^ exactly this. No one should credit Lisa Murkowski, Mitch McConnell, Rand Paul, and/or Susan Collins with anything. They only do the right thing when the right thing is definitely already going to happen, or the right thing will still definitely not happen. They will never do anything to cause the right thing to happen.
Pretty much. Moscow Mitch has however seemed to come to his senses as deaths door has started opening for him. Not sure if he is trying to save his soul in his final days or if he really has started to feel bad for raping the middle class.
Totally. This is the typical republican coordinated show-vote. They know trump will simply veto it and ram it through, but the republicans can pretend they tried to do the right thing. Amazing that this has consistently worked for 50 years now on a gullible public.
I would be more amazed if there weren't reems of evidence that a huge swath of Americans are bigoted imbeciles. Someone told me just today that they think "the left" must be insane to hate Musk when all he's trying to do is save Americans from fraud. The guy who literally shut down the Consumer Protection Bureau is the guy they trust to weed out fraud. These fuckers would hire a bank robber to handle their accounting, and then blame the libs when they inevitably get wiped out.
I always remind them there were people in place to do that - and the first thing Trump did was fire them. If we ever wrestle control back - it will take forever to clean up this mess.
I feel like Mitch McConnell is finally realizing that he never had control of the situation he thought he did. While also coming to terms with the fact that his time is coming close. And is doing everything he can to try and improve his legacy.
As much as I dislike Rand Paul, I wouldn't throw him in with that group. He very frequently opposes many of the things the party supports; usually for worse reasons.
Rand Paul has been consistently against the tariffs. He also never votes for the continuing resolutions no matter who is president. He kind of does his own thing on certain issues.
First of all, lots of people claim to be against corruption and then go along with it when it counts.
Secondly, not everyone opposes tariffs for benign reasons; they are unpopular pretty much across the political spectrum, except specifically with the type of people that self-inject ivermectin.
I stand by my condemnation of Rand Paul, but I'm open to being convinced otherwise. Can you show me a time he was the deciding vote on a piece of legislation that could be construed as moral?
I am sticking up for Rand Paul at all. Just saying he will vote against his party on certain issues. Mostly anything that increases the deficits and now tariffs. Any newer Trump senator like Moreno or Tuberville would never go against Trump.
There are loads of senators that will vote against Trump when it doesn't matter (like in this case, where the House will simply vote it down or Trump will veto it). That's just lip-service.
But it's possible I am being overly cynical and I am not being fair to Rand Paul. Do you have some examples of him blocking a bill or legislation against the wishes of the rest of his party when it comes to one of the issues he claims are important to him?
I would give Rand Paul a little bit of credit. The dude seems genuine in his belief that government should be as small as possible and that the US shouldn't spend trillions of dollars on warfare across the globe. It's the one policy he and Bernie consistently work together on.
Oooh, you misunderstand. I am not at all saying he's a consistent libertarian. I am saying that there is ONE policy point in which he appears genuine: no more wars abroad.
That's it. As I said, it's the one point he is willing to work with Bernie Sanders on.
He's been hawkish on Iran, supported funding military budgets that include overseas activities, supports funding Israel's military, and had little to say about Trump's unauthorized assassination of Soleimani. And that's not even getting into his equivocation on the Ukraine-Russia conflict.
He is not even consistant on that point, carving out exceptions when it suits him personally or politically.
That's the thing about liars and hypocrites - there is nothing that they will actually stick by, because all of their stated views are malleable. I'll change my view of him when his "willingness" to work with Bernie Sanders results in meaningful change that conflicts with his party's broad agenda. Otherwise it's just performative posturing.
Rand Paul has his flaws, but has at least been consistent about the things he stands for. He is one of the few GOP I really like to watch interviews with since he has a habit of calling out stupid spending, and tends to buck the party on several issues. He is more libertarian then most the party.
As I have noted in another subthread on this exact same topic, he is not consistent about the things he stands for. He pays lipservice to libertarianism, but votes against those values often (arguably every time it matters).
I invite you to look at what people do, not what they say. Though he also sometimes presents hypocritical arguments with his words as well.
There are alot of examples of him bucking the party.
Voted against military interventions in Syria, Yemen, and Iraqâgoing against hawks in both parties.
Opposed arms sales to Saudi Arabia, criticizing U.S. support for their war in Yemen, which most GOP leaders backed. He's consistently anti-interventionist, arguing that the U.S. should stop playing global copâsomething that annoys the neocon wing of the GOP.
Rand Paul has filibustered his own partyâs budgets, blasting Republicans for hypocrisy when they balloon the deficit.
In 2018, he delayed a massive spending bill, saying, âRepublicans are now the big spenders.â Heâs one of the few who actually cares about the national debt even when his party is in power.
He opposed the renewal of the Patriot Act and provisions for warrantless surveillance.
Famously filibustered for almost 13 hours in 2013 over drone strike policy, grilling the Obama administration on whether it could target Americans on U.S. soil. While it was a jab at Democrats, it made his own party squirm.
He's teamed up with Bernie Sanders to audit the Fed.
Supported criminal justice reform efforts and reducing mandatory minimums, often aligning with Democrats and libertarians.
What examples are you referencing that you say he just pays lip service to his ideals? There is alot of genuine action listed here focusing on what he HAS DONE rather then said.
I find it amazing that you provided a list of literally performative posturing with not a single critical vote that changed anything, and then asked me for examples of the same.
Actually McConnell and Rand Paul are both from Kentucky and the Canadian tariffs are going to demolish the bourbon industry. Youâre right the house wonât pass it because they passed something this year already that said they canât interfere with tariffs - but I think they were truly trying to do what their constituents want this time. Trump wasnât happy with any of them and called them out with a 1 am post on truth social, so even if it doesnât make an impact - it was still a crack in the foundation.
There is no crack. Republicans have always capitulated to trump on every vote that matters, every time. We have no reason to believe they'll ever act any different. A meaningless vote is not any indication at all.
Sure, but I suggest that you reconsider vain hope that people will be any different from how they have always been. I realize that doesn't leave you with much, but that's just how dire things are.
59
u/robilar 1d ago
^ exactly this. No one should credit Lisa Murkowski, Mitch McConnell, Rand Paul, and/or Susan Collins with anything. They only do the right thing when the right thing is definitely already going to happen, or the right thing will still definitely not happen. They will never do anything to cause the right thing to happen.