind, arguably nobody has risked so much. She comes from the most pro-Trump state in the 2020 election (Wyoming voted for Trump 70 percent to 27 percent) and one of the most pro-Trump congressional districts as well. She also could have bided her time as she sought to climb the ranks and waited for it all to pass one day, but she has chosen a far different course and clearly isn’t backing down.

McCarthy presents a more middle-ground approach (to the extent that exists in the modern GOP). While saying Trump should speak this weekend, he often faded into the background during Trump’s challenge to the 2020 election results, and he has rather clearly just been trying to hold on to control of his party.

The minority leader is hardly known as a conservative ideologue, and he even said Trump bore “responsibility” shortly after the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. But he hasn’t gone nearly so far in condemning Trump as Cheney or even his Senate counterpart, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). He also joined his vote against Trump’s impeachment with a vote to support Trump’s far-flung challenge to Congress accepting the election results (albeit while claiming his name was initially, inexplicably, left off the list of more than 100 House Republicans).

The final member of the triumvirate is the No. 2 GOP House leader, Minority Whip Steve Scalise (La.). This weekend, Scalise appeared on the Sunday shows and made big news by straining to avoid saying President Biden actually won the election, fair and square. He said Biden’s win was legitimate because that’s what the electoral college decided, but he also pointed to alleged problems with how states conducted their elections — allegations which courts have repeatedly rejected to hear. He also avoided saying Trump bore any blame for the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, as McCarthy has.

Scalise’s demonstration served to lend legitimacy to Republican efforts in states across the country to curtail voting rights, despite the lack of actual evidence of massive fraud, as The Post’s Philip Bump noted.

But others saw another potential motivation for Scalise: Staking out the most pro-Trump position among members of House GOP leadership. A huge majority of the House GOP and other GOP officials including attorneys general, after all, supported the efforts to overturn or at least question the election results. To the extent the party stays with Trump, Scalise seems to be aligning more with that effort than McCarthy.

“This has a lot more to do [with] House GOP caucus dynamics than meets the (tv) eye,” said the New York Times’s Jonathan Martin.

Martin has a very good point. And it’s worth emphasizing that, the last time Republicans were electing a new speaker, in 2015, McCarthy — who would be the obvious choice the next time around — was forced to withdraw. He didn’t appear to have the votes, in large part thanks to the tea party-aligned House Freedom Caucus. Eventually, Paul Ryan was chosen by a riven GOP caucus.

Midterm elections are generally kind to the party opposite the president, and the House is very closely divided — as close as it has been in two decades — with just five seats needed to flip the GOP to a majority in the 2022 election. The party also stands to benefit from its superior control of the redistricting process. In other words, we could soon confront a situation in which Republicans need to again select a House speaker.

To the extent Scalise has eyes on leapfrogging to that post — and he has in the past been deferential to McCarthy — he would be banking on the distinct possibility that McCarthy might again be viewed as too squishy by the party’s conservative flank. Whether that matters in two years, it’s obvious that, at least right now, the House GOP caucus is erring much more in Trump’s direction than against him.

Cheney, meanwhile, has charted a much different course than either of them and has stuck by it. It’s difficult to see that paying dividends in the near term, and it would be pretty shocking if that’s her calculus, but who knows about the long term?

And regardless of all those potential political calculations, for the speakership or otherwise, their leaders are not exactly presenting a distinct path forward for the party. Instead, they’re providing a bunch of very distinct choices.

 

[GreyhoundFan]

"The GOP’s increasingly novel relationship with the Constitution"

Quote

If there’s one party in American politics that makes a point to advertise its fealty to the Constitution and the rule of law, it’s the Republican Party. It has long called itself the “party of the Constitution,” and GOP lawmakers run as “constitutional conservatives.” Some make a point to carry around pocket Constitutions. Both of Donald Trump’s presidential campaigns focused heavily on law and order.

In recent months, though, the party’s devotion to these things has taken on an increasingly, well, novel feel. The most significant examples were the many far-flung attempts to overturn Trump’s 2020 election loss, which were nearly universally rejected by the courts — and which often notably ran afoul of the party’s traditional federalist, states’-rights bent. But even surrounding that effort and the 2020 election, several Republicans have advanced some interesting ideas about the Constitution.

Over the weekend came a few notable ones.

One came from Rep. Lauren Boebert (Colo.), a GOP freshman who declared that, “Protecting and defending the Constitution doesn’t mean trying to rewrite the parts you don’t like.”

As many noted when Blackburn tweeted what she did, the Constitution has been amended 27 times. She has personally sponsored a number of potential amendments to it. Boebert, too, has based basically her entire political brand around one of those amendments — the Second — which wasn’t included in the original Constitution.

If we’re being charitable, perhaps they meant “rewrite” to mean make wholesale changes — i.e., not just adding individual rights. But a number of amendments beyond the Bill of Rights have made actual changes to what’s contained in the Constitution, through a process literally prescribed in the Constitution. One of them switched the responsibility for electing senators from state legislatures to the people — in other words, a change that allowed Blackburn to be elected as she was.

Also this weekend, Rep. Madison Cawthorn (R-N.C.) proposed his own change, an amendment that would underline and bold the Second Amendment. “I suspect this will help Democrats who, bless their hearts, seem to skip over it currently,” he said.

This is an obvious effort at trolling from a new lawmaker who has signaled his intention to provoke and build a national brand, but it’s still a rather interesting take on how our nation’s founding document should be treated.

Cawthorn, you might recall, botched a bit of constitutional history at last year’s Republican National Convention. The 25-year-old then-congressional candidate referred in a speech to James Madison — “my personal favorite,” in Cawthorn’s words — as signing the Declaration of Independence at a young age. Madison actually signed the Constitution.

Cawthorn’s opinions on the law in recent days have also extended to the Vatican, which announced it would require vaccinations for its employees unless they have a valid personal excuse. “This doesn’t sound legal,” he said. “… One shouldn’t be forced against their will to be vaccinated.” While it doesn’t appear American employers can require vaccinations that are approved only for emergency use — as the current ones are — the Vatican is an independent state governed by an absolute monarchy, meaning it has broad authority to do what it wants (though the Vatican did walk back its policy somewhat).

Another new lawmaker, Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), has also run into some questionable constitutional territory. Most recently, he was lambasted last month — somewhat unfairly — for suggesting delaying the inauguration of Joe Biden in light of security concerns and the coronavirus outbreak. The Constitution requires a transfer of power on Jan. 20, but Tuberville’s office said he meant that Biden would still be sworn in on that day and just that the festivities, which aren’t addressed in the Constitution, would be delayed. (Tuberville was also initially misquoted.)

Before that, though, Sen.-elect Tuberville in November described the three branches of government as, “you know, the House, the Senate, and the executive.” The three branches are actually the executive, legislative (encompassing the House and Senate) and judicial branches.

The flub called to mind some of Trump’s own comments on the contents of the Constitution, including saying in 2016 that he was in favor of Article XII, despite there only being seven articles. He also suggested the impeachment of Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), even though the Constitution doesn’t provide for impeachment of senators, and suggested his own removal under the 25th Amendment would be unconstitutional, despite the process of that being laid out clearly.

In a book released last year, The Washington Post’s Philip Rucker and Carol D. Leonnig also reported that Trump struggled to read the Constitution for an HBO documentary, declaring it to be like a “foreign language.”

The GOP’s biggest clash with the Constitution in recent months, though, came during Trump’s election challenge. Lawmakers didn’t all endorse Trump’s baseless claims about the election being stolen, but many of them endorsed the idea that states could send electors that weren’t actually chosen by voters. Some decided Congress could tell states how to run their elections, despite that authority being delegated to the states. Others endorsed the idea that one state could sue over another state’s election results, which the courts rejected. And lawmakers even tried to object to laws that were previously upheld in state courts by arguing they violated state constitutions, including in Pennsylvania.

By the end, the argument centered less around alleged fraud than the idea that elections officials had circumvented not just their own constitutions but also the U.S. Constitution — by expanding mail-in balloting rules during the coronavirus pandemic without the approval of state legislatures.

“The Constitution requires that states carry out elections according to the rules established by state legislatures,” said Rep. Steve Scalise (La.), the No. 2 House Republican.

The elections clause of the Constitution does delegate this authority to the “Legislature” of each state, saying, “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof.” But the Supreme Court, including as recently as 2015, has understood the word “Legislature” to broadly refer to any valid lawmaking process in the state — including ballot initiatives and, in some states, high-ranking officials such as secretaries of state who are given the authority by their states — not just a specific body of lawmakers. (The 2015 case, for instance, involved whether voters in Arizona could change their redistricting process via ballot initiative.)

Conservative justices have dissented on this point, including in the 2015 case, but this is the precedent of the court. “The Supreme Court has construed the term ‘Legislature’ extremely broadly to include any entity or procedure that a state’s constitution permits to exercise lawmaking power,” according to the National Constitution Center.

The most pronounced example in recent months came at the end of the election-challenge process, when Trump and some Republicans encouraged Vice President Mike Pence to unilaterally try to prevent Congress from accepting the electors of many states. The overwhelming view of legal experts and eventually the judgment of Pence, though, was that the Constitution and the law gave him no such authority.

This was more a Trump initiative than one spearheaded by members of his party. Some of them, when all was said and done and the Capitol had been stormed, criticized the gambit as epitomizing the false hope Trump’s supporters had been spoon-fed about the election challenge.

But that pushback was mostly absent when the last-minute gambit was launched — and when true fealty to the Constitution might have averted disaster.

 

[GreyhoundFan]

"At conservative gathering, ideas fall to an airing of Trump grievances"

Quote

One panel will discuss whether tech companies are “colluding to deprive us of our humanity.” One speech will explore what to do when a social media network “de-platforms” a conservative by deleting his account. And seven main-stage panels or speeches will litigate the 2020 election, with panelists who mostly — and incorrectly — argue that Donald Trump won.

The Conservative Political Action Conference, which begins this week, has evolved from a fractious meeting of Republicans and libertarians into a celebration of the 45th president and the airing of his grievances.

Trump will close out the event with his first speech since leaving the White House, minutes after a 2024 presidential straw poll that he’s expected to win. The arguments among some elected Republicans about whether they should retool their agenda to prevent future losses, or revisit their alliance with Trump, will have to happen somewhere else.

“The idea that we’re going to come up with some kind of conservative platform at CPAC, it rings a little hollow,” said Matt Schlapp, the chairman of the American Conservative Union, which organizes the conference. “Right now, half the country” feels cheated “by the media coverage of the election. So we’re going to go back and cover the facts that most people in the media canceled.”

The facts haven’t been kind to that argument. Dozens of lawsuits and Trump’s Justice Department found no evidence of fraud last year that would have altered the election results.

But polling since Nov. 3 has found strong majorities of Republican voters agreeing with Trump and supporting his false take on the election. That has left CPAC in the same place as the larger Republican Party as they head toward the 2022 midterm election: wedded to Trump even as he alienates millions of potential voters.

The conference, founded in 1973, is usually held near Washington, with a crowd that can grow to 10,000 people. It moved this year to Orlando, where local covid-19 restrictions allow an indoor gathering if attendees are socially distanced and masked, and complete a quick health survey.

That will cut the full crowd at festivities that begin Thursday down to perhaps 3,500 — still one of the largest conferences in the country since the start of the coronavirus pandemic, with all but the priciest tickets sold out for weeks. Scaling a four-day convention down to a virtual Zoom-fest was never considered, and it might have clashed with the theme — “America Uncanceled,” a reference to the Republican idea that “cancel culture” is punishing conservatives for their beliefs.

Some prominent Republicans, whose criticism of the election myths have angered party activists, won’t be in attendance. Former vice president Mike Pence, a regular guest who against Trump’s wishes refused to declare the electoral college vote invalid, will not attend, and has kept a low profile since attending the inauguration of President Biden.

Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah, a one-time winner of CPAC’s presidential straw poll, has been disinvited since becoming the first senator to vote for convicting an impeached president of his own party. (He also voted to convict earlier this month after Trump’s second impeachment.) Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.), who hasn’t attended since 2014 and who excoriated Trump after voting to acquit him earlier this month, wasn’t invited, with a CPAC director telling McClatchy that he could return in 2022 “to address the improvements to election laws” Republicans are pushing through state legislatures.

Of the 47 Republican members of Congress scheduled to speak at CPAC, just nine voted to uphold every state’s election results on Jan. 6. None voted for impeachment.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who led a Trump-backed lawsuit to undo Biden’s win in Pennsylvania, will speak about “the devaluing of American citizenship” alongside Rep. Paul A. Gosar of Arizona, an early organizer of “Stop the Steal” rallies. Former secretary of state Mike Pompeo, who had resisted the transition to the Biden administration, will speak about the Bill of Rights.

There’s more on the schedule than just 2020 recriminations or election law briefings. House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (La.), who voted to challenge election results on Jan. 6, will lead a panel on “the angry mob and violence in our streets”; three panels will focus on “big tech” and related “monopoly” issues; and one will discuss “protecting women’s sports” from transgender athletes.

A series of panels, including one with former Trump trade representative Robert E. Lighthizer, will focus on the economic tussle with China. Conservative activists whose social media access has been limited, including podcaster Dan Bongino, will explore the weekend’s “cancel culture” theme.

But there will be less debate about what conservatives stand for than at many prior conferences, and far less than the last CPAC that unfolded after Republicans lost the White House and Congress. In 2009, after the GOP’s last federal wipeout, rising stars like then-Rep. Paul Ryan (Wis.) said that the party had lost its way under George W. Bush, and a new generation of true conservatives was ready to lead.

“What the public rejected in 2008,” then-ACU Chairman David Keene said onstage, “was incompetence.”

In 2021, Schlapp said, some of what conservatives used to fight over had been settled by Trump. Some immigration restriction measures, which were “considered racist when they were brought up,” he said, proved potent to “a lot of union Democrats, a lot of diverse people.” Trump had won new voters for the party without the predicted costs among Latino voters, just like he had delivered on deals with Israel despite warnings that he would destabilize the Middle East, Schlapp said.

“Even though Donald Trump is a one-term president,” he said, “there’s this feeling among Republicans that he was a huge, smashing success.”

Still, for reasons including in-party squabbling and the covid-era Orlando move, the conference will be smaller this year. The National Rifle Association, which had been a six-figure co-sponsor in the past, is not a sponsor this year; the organization did not respond to a question asking why. There will be fewer exhibitors, and some Republican organizations like WinRed, the party’s donation portal, are skipping the 2021 event after sponsoring in 2020.

Schlapp’s predecessor at the ACU, Al Cardenas, had criticized Trump’s immigration policies; he was no longer attending the conference, he said, and focused on his work with the bipartisan group No Labels.

Despite the anti-cancellation theme, CPAC organizers have also kept some people off the stage. Previous CPACs barred or disinvited speakers who had advocated white supremacy. This week, after the liberal watchdog group Media Matters published antisemitic tweets by a Black commentator named Young Pharoah, CPAC disinvited him from a panel of Black conservatives. Schlapp said that action did not amount to canceling Pharoah.

“Cancel culture is a desire to push somebody out of polite society, destroy their ability to make a living, and take away their voice,” Schlapp said, saying that Pharoah’s views were “abhorrent” and worth keeping offstage.

“If that person wants to air those views,” he added. “I don’t think they should be illegal. Just do it on someone else’s dime.”

Some Republicans who had been comfortable at CPAC in the past are staying away from anything associated with Trump.

On Wednesday, reporters asked House GOP leaders if Trump should be speaking at the conference at all. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (Calif.), who’ll speak on Saturday, said that he should. House GOP Conference Chair Liz Cheney (Wyo.), who will not attend, said that he shouldn’t.

“I don’t believe that he should be playing a role in the future of the party or the country,” Cheney said.

“On that high note, thank you very much,” McCarthy said. He walked to one exit, Cheney to another.

 

[clueliss]

Liberty University surprised by GOP

 

[fraurosena]

In case you’re wondering what that odd ringing sound that you’re hearing is, it’s the death knell of the Republican Party. McConnell has lost his grip on the former GOZ and has now publicly and completely gone over to the Trumplican side.

 

[Cartmann99]

 

[AmazonGrace]

this may be off topic for this thread because the GOP being hypocrites is nothing new.

 

[fraurosena]

8 hours ago, Cartmann99 said:

 

Hmm, what was that thing about a golden calf again... ?

/s

[clueliss]

McConnell's giving everyone whiplash.  I wonder what OFM reminded The Turtle he had on him?

[Cartmann99]

 

[ADoyle90815]

I guess they ignore that story about the golden calf just as they tend to ignore the parts of the Bible  where Christ said to love one another.

Edited February 26, 2021 by ADoyle90815

[Cartmann99]

 

[clueliss]

Everyone's all "Golden Calf" with that statue.  And I'm over here going - oh forget that.  We're in Daniel with the giant statue and people worshiping the sucker while Daniel & Company refuse.  Which I *think* is why they got tossed into the fiery furnace. 

[47of74]

Of course.  Fits the mold of young GOP men being total creeps.

Quote

Madison Cawthorn arrived at Patrick Henry College’s small Christian campus in northern Virginia in fall 2016 blazing with charm, bravado, and a flashing white smile. His former classmates said the future member of Congress would whip his white Dodge Challenger into the parking lot and regale his classmates with the story of how he survived a harrowing car crash as a teen, which left him paralyzed from the waist down and in a wheelchair for life. After his intensive recovery, he was older than most students — 21 — and didn’t fit the mold of the Christian and largely sheltered first-year students who chose the conservative school in Purcellville because of its commitment to God and rigorous academics. And, former Patrick Henry students said, it didn’t take long for women on campus to start warning one another: You don’t want to be alone with him, especially in his car.

BuzzFeed News spoke with more than three dozen people, including more than two dozen former students, their friends, and their relatives, who described or corroborated instances of sexual harassment and misconduct on campus, in Cawthorn’s car, and at his house near campus. Four women told BuzzFeed News that Cawthorn, now a rising Republican star, was aggressive, misogynistic, or predatory toward them. Their allegations include calling them derogatory names in public in front of their peers, including calling one woman “slutty,” asking them inappropriate questions about their sex lives, grabbing their thighs, forcing them to sit in his lap, and kissing and touching them without their consent. One of these women now works as an intern for another Republican member of Congress and passes Cawthorn in the corridors of the Capitol. According to more than a dozen people — including three women who had firsthand experience and seven people who heard about these incidents from them at the time — Cawthorn often used his car as a way to entrap and harass his women classmates, taking them on what he could call “fun drives'' off campus. Two said he would drive recklessly and ask them about their virginity and sexual experiences while they were locked in the moving vehicle.

“I just felt so uncomfortable and nervous and not even something I think at the time I could put a finger on, but just, like, danger warning.”

Today, Cawthorn is a 25-year-old first-year member of Congress, the youngest ever elected, from Hendersonville, North Carolina. In the 2020 primary, he pulled off a surprising upset over Republican Lynda Bennett, former president Donald Trump’s preferred candidate, by leaning into Trump’s own strategy: bombastic attacks against the left and open support for conspiracy theories.

 

[apple1]

17 hours ago, clueliss said:

Everyone's all "Golden Calf" with that statue.  And I'm over here going - oh forget that.  We're in Daniel with the giant statue and people worshiping the sucker while Daniel & Company refuse.  Which I *think* is why they got tossed into the fiery furnace. 

Well, you have somewhat of a point. But the giant statue in Daniel was planned and erected by the captor (Nebuchadnezzar).

The golden calf in Exodus was made by the Israelites themselves. It's an apt comparison.

[Cartmann99]

[Howl]

I'll see your golden Trump calf and raise you an Odal rune: 

This is truly horrifying: the floor plan of the CPAC stage is  the Odal rune, used by the SS, and adopted by neo-Nazis in place of a swastika.  (Note this correction: the subsequent tweet clarifies that the CPAC stage is in the Odal rune shape, NOT the AFPAC stage.)

 

Edited February 27, 2021 by Howl

[Black Aliss]

On 2/26/2021 at 5:21 AM, fraurosena said:

Hmm, what was that thing about a golden calf again... ?

/s

Oh, you misunderstand. The sculptor is a former youth minister and he says he knows the meaning of an idol and this is not an idol. Sorry, dude, you made a statue. Other people may choose to make an idol of it, and you have no control over that. (See Also: Teri Maxwell and Pepsi)

Quote

He’s working on a third Trump statue — one he says “is gonna really piss off the liberals” — which will be crafted from bronze plated with 24-karat gold. He plans on selling that statue at Sotheby’s or Christie’s, for “probably about $10 million.”

I love that he thinks Sotheby's or Christie's will want to represent him in selling his gold-plated bronze version. And that any liberal would GAF, let alone be pissed off.

https://www.mediaite.com/trump/artist-says-gold-trump-statue-was-assembled-in-mexico-hits-back-at-golden-calf-critics

Edited February 27, 2021 by Black Aliss

[Topaz]

10 hours ago, apple1 said:

Well, you have somewhat of a point. But the giant statue in Daniel was planned and erected by the captor (Nebuchadnezzar).

The golden calf in Exodus was made by the Israelites themselves. It's an apt comparison.

If the repugs are modelling themselves on the Israelites in Exodus then I say keep going. There’s 40 years in the wilderness coming up.

[Ozlsn]

9 hours ago, Cartmann99 said:

"I denounce when we talk about white racism - People criticise me and notice that I am promoting it, and then I feel sad."

6 hours ago, Black Aliss said:

Oh, you misunderstand. The sculptor is a former youth minister and he says he knows the meaning of an idol and this is not an idol. Sorry, dude, you made a statue. Other people may choose to make an idol of it, and you have no control over that. (See Also: Teri Maxwell and Pepsi)

I love that he thinks Sotheby's or Christie's will want to represent him in selling his gold-plated bronze version. And that any liberal would GAF, let alone be pissed off.

https://www.mediaite.com/trump/artist-says-gold-trump-statue-was-assembled-in-mexico-hits-back-at-golden-calf-critics

I'm amused that he thinks liberals are getting upset about it when the reactions I've seen are mostly laughing at it. I mean the "golden cow" imagery is appropriate in more than one way -  the statue definitely gives Trump a bovine look.

Edited February 28, 2021 by Ozlsn

[Black Aliss]

Never mind. I'm late to the party as usual No sense in beating that poor horse (the statue of Nebuchadnezzar)

Edited February 28, 2021 by Black Aliss

[fraurosena]

More evidence that the GOP is broken.

 

[CTRLZero]

I wonder if the phrase “voting machines” in this context makes the GQP lawyers quickly speak up because the voting machine companies have filed such huge lawsuits against some of their favorite members (I.e., Giulihairdye, Krakenmonster, and Pillowguy).

It will be interesting to follow the lawsuits, as well as the horrible voter suppression tactics that are going on in the states.