Twangbanger
Grandmaster
- Oct 9, 2010
- 7,100
- 113
If the majority doesn't return tangible benefits to the base conservative voter, the base conservative voter isn't going to be as interested in allowing the GOP to keep that majority. Being the "last best chance against socialism" isn't going to be a good enough brand for the GOP anymore. If it's 60mph toward the cliff vs. 90mph, that's just not perceived as enough benefit by a lot of people.
McCarthy was setting up a Ukraine / Border Security deal which would have instantiated a tolerable "migrant entry level" at something like 30,000 per week, or 8,000 in a single day. This was what the conservative voter was supposed to accept, in exchange for allowing Ukraine aid to pass.
Congress didn't repeal Obamacare, because of RINOs like McCain - the sort of RINOs people "like you" would probably vehemently declare that we need.
Congress won't stop the Government spying on us via the Tech Industry.
Congress won't secure the border, because too many Neocon/Rino/Neoliberal/Pro-Business interests have an interest in keeping it the way it is.
Congress can't stop Soros Prosecutors from getting elected by Cities.
Congress can't make or prevent States enacting abortion, transgender, or other hot-button social legislation.
I think we're just seeing the "conservative voter" become a lot more discerning about the true value of a majority in a given chamber. There has to be a transactional transfer of benefits, in exchange for votes. Everybody seems to be getting their vote "bought" except "us." And it only takes one Chamber to prevent an AW ban.
down. Never should have given away trillions of dollars. We're paying for all of those poor decisions now.
