this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2023
146 points (98.0% liked)

politics

25492 readers
2229 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
 

The rule that allowed Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) to single-handedly call for a vote ousting Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) has become a key issue for Republicans as they grapple over who should replace him.

Some are intent on changing the rule, known as a “motion to vacate,” so a handful of House Republicans can never again join with the minority to force a Speaker out and throw the House into chaos. But others who fought for the single-member threshold are defending it.

A group of 45 House Republicans — just over a fifth of the GOP conference — signed on to an open letter last week calling for changes to the “motion to vacate” rule, expressing frustration with the eight GOP lawmakers who joined with Democrats to remove McCarthy.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 33 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Wouldn't it be easier to just eject Gaetz on ethics grounds? I mean, Democrats are obviously going to support it; Republicans just need a handful of people to join them. Everybody hates Gaetz anyway, and his kiddy-diddly associations are plenty enough political cover to justify it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

The problem, from the perspective of the rest of the caucus, is that if any of them are held accountable for anything, then they're all on the chopping block once a more extreme person wants to make headlines.

If there were a conviction, that might move some of them onto the roster of those willing to vote to censure or remove. But for un-adjudicated wrongdoing? They'd just be opening the doors for it to be used against them as well.

load more comments (1 replies)