Quo Vadis GOP?

[jimmy olsen]

Woah
https://www.northjersey.com/story/news/politics/2021/01/12/mikie-sherrill-pro-trump-rioters-got-tour-congress-members/6648386002/

"We can't have a democracy if members of Congress are actively helping the president overturn the elections results. And so not only do I intend to see that the president is removed and never runs for office again and doesn't have access to classified material, I also intend to see that those members of Congress who abetted him, those members of Congress who had groups coming through the Capitol that I saw on Jan. 5 – a reconnaissance for the next day," Sherrill said, speaking sedately, but severely. "those members of Congress that incited this violent crowd, those members of Congress that attempted to help our president undermine our democracy, I'm going to see they are held accountable, and if necessary, ensure that they don't serve in Congress."

[Eddie Teach]

I doubt those congressmen were stupid enough to let on if they knew those tour groups were conducting "reconnaissance".

[Jacob]

FBI and US Attorney Office press conference on how they're proceeding: https://youtu.be/_JEa9peKkSs

170 cases opened, 70 of those people have already been arrested.

"I think people are going to be shocked by some of the egregious conduct that took place."
"Some rioters specifically targetted members of the media and assaulted them."

Sounds like there's a whole lot of FBI agents working to get the seditionists and they're taking it fairly seriously.

[jimmy olsen]

I doubt those congressmen were stupid enough to let on if they knew those tour groups were conducting "reconnaissance".

Definitely some dumb enough for this among the Qanon crazies and Louie Gohmert of the world.

Inside job
https://twitter.com/EoinHiggins_/status/1349232278636011520

According to Ayanna Pressley's chief of staff Sarah Groh, the panic buttons in the Congresswoman's office were all "torn out—the whole unit."

[Oexmelin]

I doubt those congressmen were stupid enough to let on if they knew those tour groups were conducting "reconnaissance".

Have you listened to some of your congressmen?

[Sheilbh]

Maybe. I think it makes it easier for them to try Trumpism without Trump. They don't have to address the underlying issues, or the questioning of democracy because they can just point at mobs and say "well obviously we condemn violence but..."

As long as Trump is still fueling the riots, it'll put heat on those unwilling to go against him. Much better for them if this tapers off on its own.

I think McConnell's comments are a sign that this will be easier - he's always had the votes to impeach Trump (because lord knows Trump has provided plenty of plausible grounds for impeachment). After four years when there's nothing to lose - it won't cost you any judges etc - to cut yourself off from Trump. It's a really easy way to show that the GOP is different from Trump and set up a clean hands narrative. This makes Trumpism without Trump a lot easier and means it's far less likely Trump (although maybe not his family) will be a major influence in the future.

[Razgovory]

Well, now we know why she is so keen to carry a gun.

[crazy canuck]

Krugman's conclusion on this question

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/11/opinion/republicans-democracy.html?action=click&algo=bandit-all-surfaces&block=more_in_recirc&fellback=false&imp_id=551861081&impression_id=cdb67382-569e-11eb-be96-d59d83213c8e&index=3&pgtype=Article&region=footer&req_id=710542827&surface=more-in-opinion&variant=1_bandit-all-surfaces

The G.O.P. has reached the culmination of its long journey away from democracy, and it's hard to see how it can ever be redeemed.

[Malthus]

Krugman's notion - with with I agree - is based in part on the idea that more pragmatic Republicans coddled the crazies in the hope of gaining votes and thus power, only to find out that he crazies were driving the bus.

The natural conclusion, though, is that if the crazies no longer attract votes - if being associated with them actually loses votes - maybe the more pragmatic Republicans will cease coddling them.

It is still too early to know whether there is a line of violent insurrection beyond which the crazies start to lose more votes than they represent.  The fact that at least some Republicans were willing to vote for impeachment indicates that there may be.

If future violent incidents occur, as seems likely, my guess is that we will see a real split in the Republican Party.

[Sheilbh]

Krugman's notion - with with I agree - is based in part on the idea that more pragmatic Republicans coddled the crazies in the hope of gaining votes and thus power, only to find out that he crazies were driving the bus.

But. Were they?

What did Trump and the crazies achieve? Judges and tax cuts - the same agenda that the pragmatic Republicans would have pushed if we had President Romney, Cruz, Rubio or whoever else. Trump ran on isolationism, pulling out of foreign quagmires (and international organisations), protecting social security/Medicare, nativism and infrastructure spending.

Just like after the Tea Party - the pragmatic Republicans harnessed the crazies to deliver a standard small government and tax cuts agenda that's not been able to win an election for nigh on 40 years. I don't think that the pragmatic Republicans will stop coddling the crazies, I think at some point the crazies will reach the point when they're asking "ever get the feeling you've been cheated?"

I think that is the real threat/will be explosive for the GOP.

[Valmy]

Yeah the Republican establishment loved Trump, he was pretty easy to manipulate...at least until recently.

At least that was what Justin Amash said in his interview on the Yang Speaks podcast.

[The Brain]

What did Trump and the crazies achieve?

Much weaker democracy in America. To get their beloved "Camp Auschwitz" going democracy has to go.

[Solmyr]

I think at some point the crazies will reach the point when they're asking "ever get the feeling you've been cheated?"

I think that is the real threat/will be explosive for the GOP.

They are at that point already. Any Republican (up to and including Mike Pence) who has agreed to recognize the results of the election as legitimate is seen as a traitor.

[crazy canuck]

Krugman's notion - with with I agree - is based in part on the idea that more pragmatic Republicans coddled the crazies in the hope of gaining votes and thus power, only to find out that he crazies were driving the bus.

The natural conclusion, though, is that if the crazies no longer attract votes - if being associated with them actually loses votes - maybe the more pragmatic Republicans will cease coddling them.

It is still too early to know whether there is a line of violent insurrection beyond which the crazies start to lose more votes than they represent.  The fact that at least some Republicans were willing to vote for impeachment indicates that there may be.

If future violent incidents occur, as seems likely, my guess is that we will see a real split in the Republican Party.

Krugman is saying more than that.  He is saying it has already happened as a result of steps the GOP has taken since the 70s.  In his words the crazies, in which he includes the Christian Fundies and Tea Party nut jobs, are already in control.

I think at some point the crazies will reach the point when they're asking "ever get the feeling you've been cheated?"

I think that is the real threat/will be explosive for the GOP.

They are at that point already. Any Republican (up to and including Mike Pence) who has agreed to recognize the results of the election as legitimate is seen as a traitor.

Yep, that was Krugman's argument.

[alfred russel]

Krugman's notion - with with I agree - is based in part on the idea that more pragmatic Republicans coddled the crazies in the hope of gaining votes and thus power, only to find out that he crazies were driving the bus.

The natural conclusion, though, is that if the crazies no longer attract votes - if being associated with them actually loses votes - maybe the more pragmatic Republicans will cease coddling them.

It is still too early to know whether there is a line of violent insurrection beyond which the crazies start to lose more votes than they represent.  The fact that at least some Republicans were willing to vote for impeachment indicates that there may be.

If future violent incidents occur, as seems likely, my guess is that we will see a real split in the Republican Party.

"The people" seemed to like Trumpism. An election was just held at the conclusion of likely the worst year most voters can remember, with the unemployment high and the economy low. Trump increased his vote count from the first election and lost the tipping point state by 0.7%. Republicans did well in other elections.

It isn't hard to envision a fissure in the Republican party along the lines of what you mention.

But I think the Democrats are about to be divided as well. You have a very strong left wing with AOC, Bernie Sanders, etc. You have a lot of moderate democats, especially in the Senate. You have a party that sees it controls the house, senate, and presidency and expects action on things like a Green New Deal and social justice reform. I don't think any really major legislation is going to come out of congress - the democrats are only going to have 222 or so out of 435 seats in the House and the Senate is a 50-50 split. They will need virtual unanimity to do anything, which is going to be really difficult to achieve.