• ThrowawayOnLemmy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Until the Republicans decide to put someone forward who didn’t attempt to undermine the election, they aren’t serious.

    • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Afaik, Emmer is one of two reps in the group of 9 (now 8, after one guy pulled out of the nomination yesterday) that did not refuse to certify the AZ and PA electors in the 2020 election.

      Edit: turns out he did sign the amicus brief encouraging the SC to throw the results though, which is essentially just as bad… yayyyyyyyy -_-

      • anon6789@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I think you’re both right. He did a lot to support the Texas vs Pennsylvania lawsuit to remove valid ballots, but he didn’t actually vote to do it. So he supported the overthrow of the election, he just didn’t follow through. How the scales balance after those 2 events, I leave up to you!

        In the aftermath of the 2020 election, Tom Emmer, a leading Republican candidate to be speaker of the House, baselessly said there were “questionable” practices in the 2020 presidential election.

        Later, Emmer signed an amicus brief in support of a last-ditch Texas lawsuit seeking to throw out the results in key swing states.

        Though he would vote to certify the results on January 6, 2021, the comments and actions show Emmer flirted with some of the same election denial rhetoric as far-right members of the Republican caucus.

        Full Article - CNN

              • anon6789@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                1 year ago

                Pro: At least he is smart enough to have read the room and was one of the few people running for Speaker that could say they didn’t vote for it.

                Neutral: Seems to policy-wise be a split between a Bush and Trump era Republican, so he’s slightly less bad than a full fledged MAGA, but still pretty bleh on most issues. But we all knew it was going to be a Republican, so we knew most of us wouldn’t like whoever it was anyway, but it sadly could have been a number of worse choices.

                Con: As a Pennsylvania introvert who loves mail in voting, screw this guy…

    • yip-bonk@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Oh yeah, that’s not a problem. They were never serious.

      I mean, arguably in the 50’s or something. But since Reagan it’s been a screeching clownwreck of disaster up until this very day.

      • Fraylor@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        January 20th, 1981 - the day American people were less important than oligarchs.

        • Nudding@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Were slaves considered Americans at the time? Might have to push the date back a little, I don’t think there was ever a time in the country’s history that people were more important than oligarchs.

    • PugJesus@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      No, but McCarthy was a loon too. This is a return to status quo loondom. Which is marginally better than ‘loondom but even worse’.