this post was submitted on 20 Dec 2024
258 points (97.8% liked)

politics

19243 readers
2484 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
outrageousmatter@lemmy.world
aidan@lemmy.world
jordanlund@lemmy.world
HLMenckenFan@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
258
38 House Republicans give Trump the finger in shutdown vote (www.thedailybeast.com)
submitted 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
42 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Summary

A potential U.S. government shutdown looms after 38 House Republicans joined Democrats in rejecting a Trump-backed spending bill, which included a debt ceiling increase.

Trump derailed Speaker Mike Johnson’s initial bipartisan plan, causing GOP infighting and weakening Johnson’s leadership.

MAGA allies Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy rallied for a shutdown, angering GOP moderates.

The failure could furlough federal workers and disrupt holiday travel.

Frustration grows within the GOP over chaotic negotiations, foreshadowing future challenges under Trump’s second-term agenda.

top 42 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 64 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

A real mess. Happy Shutdown Day.

Washington Post: “One major reason 38 Republicans opposed the bill is because of the last-minute insertion to lift the debt limit. It’s a congressional requirement that is usually necessary every couple of years, but one that no Republican likes to do and many refuse to vote for.”

“Trump had been asking Johnson to lift the debt ceiling before he takes office, two House GOP sources familiar with the request said. But one of the sources said Johnson had been reluctant because he said he doesn’t have the votes.”

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 24 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

because of the last-minute insertion to lift the debt limit

Last minute? Wasn't that the whole intent?

*Now that I'm reading the article:

Trump threw Johnson a surprise curveball by demanding lawmakers increase the U.S. debt ceiling—an issue that previously had nothing to do with negotiations to avoid a government shutdown.

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 15 points 6 days ago (1 children)

The original intent was to fund the government. The debt ceiling is a much different thing.

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I thought it was funding the government by increasing the debt ceiling.

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago

The debt ceiling does not need to be increased to fund the government at this time. This was a Trump demand to suspend the debt limit 2 years.

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 8 points 6 days ago (2 children)

A limit increase is different from lifting the limit. The wording is admittedly quite similar, but lifting means removing completely. So this whole song and dance never happens again.

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Indeed; the debt limit forces Congress to show up for work and make decisions, including ones that aren’t politically expedient. If it is permanently lifted, the executive suddenly has an unlimited checking account, with limited accountability. Having that limit is what keeps congress in control of what gets done.

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 2 points 6 days ago

I don't think having that limit realistically affects much other than government employees having to work unpaid for a while, but it is an area I feel like a compelling case could be made either way.

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Wouldn't that be removing the limit? To me "lifting the limit" means increasing it.

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I'm only stating what the facts are. Often as it relates to law "lift" has an alternative meaning of to remove. Sometimes you see it with "lifting a ban" or "lifting restrictions".

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Now that I read the article:

Trump threw Johnson a surprise curveball by demanding lawmakers increase the U.S. debt ceiling—an issue that previously had nothing to do with negotiations to avoid a government shutdown.

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 1 points 6 days ago

Thanks for that. The site doesn't load for me with my current settings, so I figured it was more of this: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-calls-abolishing-debt-ceiling-rcna184820

[–] usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml 53 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Good reminder that there are fights to be had for his agenda and they are not forgone conclusions. They will have just a 3 seat majority in the house - and a 1 seat majority for a couple months with their planned vacancies. If they can lose 38 votes on their own funding bill, they can lose 3 on others

[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee 35 points 6 days ago (1 children)

They're just fighting over the bag, which happens within the GOP during the best of times. Just because they aren't uniform in certain policy doesn't mean they won't rally together to strip rights away from minorities, or enact more Christ based fascism.

[–] usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml 20 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

I mean Matt Gatez already dropped out because he couldn't get the senate votes. You won't win every fight but that doesn't mean you can't win some important ones

For instance, the ACA survived narrowly, but it survived after people fought its repeal in the first term. It died in the senate narrowly. They had a much larger house majority (+26 more seats) then and it still barely passed the house 217-215

You only need 3 "moderate" republicans to vote against it. Or 3 MAGA republicans to vote against it because of petty reasons (maybe they're mad at the bill's author). Or just a few absences - there's republicans with attendance issues

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 13 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I think part of the key here is encouraged infighting between Trump and his Cabinet (mainly Musk). They're all CEOs in one way or another and CEOs don't like being told what to do.

[–] usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml 15 points 6 days ago

The Democratic party actually seems to be getting that memo

The “President Musk” messaging is by design, at least partially. This week, according to a source with direct knowledge of the matter and another person briefed on it, at senior levels of different Democratic congressional offices, and also within the Democratic National Committee, discussions have been had about having party leaders and elected officials actively portray Musk as effectively Trump’s boss, and to do so during television appearances that the president-elect is likely to see. The idea is that it’s a cost-free opportunity to potentially drive a petty wedge between the notably mercurial and ego-obsessed Trump and his similarly emotive pal Musk, and to sow some chaos in the upper ranks of the Republican Party.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/president-musk-dems-troll-trump-elon-1235211922/

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 47 points 6 days ago (2 children)

People know that Trump isn't going to be there for them in the next election cycle.

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 22 points 6 days ago (1 children)

And I bet they're just waiting for the day he finally kicks the bucket. He did what they wanted him to do, namely deliver them a win. As there won't be another one, he's no longer useful.

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 8 points 6 days ago

Look at how MLK became a conservative icon after he died.

Ray Bradbury called out Obama for not funding more space flights; after Ray died he was suddenly a life long GOP

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago (1 children)

He also has little to no loyalty. He'd throw anyone under the bus to make a dollar.

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 7 points 6 days ago

Did you see the pictures of his first wife's grave?

He planted her on a golf course because you can't tax a cemetery

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ivana-trump-grave-weeds/

[–] anon6789@lemmy.world 20 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

• Aaron Bean (Fla.) • Andy Biggs (Ariz.) • Josh Brecheen (Okla.) • Tim Burchett (Tenn.) • Eric Burlison (Mo.) • Kat Cammack (Fla.) • Michael Cloud (Texas) • Andrew Clyde (Ga.) • Eli Crane (Ariz.) • John Curtis (Utah) • Jeff Duncan (S.C.) • Russ Fulcher (Idaho) • Bob Good (Va.) • Paul Gosar (Ariz.) • Andy Harris (Md.) • Wesley Hunt (Texas) • Doug Lamborn (Colo.) • Debbie Lesko (Ariz.) • Greg Lopez (Colo.) • Morgan Luttrell (Texas) • Nancy Mace (S.C.) • Thomas Massie (Ky.) • Richard McCormick (Ga.) • Cory Mills (Fla.) • Alexander Mooney (W. Va.) • Blake Moore (Utah) • Nathaniel Moran (Texas) • Ralph Norman (S.C.) • Andy Ogles (Tenn.) • Scott Perry (Pa.) • Bill Posey (Fla.) • Matt Rosendale (Mont.) • Chip Roy (Texas) • David Schweikert (Ariz.) • Keith Self (Texas) • Victoria Spartz (Ind.) • Thomas Tiffany (Wis.) • Beth Van Duyne (Texas)

[–] AraJuSanja@lemm.ee 16 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Can someone explain this to me I’m not a U.S. citizen… trump isn’t even the acting president yet so this makes no sense to me..

[–] Bronzebeard@lemm.ee 46 points 6 days ago (2 children)

He has no official power, but a lot of current Republican congressmen are spineless little shits who will do anything he tells them to do. And apparently Elon wants the government shut down so bullied trump into pushing for it

[–] AraJuSanja@lemm.ee 8 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Thanks for simplifying it and explaining it to me. How do you feel about Elon musk being involved in politics? It’s a little scary I think

[–] samus12345@lemm.ee 25 points 6 days ago

It's horrific and the logical conclusion of allowing billionaires to buy lawmakers. Now they're just being completely direct about it instead of hiding behind other lobbyists.

[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

It's honestly just business as usual in American politics, our leaders have been corporate puppets for decades. The only scary part is that they think their victory is so absolute that they can drop the mask.

[–] Scolding7300@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Why does Musk want to shut down the gov? Does he gain something from it?

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

The right wing essentially wants to destroy the government, because they think the free market solves everything.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

They don't think the free market solves everything. They think a weaker government is easier to control and that struggling government workers are easier to buy.

[–] Not_mikey@slrpnk.net 4 points 6 days ago

He may want to shut down some agencies that are currently investigating/ prosecuting him until trump actually gets in, like the national labor relations board and the epa.

[–] SkyNTP@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 days ago

The real people in power are those who tell the best stories.

This tale is as old a civilization: a sword is powerful, but more powerful yet is a pen to instruct a thousand swords.

Maybe we have forgotten that, in this analogy, the pen isn't literally a pen in an oval office, rather it is a tweet plugged straight into people's brains.

Too many of you incorrectly assume that the real power of persuasion can only come from inside the Whitehouse, or some other institution, just because historically that is where it came from.

[–] swordgeek@lemmy.ca 15 points 6 days ago (3 children)

As someone not in the US, I'm hoping someone can explain.

Trump isn't in office yet. How can he have any say in this, other than just blowing hot air?

[–] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 38 points 6 days ago (1 children)

99.99% of GOP members are spineless cowards that will do whatever their daddy tells them to.

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 24 points 6 days ago

Translation: They are scared of backlash from his supporters and donors. Figuratively speaking, our legislators are bought, not elected.

[–] tiefling@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 6 days ago

President Musk is threatening to use daddy's money to primary anyone who doesn't lick Trump's diaper ring

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

This is decided by the House of Representatives, which is currently controlled by the GOP. They can't get their act together to decide to do either what they were working on for months, or do what Trump says (he wants to add a debt level increase), or do what musk says (refuse to pass it).

[–] codexarcanum@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 6 days ago

They could make peace (aka Johnson could shut up and choke down some orange D) but I don't see Trump and our truculant Speaker really getting along well. Johnson is a principled corrupt shitbag, an actual Christian nationalist, while Trump just uses Xian nationalism as a prop.

[–] GluWu@lemm.ee 9 points 6 days ago (1 children)

People realize trump, elon, and the magat cult want the government shut down? This is exactly what they wanted. They want it shut down until trump is in. Go listen to what Victoria Spartz, one of the 38 repubs that voted no said on fox news. They want Johnson out as speaker and elon in. And every other Republican is blaming the dems for shutting the government down, not those 38. THE CULT GOT EXACTLY WHAT THEY WANTED.

[–] usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml 16 points 6 days ago

Trump publicly backed this new bill, and 38 of them voted publicly against it. It makes Trump look weak and Trump hates looking weak. He wouldn't have backed the bill if he thought it was going to get shot down like that

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

I don't necessarily like their reasoning, but I'll take their votes.