WOW!!! RINO’s Threaten to Leave Republican Party & Join Democrats Not America First…

[KLB]

But the swamp creatures have unlimited taxpayer funds at their disposal.
Even DJT doesn't have the capital to match that.
Without term limits, we're sunk. The swamp creatures must be convinced to pass term limit legislation.

We're done for.

The swamp creatures aren't just the ones that get voted in over and over. The ones you need to get under control are the bureaucrats.

 

[Leadeye]

You have to figure out how to break up and scatter the swamp. The concentration of power and money in one place produces a collective that absorbs and converts people to it's own ways. Term limits work on elected officials but do little to affect an appointed curia invulnerable to influence from the people.

 

[Ingomike]

But the swamp creatures have unlimited taxpayer funds at their disposal.
Even DJT doesn't have the capital to match that.
Without term limits, we're sunk. The swamp creatures must be convinced to pass term limit legislation.

We're done for.

Term limits are political rope-a-dope. They are unconstitutional and anyone selling that without saying we must do a constitutional amendment is just BS’ing.

We must rein in the power in DC.

Term limits actually are 180 degrees backward. It is permanent bureaucracies that threaten our country, not the lazy congresses that pushed their constitutional work off on the unaccountable.

 

[BugI02]

And here I’ve been told that voting for a RINO is better than the alternative….

It is. A Republican In Name Only might be a centrist or a grifter but a Democrat is a ****ing communist

Voting for a Libertarian before they have a realistic voter base is only OK if it doesn't result in the election of a communist. Ls need to start at a lower level in politics and establish credibility, otherwise they wind up as the Green Party on the right, only capable of being spoilers

 

[Shadow01]

It is. A Republican In Name Only might be a centrist or a grifter but a Democrat is a ****ing communist

Voting for a Libertarian before they have a realistic voter base is only OK if it doesn't result in the election of a communist. Ls need to start at a lower level in politics and establish credibility, otherwise they wind up as the Green Party on the right, only capable of being spoilers

A RINO that votes with the democrats is also a communist. How is that better?

 

[Ingomike]

A RINO that votes with the democrats is also a communist. How is that better?

First one off the bat is a dem will vote for schumer for majority leader or Pelosi types for speaker. Huge difference between them and McCarthy. None of what republicans have uncovered this year would be coming out if not for McCarthy speakership. They are not the same, they may not be what you and I want but are significantly better than the alternative.

Conservatives/America First must win primaries first then get elected to do what we want.

 

[manifest destiny]

Term limits are political rope-a-dope. They are unconstitutional and anyone selling that without saying we must do a constitutional amendment is just BS’ing.

It's weird that only the office of POTUS has been altered by such a process. If one feels it's ok to limit the presidential terms, why not congress or senate? Would you consider POTUS limited to two terms to be rope-a-dope? Or specifically, do you think the limit on POTUS terms should be eliminated?

 

[Ingomike]

It's weird that only the office of POTUS has been altered by such a process. If one feels it's ok to limit the presidential terms, why not congress or senate? Would you consider POTUS limited to two terms to be rope-a-dope? Or specifically, do you think the limit on POTUS terms should be eliminated?

That is not what I said. As a political issue, term limits are rope-a-dope because congress can’t just pass a law to create them, they must pass a constitutional amendment. I would be fine with term limits but acknowledge the reality that a constitutional amendment is not obtainable.

I still believe the biggest problem on the topic is the permanent bureaucracy. Both the government and the party bureaucracy. For example a state senator gets elected to the house of representatives, the new rep goes to DC with an assistant and a consigliere.

When they are oriented they get say 17 staffers, all a part of the permanent swamp. Our new rep and their trusted advisors are 15% of the reps team. With a two year term they never even get their footing to participate in actual governance. Not sure the actual numbers but you get the idea.

The question is would term limits actually make DC better for us constituents or give more power to the bureaucracy?

 

[manifest destiny]

I would be fine with term limits but acknowledge the reality that a constitutional amendment is not obtainable.

Ok. I'm in favor of term limits, though not necessarily only two terms. It does take some time to put one's mark on the government.

I still believe the biggest problem on the topic is the permanent bureaucracy. Both the government and the party bureaucracy

100%. And I'll add that maybe more party choices might shakeup the Uniparty system. Really there should be 500 independents in congress not just two 'teams'. I hate the party system because I feel it limits the input by citizens that don't want to conform to the parties.

The question is would term limits actually make DC better for us constituents or give more power to the bureaucracy?

Yes, I think term limits would create a vibrant discourse within DC, at least initially. Eventually the players would figure out how to game the system just as they do today. As to the unelected bureaucrats, I'm thinking that needs corrected at the societal level, though I can't define a blueprint for such without sounding like some kind of revolutionist.

 

[BugI02]

A RINO that votes with the democrats is also a communist. How is that better?

Sigh. Numerical control of either chamber allows that party to provide the speaker or majority leader and exercise significant control of that chamber's business

If republicans hadn't had numerical superiority in the senate in 2016 Merrick Garland would almost certainly be a Supreme Court justice now. The Turtle could only ignore that nomination for a year because he controlled what came to the floor. Every warm body with an R next to its name is actually good for something, even Romney

 

[Tombs]

Hopefully Pence goes with them.

He's more interested in being president of Ukraine than the president of the US.

 

[KLB]

It's weird that only the office of POTUS has been altered by such a process. If one feels it's ok to limit the presidential terms, why not congress or senate? Would you consider POTUS limited to two terms to be rope-a-dope? Or specifically, do you think the limit on POTUS terms should be eliminated?

Limiting the President's terms is much more important than trying to limit a Rep or Senator. The difference in power and ability to misuse that power is exponentially greater.

 

[KG1]

First one off the bat is a dem will vote for schumer for majority leader or Pelosi types for speaker. Huge difference between them and Meadows. None of what republicans have uncovered this year would be coming out if not for Meadows speakership. They are not the same, they may not be what you and I want but are significantly better than the alternative.

Conservatives/America First must win primaries first then get elected to do what we want.

I think you meant McCarthy and it's true that the benefit in numbers determines which party has majority control over Congressional committees to conduct investigations.

 

[Bugzilla]

Maybe if more people voted and elections weren’t rigged, we would have natural term limits.

 

[Ingomike]

Maybe if more people voted and elections weren’t rigged, we would have natural term limits.

This point is one I have marveled at for over 30 years. Generic congressional approval is always dismal, but the average congress critter has near 60% approval in their district. The bottom line is 90% despise other people’s choice in a rep, but majorities love their own rep. Most of those people don’t want to limit their rep…

 

[Ingomike]

I think you meant McCarthy and it's true that the benefit in numbers determines which party has majority control over Congressional committees to conduct investigations.

Thanks, brain fart. Fixed

 

[jamil]

So even if republicans get a majority they will be held back or maybe even have the majority taken away by party switching RINO’s…

“According to interviews conducted by The Hill, several Republican senators are now saying they just cannot be members of the Republican Party if they are forced to represent the interests of the base voter. These very specifically named Republicans have always been members of the UniParty in DC; however, now they are saying “populism” amid the commonsense, America First voting base is not going to be acceptable.”

“The senators are openly warning that if putting American interests first is going to be demanded by the voters, these Republicans will just become Democrats. There is no reason for Americans to distrust the institutions the Republican senators support, and there will be no compromise or discussion.”

“What is making these Republican senators angrier is that who they consider to be intellectual and professional people are also demanding a more populist approach toward a government that represents the people. This is just not going to be allowed according to Lisa Murkowski, John Thune, John Cornyn and the other names outlined.”

GOP senators rattled by radical conservative populism

Republican senators say they’re worried that conservative populism, though always a part of the GOP, is beginning to take over the party, becoming more radical and threatening to cause them signifi…

thehill.com

Lisa Murkowski Threatens to Leave Republican Party and Join Democrats, Several Republican Senators Including Thune, Romney, Cornyn and Young Agree - The Last Refuge

For those of us who have been trying to awaken people to the true nature of Republicans in the senate, aka “the Decepticons”, the latest self-admissions are very welcome. According to interviews conducted by The Hill, several Republican senators are now saying they just cannot be members of the...

theconservativetreehouse.com

GOP Uniparty Senators Threaten to Leave and Become Democrats | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hᴏft

This article originally appeared on JoeHoft.com and was republished with permission.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

They’ll need to adopt woke policies. If they don’t get nutty they will lose their seats to a bat **** crazy communist wannabe if the try to run as a Democrat. If they switch now, this is their last term.

 

[Tombs]

Maybe if more people voted and elections weren’t rigged, we would have natural term limits.

The issue is too many people vote. They create so much white noise in the results that those who are actually decently informed are effectively made irrelevant.

Voting should include a basic knowledge test on the functioning of the branches of government, even if it's 1st grade level knowledge. Because most of the white noise would be instantly cut out.

How many years does a senator serve, how many years does a house member serve, what is the age to serve, what are the branches of government. Simple stuff. If they fail, do not notify them, just have their vote be invalid.

If someone calls this racist, that's rich because of the implication being made about that race.

 

[LeftyGunner]

That is not what I said. As a political issue, term limits are rope-a-dope because congress can’t just pass a law to create them, they must pass a constitutional amendment. I would be fine with term limits but acknowledge the reality that a constitutional amendment is not obtainable.

I saw an idea a few years ago that never got much traction, but it stuck with me: rather than amend the constitution to allow for term limits, change it to make it illegal to seek the ballot for elected office while you hold elected office.

Elected officials should use their time on the public clock to focus on running their office, not their next campaign.

I still believe the biggest problem on the topic is the permanent bureaucracy. Both the government and the party bureaucracy. For example a state senator gets elected to the house of representatives, the new rep goes to DC with an assistant and a consigliere.

I see the bureaucracy as a double-edged sword. We don’t want to hire new air traffic controllers or network administrators every time we get a new president…critical services would be exposed to massive vulnerabilities. People would likely die.

On the other hand, the bureaucracy has to be kept in close check. Transparency and oversight are critical to a functioning representative government, and both are sorely lacking in ours currently.

Unfortunately, its a bit of a catch-22. It would fall to the bureaucracy to provide both in any practical implementation.

When they are oriented they get say 17 staffers, all a part of the permanent swamp. Our new rep and their trusted advisors are 15% of the reps team. With a two year term they never even get their footing to participate in actual governance. Not sure the actual numbers but you get the idea.

The question is would term limits actually make DC better for us constituents or give more power to the bureaucracy?

This is why I like the idea of not being allowed to run for office while you are already holding elected office...you can hold office as many times as the voters want you to, but you can never hold the seat for a dynastic period of time continuously.

 

[LeftyGunner]

The issue is too many people vote. They create so much white noise in the results that those who are actually decently informed are effectively made irrelevant.

Voting should include a basic knowledge test on the functioning of the branches of government, even if it's 1st grade level knowledge. Because most of the white noise would be instantly cut out.

How many years does a senator serve, how many years does a house member serve, what is the age to serve, what are the branches of government. Simple stuff. If they fail, do not notify them, just have their vote be invalid.

If someone calls this racist, that's rich because of the implication being made about that race.

Voting is a right.

People shouldn’t have to get special licenses to exercise their rights.

I learned that here on INGO.