The GOP has a new Speaker, but he's stuck with the same doomed strategy

[Crabtownboy]

Even if House Republicans get a new speaker this week in Paul Ryan, they're not going to get what they really need: a new strategy.

The core problem that afflicted John Boehner during his tenure in office remains in place — a band of hard-line conservatives routinely insists that the GOP use routine-but-critical pieces of must-pass legislation (debt ceiling bills, government funding bills, etc.) as "leverage" to secure ideological concessions from the White House. The plan fundamentally doesn't make sense and can't work, which most Republicans know but aren't willing to say. It's a recipe for disaster, and it hasn't changed one bit. And in some ways things may be worse than ever under Ryan who isn't really a practitioner of the kind of crass transactional politics that Boehner used to make it work.

http://www.vox.com/2015/10/26/9612570/house-gop-strategy

 

[TCassidy]

The plan fundamentally doesn't make sense and can't work, which most Republicans know but aren't willing to say.

Why won't it work? If the right wing puts something in a bill (like those hated spending cuts) the left wing does not like, but the bill is a "must pass" bill there are only two options. Either the President signs it, right wing spending cuts and all, or he vetoes it. And if he vetoes it, and say it was a budget bill lifting (again) the debt ceiling, the government shuts down. And who vetoed the bill that would have funded the government? Oh, right. The radical left wing socialist progressive President! DUH!

 

[Rolfe]

Even if House Republicans get a new speaker this week in Paul Ryan, they're not going to get what they really need: a new strategy.

Sour fruit, eh?

 

[carpro]

The GOP needs more far right conservatives to balance out the far left extremists that dominate the democrat party.

 

[TCassidy]

 

[poncho]

The problem with the bird we have in congress now is the left and right wings work together to protect the bankers and empower the transnational corporations.

 

[carpro]

Republicans being the majority hasn't helped America at all. Boehner and McConnell have given Obama everything he wants.

No guts at all.

Might as well have left democrats in charge. We would have gotten the same results.

 

[OldRegular]

Even if House Republicans get a new speaker this week in Paul Ryan, they're not going to get what they really need: a new strategy.

The core problem that afflicted John Boehner during his tenure in office remains in place — a band of hard-line conservatives routinely insists that the GOP use routine-but-critical pieces of must-pass legislation (debt ceiling bills, government funding bills, etc.) as "leverage" to secure ideological concessions from the White House. The plan fundamentally doesn't make sense and can't work, which most Republicans know but aren't willing to say. It's a recipe for disaster, and it hasn't changed one bit. And in some ways things may be worse than ever under Ryan who isn't really a practitioner of the kind of crass transactional politics that Boehner used to make it work.

http://www.vox.com/2015/10/26/9612570/house-gop-strategy

Why won't it work? If the right wing puts something in a bill (like those hated spending cuts) the left wing does not like, but the bill is a "must pass" bill there are only two options. Either the President signs it, right wing spending cuts and all, or he vetoes it. And if he vetoes it, and say it was a budget bill lifting (again) the debt ceiling, the government shuts down. And who vetoed the bill that would have funded the government? Oh, right. The radical left wing socialist progressive President! DUH!

Crabbie is a left wing, pro abortion, n- - - -t! However, since he ios a prtofessing Brother we must make allowance for him!

 

[poncho]

 

[just-want-peace]

I must say that I am extremely grateful that Crabby is bi-partisan enough to give us the benefit of his wisdom to get the RNC on the "right" path for the sake of the RNC.!! NOT!!!Rolleyes

 

[Crabtownboy]

Crabbie is a left wing, pro abortion.

Still telling you lies I see. I guess you do not understand the topic. Maybe this cartoon will help you.

 

[Crabtownboy]

View attachment 95

Your graphic is correct and currently the right wing is broken and will not even cooperate with itself.

 

[poncho]

Fresh starts as GOP taps new speaker, approves budget deal

WASHINGTON (AP) — House Republicans embraced a new leader Wednesday and swiftly consented to a major budget-and-debt deal to avert a federal financial crisis, highlights of a day of dramatic fresh starts at the Capitol after years of division and disarray.

Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan, the 2012 GOP vice presidential candidate and a telegenic spokesman for conservative priorities, was nominated by his colleagues in a secret-ballot election to serve as speaker of the House, second in line to the presidency. The full House will confirm that choice on Thursday.

"This begins a new day in the House of Representatives," Ryan, 45, said after the vote. "We are turning the page."

Continue . . . http://news.yahoo.com/houses-big-day-budget-deal-vote-gop-nominating-074758282--politics.html

Yeah turning the page in the same old playbook.

"meet the new boss same as the old boss"

Open borders, secret trade deals and increased borrowing from a private international banking cartel.

 

[Revmitchell]

Even if House Republicans get a new speaker this week in Paul Ryan, they're not going to get what they really need: a new strategy.

The core problem that afflicted John Boehner during his tenure in office remains in place — a band of hard-line conservatives routinely insists that the GOP use routine-but-critical pieces of must-pass legislation (debt ceiling bills, government funding bills, etc.) as "leverage" to secure ideological concessions from the White House. The plan fundamentally doesn't make sense and can't work, which most Republicans know but aren't willing to say. It's a recipe for disaster, and it hasn't changed one bit. And in some ways things may be worse than ever under Ryan who isn't really a practitioner of the kind of crass transactional politics that Boehner used to make it work.

http://www.vox.com/2015/10/26/9612570/house-gop-strategy

And you believe Obama is not doing the same things? Be careful of your answer it will effect your credibility.

 

[carpro]

And you believe Obama is not doing the same things? Be careful of your answer it will effect your credibility.

I don't believe that's possible.

 

[InTheLight]

Even if House Republicans get a new speaker this week in Paul Ryan, they're not going to get what they really need: a new strategy.

The core problem that afflicted John Boehner during his tenure in office remains in place — a band of hard-line conservatives routinely insists that the GOP use routine-but-critical pieces of must-pass legislation (debt ceiling bills, government funding bills, etc.) as "leverage" to secure ideological concessions from the White House. The plan fundamentally doesn't make sense and can't work, which most Republicans know but aren't willing to say. It's a recipe for disaster, and it hasn't changed one bit.

It would work if there was a hot-button issue that the Republicans used as leverage. If the Republicans gave Obama a budget that lined up with 99% of his wants but had a piece in there defunding Planned Parenthood (hypothetically) it would be construed to be the "obstructionist Republicans that aren't playing fair" and "they want to shut down government." (BTW, as despicable as Planned Parenthood is, I don't think this would be the issue that would resonate with the majority of Americans, but there must be one out there.)

Also, if the Republicans got any sort of favorable treatment by the press. For example, notice how many times the article Crabby posted says, "this won't work". That gets repeated enough times and people get worn out and start to believe it.

 

[agedman]

There is a big problem with "shutting down the government."

The social and political leftist media ALL blame Republicans not matter the truth.

As a result, the typically politically ignorant folks buy into that lie, and soon the delusion is spread like peanut butter on hot toast.

It all ends up eventually hurting the Republicans.

Besides, as the last big "shut down" showed, very little (if any) was actually beneficial. Life and living in the great America decline just slides right along to the eventual third world status that Obama and the left desire.

A year ago, I questioned if the U.S. was even going to have another presidential election. Even now, I could see the current administration declaring some reason for marshal law with the elections never to happen so he can complete the destruction of this nation - which he said was his goal BEFORE running for president the first time.

Done a pretty good job of it - hasn't he.

 

[InTheLight]

There is a big problem with "shutting down the government."

The social and political leftist media ALL blame Republicans not matter the truth.

As a result, the typically politically ignorant folks buy into that lie, and soon the delusion is spread like peanut butter on hot toast.

It all ends up eventually hurting the Republicans.

Hmmm...how did it hurt the Republicans? In 2014 they added to their majority in the House and retook the Senate by adding 9 seats.

Besides, as the last big "shut down" showed, very little (if any) was actually beneficial. Life and living in the great America decline just slides right along to the eventual third world status that Obama and the left desire.

Also, like the shutdown in the 90's (which was blamed on Clinton) I can't remember any far reaching consequences of the shutdown of 2013. In fact I can't think of one way it affected my life. Anybody have any dire stories from the shutdown of 2013?

A year ago, I questioned if the U.S. was even going to have another presidential election. Even now, I could see the current administration declaring some reason for marshal law with the elections never to happen

Oh boy, here we go again. This old chestnut has been going around for 20 years now. Bill Clinton was going to do this; George W. Bush was going to do this; Obama was going to do this in 2012 and now again in 2016. I remember the master plan in 2000. Bill Clinton was going to resign, making Gore the President. Gore was going to nominate Hillary to be the Vice President. Then, they would run in 2000, win the election and set up 16 more years of Democrats ruling the White House. That didn't pan out.

I've got to believe after 8 years of being President the first thing they want is to get out of the office.

 

[carpro]

I've got to believe after 8 years of being President the first thing they want is to get out of the office.

Obama would stay if he could. Clinton would have, as well.

 

[agedman]

Hmmm...how did it hurt the Republicans? In 2014 they added to their majority in the House and retook the Senate by adding 9 seats.

I was referring to the one during the Clinton administration.

"A 1995 ABC news poll had Republicans receiving the brunt of the blame with 46% of respondents compared to the 27% that blamed Clinton. Clinton's Gallup approval rating stood at 51% in the early days of the December shutdown, but fell significantly to 42% as it progressed into January. Once the shutdown had ended, however, his Gallup approval ratings rose to their highest since his election."
​

What did happen in the second shut down was the congress funding specifics that prevented the catastrophe of that in 1995. However, (imo) such funding proved the shut down was basically useless, ill advised, and gave a food fest to the leftist as you indicated.

What come from the shutdown during Obama's time is the ability to erode the consumer confidence in government as a whole, to enlarge the public perception of congress not doing anything beneficial (lowest ratings - ever in latest polls), and provided the catalyst for the increases of federal spending to push the agenda ever sense.

Oh boy, here we go again. This old chestnut has been going around for 20 years now. Bill Clinton was going to do this; George W. Bush was going to do this; Obama was going to do this in 2012 and now again in 2016. I remember the master plan in 2000. Bill Clinton was going to resign, making Gore the President. Gore was going to nominate Hillary to be the Vice President. Then, they would run in 2000, win the election and set up 16 more years of Democrats ruling the White House. That didn't pan out.

I've got to believe after 8 years of being President the first thing they want is to get out of the office.

Have you read what Obama stated prior to his presidency what he and Michelle considered their life goal? Do you think that he has the same goal of doing what is best for this country as any former president?

Have you read what public statements he made, and published? In summery, it was to change the U.S. by destroying it and remaking it in to the social / communist in which they were schooled and endorse.

There is not a single president in U.S. history that has made the documented statements that Obama made about the vision he has for America. It was NEVER to build up the present system, but to tear it down, and rebuild it in a manner in which would be acceptable to the communist / socialist third world.

Is that not what he has done and called acceptable from the beginning?

For documentation sources look at this writing which lists documentations.