Tag: matt gaetz
Fear Of Election Doomsday Propels Republicans Into Stages Of Grief

Fear Of Election Doomsday Propels Republicans Into Stages Of Grief

Republicans had been keeping their midterm fears at bay over the summer, convincing themselves that after Labor Day—when voters really tune in—polls would narrow, avoiding a total disaster for their party.

But with less than six weeks until Election Day, that hope is gone.

Democrats’ lead on the generic ballot has surged over the last two weeks, as President Donald Trump’s approval rating plummets to -22 percent —the lowest for any president at this point in their tenure since political polling began.

So in a desperate attempt to reverse their fortunes, Republicans are practically pleading with voters—reaching the bargaining stage of grief before a single ballot has even been counted.

Multiple GOP lawmakers, who for months have been voting to allow Trump to continue his war in Iran, are now calling for an end to the conflict that has cost more than $43 billion in taxpayer dollars, spiked gas prices, and ultimately threatens to take down the global economy.

Others are saying that they want to return to Washington to try to mitigate the disaster of their own making, vowing to suspend the gas tax and ban diesel exports—even though oil and gas experts say that would cause exponentially more harm than good.

“The House should return to DC immediately to work to pause diesel exports, suspend the gas tax, fully unleash E15 and biodiesel, and work on a diesel relief program for truckers and farmers,” Iowa’s GOP Senate candidate Rep. Ashley Hinson wrote on X. “Americans need relief and I’ll work with anyone to deliver.”

Of course, Republicans will likely not be returning to Washington. But even if they do, they’ll be forced to vote on articles of impeachment against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth—which GOP leadership is trying to avoid at all costs.

But hey, they’re working hard for us!

Party ID chart from Gallup Source: Gallup Screenshot from Daily Kos

Non-elected Republicans, fearing a wipeout, are also bargaining with their own party to do something to avoid the impending disaster.

“Yesterday, Iowa House Republicans were informed by their own pollsters that if you are in a +15 district you’re within the margin for error, if you’re in a +10 district you’re underwater, and that this might end being an even worse midterm environment than 2006,” right-wing radio host Steve Deace wrote on X.

He added, “I slept on whether to share this publicly, because I don’t want to cause anyone to black pill. But this morning I ultimately decided the truth should be shared while there is still six weeks left to do something about it for the good of the country.”

Deace went on to plead with Trump and GOP strategists to fix the problem, saying that they need to better articulate the reasons and goals for Trump’s boondoggle of a war in Iran.

“We need the president out on the stump asap. We need better and way more aggressive messaging. Stop running fake and gay ads about how often so-and-so shows up for votes, and instead mercilessly hammer Democrats on the wickedness they’re voting for,” he wrote.

Deace concluded, “Articulate specifically what the mission/victory is in Iran/Hormuz, because out here in the cheap seats it feels like another Middle East War quagmire regular folks are paying for on both ends all over again.”

Ah, yes, it’s the “fake and gay ads” that are the problem here, and everything can be solved by putting the guy with a 34% approval rating on the campaign trail. Good plan, Steve! Please, Republicans, listen to that guy!

Meanwhile, at least one Republican told a disaffected GOP voter to just stick with the party—an interaction that did not go well, to say the least.

“Bro we need your vote,” former Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida wrote in response to Robbie Smither, a Florida Republican who wrote that he planned to vote Democratic this year for the first time in his life because of GOP sycophancy to Trump.

“I hate the war too. But the Democrats want to trans your kids,” Gaetz added.”

But it turns out that message didn’t sit well with Smither.

“With all due respect, stop pissing on people and telling them it’s raining,” he shot back. There is absolutely no logical evidence that [Democrats] want to ‘trans’ my two sons. None.”

Smither went on to say, “What we worry about is feeding him and his brother. Paying the mortgage and homeowners insurance on the house we’re raising them in.”

And therein lies the problem for Republicans, whose anti-trans messaging is falling flat because voters care more about the cost of living than the GOP’s dumb culture wars.

Ultimately, anything can happen in six weeks. But watching the GOP freak out is all you need to know about the state of play.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos

Mike Johnson

Johnson Barely Wins Speaker Election (And House Applauds Gaetz Absence)

Mike Johnson finally secured the speakership on the first ballot after three GOP lawmakers initially voted against his candidacy during a tumultuous start for the 119th Congress on Friday.

Johnson could afford to lose just one vote and win the gavel. But Reps. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, Ralph Norman of South Carolina, and Keith Self of Texas initially voted against Johnson, which would have blocked the Louisiana Republican from winning a majority of the ballots—and handed him an embarrassing defeat.

Initially, Massie voted for House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, Norman voted for Ohio GOP Rep. Jim Jordan, and Self voted for Florida GOP Rep. Byron Donalds. However, none of these Republicans were officially running for the position.

However, after some politicking on the House floor and negotiation by Johnson, Norman and Self changed their votes to support Johnson, giving him the speaker’s gavel.

The move was critical because Congress needs a House speaker by January 6 to certify Donald Trump’s presidential victory, which is expected to happen on Monday.

Johnson’s rocky vote is a bad sign for Republicans’ ability to govern since keeping a conference unified to pick a leader should be the easiest vote of a Congress. And the GOP has no room to spare to pass Trump’s destructive agenda, as Republicans have the narrowest majority in nearly 100 years.

The 220 seats Republicans won in November is set to shrivel to 217 in the coming weeks because Trump nominated two GOP House members—Elise Stefanik of New York and Mike Waltz of Florida—to his administration. Florida Republican Matt Gaetz also declined to take the seat he won in November after his nomination to serve as Trump's attorney general crashed and burned. (When it was announced on the House floor Friday morning that Gaetz would not be taking his seat, multiple members of the House clapped.)

With just 217 seats—at least until the spring when special elections can be held to fill the vacancies—the eventual GOP speaker won’t be able to afford losing a single vote if every lawmaker is present. That will give Johnson no room to spare when trying to pass Trump's agenda of tax cuts for the rich and border security.

Among the pieces of legislation Republicans are promising to pass include a bill to require doctors to provide care to infants that survive abortions and a bill to require proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections, among others.

Harder still, Republicans will have to put up legislation in the spring to fund the government as well as raise the debt ceiling so that the United States doesn't default and plunge the country—and likely, the world—into economic crisis.

Given that both of those tasks will require compromise with Democrats in the Senate—where the filibuster currently remains in place, requiring 60 votes for legislation to earn an up-or-down vote—Speaker Johnson could face another revolt from hard-liners in his conference.

Indeed, far-right Rep. Chip Roy of Texas signaled that Johnson’s future as House speaker may be anything but certain.

What Johnson does have going for him, however, is that Republicans are set to change the rules to make it harder to oust him from the speakership.

In the previous Congress, one lawmaker from either party could force a vote to oust a speaker. But the proposed rules for the new Congress, only GOP lawmakers can force a vote and only if they get eight other GOP lawmakers to co-sponsor their motion.

Democrats mocked Republicans for the chaos they created so quickly into the new session of Congress.

“Well folks… Johnson doesn’t have the votes… At least on this first round…” Rep. Jasmine Crockett of Texas wrote in a post on X. “THE PARTY of CHAOS is at it again! Welcome to the 119th Congress!”

Editor’s note: This story has been updated to reflect the changing nature of the House speakership vote.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Chip Roy

House Republicans Suddenly Want To Make Ousting Speaker More Difficult

House Republicans released a proposal Wednesday for the rules governing the lower chamber of Congress to make it more difficult to oust a speaker—an effort to protect Mike Johnson, or whoever ultimately wins the gavel.

In the current Congress, any House member from either party could introduce a motion to vacate the chair, which would require the House to vote on a new speaker.

Former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) made this rule in 2023 as a concession to House Republicans in exchange for their votes for speaker after an embarrassing 15 rounds of voting.

Former Rep. Matt Gaetz, Republican of Florida, used this rule to oust McCarthy in October 2023. And Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, Republican of Georgia, tried to use it again in May 2024 to push out Johnson, but Democrats voted to keep him to avoid throwing the House into chaos for the second time in less than a year.

But Republicans’ new proposed rule, which the House will vote on when the 119th Congress is sworn in on Friday, would only allow members of the majority party to introduce motions to vacate the chair.

As the proposal states, “A resolution causing a vacancy in the Office of Speaker shall not be privileged except if it is offered by a member of the majority party and has accumulated eight cosponsors from the majority party at the time it is offered.’’

If adopted, this rule could insulate Johnson from being ousted if his own members revolt against him. Though, of course, Johnson has to be elected speaker first, which is not a sure thing.

Johnson can afford to lose just one Republican vote with his narrow majority and still become speaker. Already, Rep. Thomas Massie, Republican of Kentucky, said he is not voting for Johnson, and Rep. Chip Roy, Republican of Texas, suggested that he isn’t either, putting Johnson’s speakership in potential danger.

It’s unclear whether anyone will challenge Johnson for the gavel, so the Massie-Roy effort would merely stop the House from having a speaker and paralyze the chamber until they relent. If no speaker is in place by Jan. 6, then Congress will not be able to certify Donald Trump’s victory.

Democrats, meanwhile, are irate about Republicans' proposed rule change.

Rep. Jim McGovern, Democrat of Massachusetts, accused Republicans of "injecting partisan extremism into the rules."

"Their proposed changes would, for the first time in history, shield the Speaker from accountability to the entire chamber by making it so that only Republicans can move to vacate the chair," he wrote on X. "This makes it clear that they have no intention of working together to find common ground. Instead of electing a Speaker of the House, they decided to elect a Speaker of the Republican Conference—held hostage by their most extreme members."

Other Democrats said the rule proposal is an indication of Johnson’s weakness.

"I suppose this travesty is necessary in the Speaker's mind because his leadership is so tenuous,” Rep. Joe Morelle, Democrat of New York, told Axios. “There's no way for him to 'win’ the game unless the 'fix' is in. But this is deeply troubling."

The 119th Congress is already a mess, and it hasn't even started yet.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Hey Suckers! Stop Taking Trump's Boob Bait On Greenland And Panama

Hey Suckers! Stop Taking Trump's Boob Bait On Greenland And Panama

Donald Trump had a rough couple of weeks. Members of his own party sunk his attempt to escape a vote on the debt limit for two years. Some of Trump's picks for top jobs weren't received with universal applause. A revolt by Republican senators against his choice of Matt Gaetz as attorney general forced the Florida Republican to withdraw from consideration. Then there was, yuck, the Gaetz report.

If you were Trump confronted with this unwanted evidence of limited political potency, what would you do? You would throw out some dazzling nonsense to distract the public's attention from your difficulties. You would make outlandish comments on such matters as buying Greenland and taking back the Panama Canal. You'd suggest that Canada become the 51st state.

And what has much of respectable media done with this fusillade of goofy chatter? Unfortunately, they jumped at the bait with unseemly speed and moved their focus to Trump's muttering about plans to stomp on the sovereignty of friendly countries. They led news reports with serious discussions of the international ramifications.

"The US is unlikely to take control of any of these regions," the BBC wrote with a straight face, "but these statements could indicate that Trump's 'America First' vision includes flexing the superpower's muscle beyond its borders for US trade and national security interests."

We've been here before.

In August 2019, then-President Trump told reporters of the "strategically interesting" idea of buying Greenland, which is a territory of Denmark. The Danish prime minister called the proposal "absurd." Trump then canceled a planned state visit to Denmark, citing such remarks as the reason.

But to show what a ha-ha headbang that attention-grabbing stunt really was, Trump tweeted a photograph of a skyscraper in the middle of an Arctic setting with the Trump logo at the top.

He wrote: "I promise not to do this to Greenland!"

He just dusted off the ridiculous idea again, writing on a social media post that the U.S. "feels that the ownership and control of Greenland is an absolute necessity" for reasons of national security and global freedom.

Media again snapped at the floating lures.

The Wall Street Journal offered the headline, "Trump Threatens to Take Control of Panama Canal, Greenland." The New York Times headline was "Trump's Wish to Control Greenland and Panama Canal: Not a Joke This Time." The article asserted: "Over the past two days, President-elect Donald J. Trump has made clear that he has designs for American territorial expansion."

Not a joke? Trump's son Eric posted an image on X showing Greenland, the Panama Canal, and Canada in an Amazon online shopping cart.

The Danish prime minister's office simply brushed off the latest provocation. It blandly remarked that the government was "looking forward to working with the new administration" and left it at that.

As for the Panama Canal, one serious news source noted that Trump would be able to use "the world's largest military" to back up his demands. The irony of discussing such rash international adventures without noting that Trump routinely accused his political opponents of being war-mongers was lost.

Greenland is still not for sale, but if it were on the market, it would be a big-ticket item, to say the least. Some analysts put the value of its natural resources alone in the hundreds of billions of dollars. Taking it by force would be a costly military operation.

How would starting the United States on a round of territorial expansion fit in with vows to chop $2 trillion out of the budget? Not well and another reason to dismiss the clown show.

At the very least, Trump should have to come up with new material.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Trending

World