It is such a complicated game though. I mean, I guess she knows her act. She got elected. Where I live, if you shake hands and get hurt so badly you need a sling, a red hat is going to call you a mean name. It is very difficult to physically injure a red hat and I'm surprised that someone who FOSTERS TRANS kids could do it.
What stupid thing did the GOP say or do this time? Episode 3!
- Thread starter Ironbite4
- Start date
It's not that complicated. Redhats always side with redhats, logical consistency be damned.
Republicans Cut Child Cancer Research From Funding Bill After Musk's Meddling
Republicans removed funding for child cancer research from a new version of a bill to fund the government after Elon Musk torpedoed the previous deal.
www.rollingstone.com
Because children are our future... unless we stop them now.
Why can't they see that other redhats are dopes?
I just told you why.
A Republican Congreswoman who has been MIA for the last six months has been found:
wcbm.com
Apparently has been being covered up by her staff, bizarrely?
‘Missing’ GOP Congresswoman Not Seen For Six Months Finally Found Living at Dementia Care Home
In a startling revelation, Rep. Kay Granger, missing for six months, has been found living in a dementia care home. Discover the details behind her sudden disappearance and the implications for her political legacy. The post ‘Missing’ GOP Congresswoman Not Seen For Six Months Finally Found...
wcbm.com
Easier than finding a new job.
Can't risk losing her seat to a Democrat.
Yup, and I don't know why it isn't grounds for automatic expulsion from congress for ANY congressperson who presses the vote button on another congressperson's seat. If you can't be there to vote, you should either resign or a vote from your seat should not count.
I 100% agree. I don't care what sort of deals are done, who said what or agreed to what. If you were elected to the office, you have to be there to vote. Otherwise your constituents don't get their say. And if someone does try to vote on your behalf, that's immediate fraud. Expulsion and criminal charges should apply.
Does someone have evidence that it happened or that it is allowed?
I am comfortable with a member of Congress having a staff member or colleague enter their vote so long as there is some documentation that it is their vote. In other words, I don't care about a rule that they have to be sitting in their chair to vote. A vote for a Congressmen in the present day is a vote for the person who will run an operation representing your district. The person who delivers speeches and smiles at a crowd will not be writing any legislation, does not even write their own speeches. They will not be researching policy, talking on the phone with constituents, reading the bills they vote on. They will just be the person who makes the decisions based on the work of their staff. I don't like it that they can avoid making a call on an issue on a vague pretext that they were unable to attend.
I'm not comfortable with their vote being handed to their party because they have become incoherent.
I am comfortable with a member of Congress having a staff member or colleague enter their vote so long as there is some documentation that it is their vote. In other words, I don't care about a rule that they have to be sitting in their chair to vote. A vote for a Congressmen in the present day is a vote for the person who will run an operation representing your district. The person who delivers speeches and smiles at a crowd will not be writing any legislation, does not even write their own speeches. They will not be researching policy, talking on the phone with constituents, reading the bills they vote on. They will just be the person who makes the decisions based on the work of their staff. I don't like it that they can avoid making a call on an issue on a vague pretext that they were unable to attend.
I'm not comfortable with their vote being handed to their party because they have become incoherent.
Last edited:
I'm not comfortable with that and I want to explain why.
We wage slaves bust our ass to be at work. To do the job. We miss out on family, free time, events. We make sacrifices in the name of work so we can continue to pay for our families lives.
Why the hug don't they have to? If you believe strongly enough to vote one way or another then your ass needs to be in the ******* chair. Full stop period. If your life is more important then that vote, if something is going on with family, that's fine. You don't get the vote.
I don't believe in proxy voting when it comes to politicians. This is your job. You're elected to do the work. Just like all of us, if you don't show up, you don't get paid.
It's 'allowed' in that the rules don't outright ban it, and I think I recall seeing a video compilation of it being done by both Republicans AND Democrats, though I can't seem to find it now. I'm not sure if has been done in this specific case, though. Frankly if the congresswoman in question has dementia to the point she is in a memory ward at an assisted living facility, she really shouldn't be in office anyway. Her STAFF WASN'T ELECTED, she appointed them after the election and she would get final say on the vote and is indeed the ONLY one who should be allowed to cast it. She should have resigned before she got to the point she's at now. Heck, she's been at said facility since July and likely the symptoms were severe enough to warrant her resigning well before that.
Conversely: republicans can't tell the difference between rhetoric and dementia anyway, and patently refuse to listen to experts. They probably also think dementia ward is like a ******* spa anyway.
Last Week Tonight was where I first saw footage of people doing it, if that helps.
And I don't know for a fact that people have been voting in her stead, but if it's as common a practice as Mr. Oliver made it out to be, I can't imagine that they haven't been, especially if there's been a concerted effort to cover up her absence. No sense pulling a Weekend at Bernie's unless there's a party to be had and drinks to be charged to Bernie's account.
Just to add to what Rhinox has said - if I understand it right and it works like it does here, the period before the vote includes a large amount of debate. If the congressperson isn't present and considering the debate then their vote is not an informed vote. (I realise it's wildly optimistic of me to assume every congressperson is open minded and able to be swayed by debate but some certainly are)