Cheney says a Republican House majority in 2025 would present a ‘threat’
Cheney says a Republican House majority in 2025 would present a ‘threat’
Former Republican Rep. Liz Cheney believes a Republican majority in the House in 2025 would present a “threat.”
Republican former Rep. Liz Cheney said she believes a GOP majority in the House in 2025 would present a “threat” to the country.
“I believe very strongly in those principles and ideals that have defined the Republican Party, but the Republican Party of today has made a choice and they haven’t chosen the Constitution. And so I do think it presents a threat if the Republicans are in the majority in January 2025,” Cheney said in an interview that aired on “CBS Sunday Morning.”
Cheney, who represented Wyoming in Congress from 2017 to 2023, said current House Speaker Mike Johnson was “absolutely” a collaborator in the effort to overthrow the 2020 election and he should not be speaker in 2025.
You're viewing a single thread.
Always was.
Nah. The GOP was a pretty different party during the 19th century and the first half of the 20th century. But today’s GOP is the party of Lincoln in name only.
The post Jim Crow GOP has been moving further to right with every passing year, but it was never “overthrow the elected executive” bad. Now it literally is.
I can’t remember a time when they weren’t inexorably marching toward this result though. Every step has been away from both progress and democracy.
I do agree that the label itself has changed but I don’t believe that what we, including Cheney, are talking about.
As far as I can tell, this march began in reaction to the voting rights act, made into law by Northern Democrats in the 60s.
Southern Democrats aka Dixiecrats consequently left their party for the GOP which became the single new home for reactionary, regressive ideologies.
This single minded movement to roll back progress has been underway for almost 60 years now.
Even through the Bush era and a potential McCain presidency the GOP was not anti-American. It was a party that had beliefs but still seemed to have America’s (collective) best interest at heart, even if it was a way I didn’t agree with. Contrast that with today’s Republican Party, which is very clearly party over country.
Dick Cheney and Bush 2 were planning the (re)invasion of Iraq from before 9/11. And tax cuts at all costs beside the military, denial of abortion rights, and deregulation of agencies have been on their platform since Reagan.
Also Bush won his while losing the popular vote and refused to concede in Florida where his brother and the Supreme Court gave him an arguably undemocratic presidency.
I never said Bush/Cheney are immune from criticism, just that their words and behaviors weren’t actively anti-American.
Suggesting they were thinking of the “collective interest” of the American people as you stated, was were I took exception.
They were, if you take the view that civil liberties are fundamentally American, or a large part of what it means to be American