That is an admission on your part that the new rules now in place block would block such a scenario. Nice to hear you finally acknowledge that.
Again, if we get into late September/October, and it doesn't look like there is enough movement, you will see the Dems make common cause with the RINO's, suspend whatever rules they need, and pass a big, chunky bill in it with a lot of stuff we don't want. And the reality is that those rules are going to make it harder to get those bills passed in time because of the greater ability to offer amendments, and the Speaker lacking the power to do anything about delay tactics from the Democrats. That is why I was not in favor of imposing all of those rule changes in this session where we only have a tiny cushion in the House.
As for an attempt to the rules back to the way they were (rules which you have openly supported) in order to bring spending back up to Pelosi levels again, there is nothing in that which discredits the new rules. It only confirms that the new rules prevent an omnibus, and that Republicans would have to expose their true colors by joining with Democrats to put back in place Spendapalooza.
The new rules only prevent an omnibus unless/until they are suspended, and you've got the Nancy Mace crowd that wouldn't be "exposing" anything. They're open about being moderates. And if we don't keep them locked into the caucus, they'll side with the Democrats before shutting down the government.
Pure horseshit. These "irrelevant" Conservatives sure as heck were relevant when it came to changing the rules. And they were willing to compromise by giving McCarthy his coveted throne in exchange for those rule changes. It is pure nonsensical idiocy to claim that Democrats will be holding all the cards because of 20 Conservatives demanding something Conservative in exchange for their votes.
They were relevant
within the caucus because their votes were needed to give the GOP a majority. They are much less relevant in the House as a whole because majorities can be formed without them. If Gaetz tries his smirking "you have to deal with ME" act when it comes time to pass legislation, conservativism is screwed.
Horseshit piled on top of horseshit. Conservatives shifting the rules towards Conservatism will result in even more liberal legislation than we had under Pelosi.
No, I didn't say that. Regardless of any changes to the Rules, this House was going to be more conservative than the last because Pelosi/Jeffries aren't in charge. The question is how much more conservative. If you want maximum conservative
results and not just maximum conservative
posturing, we're going to need to see a much more flexible Freedom Caucus than we just saw because majorities can be formed without them. Is their priority going to be passing the most conservative bills that can be passed, or just being inflexible so they can campaign on "standing strong", regardless of what actually ends up passing?
That is going to be the key to whether or not this whole thing works.