Highlights: Intimidation, backstabbing and flaunting the will of the majority are all tactics that Donald Trump has used expertly to dominate the Republican Party. Wannabe House Speaker Jim Jordan has tried the same gameplan, only to find out that he’s no Trump. It took three failed ballots for that reality to sink in for Jordan and his fuming, fumbling allies.

What is incredible is the utterly delusional behavior of Jordan and his supporters. Like Trump, they have only one strategy: louder and angrier. Unlike Trump, they don’t have the fear behind them. They overplayed their hand but are determined to keep overplaying it. Not to mention, they are complete hypocrites: now that their own strategy to sink Scalise is being used against Jordan, they can’t believe it and are furious.

  • MamboGator@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It’s because Trump doesn’t have any “tactics” for Republicans to turn into a system for their own success. There is no 4-D chess or even conscious thought behind Trump’s actions. He is just a self-aggrandizing idiot who was born rich. His “tactics” only work for him because he is rich enough that he has thus far been able to walk over any consequences. His stupidity and indifference to consequences lead him to push on even in the face of external reactions that would make anyone else pause, rethink and adjust course. His idiot followers see his self-assuredness as strength.

    Jim Jordan is a shitty, evil person, but he isn’t as stupid as Trump. When he sees a negative reaction to his actions, he flinches because he has half a brain. He reacts and adjusts, as people with even the smallest amount of self-awareness do. Republicans see that as weakness.

    • Makeitstop@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      Trump’s antics could be considered successful for him because he was the only one who had to benefit for them to be considered successful. Both as a candidate and as president, the measure of his success was merely in his ability to not alienate his base. He didn’t have to actually accomplish anything, or work well with others in the long term. If he alienated allies, there wasn’t really anything they could do, especially in the white house where he could fire people all day long if he so chose. He didn’t have to answer to anyone but the voters, and even then, he lost 1 of 2 elections, so not the greatest track record, but somehow he still has the support of his base.

      You can’t really have the same casual disregard for everyone around you if you want to succeed in congress. The whole system requires at least a minimal amount of cooperation. What we’ve been seeing lately is a group of politicians trying to push the limits and force their way through each stand-off as though it exists in a vacuum, seemingly oblivious to the long term consequences of strong-arming their colleagues. It turns out that people who need bridges from time to time shouldn’t burn them at every opportunity.