Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Republican congressman uniformly support Trump and his agenda. He has full support of republican party. So do senate and so do republican supreme court justices.

They stand up for this.



The Wikipedia article mentions a bipartisan delegation to Copenhagen in support of Denmark. Maybe they took along Republicans that have been a bee in the Trump administration’s bonnet, but it’s definitely not fair to say they uniformly support his agenda, only that they would rather support him than the Democrats.


Republican congressman vote in support of Trump and his agenda with super rare exceptions. Most of the time, they all vote to support him. It is completely fair to say that.

> only that they would rather support him than the Democrats.

This literally counts as "uniformly supporting Trump". Nothing less. They are all in for Trump agenda. It is straightforwardly absurd to claim that this somehow represents someone against that agenda. And no, "I do it only because I prefer this over voting with people who are against it" does not changes anything on it.

If you would rather support Trumps agenda then vote with Democrats, then you are supporting Trump. And no, it is not as if they had to make some ideological or ethical sacrifice by voting with Democrats here. They cant do it simply because they support Trump.


> If you would rather support Trumps agenda then vote with Democrats, then you are supporting Trump.

Okay, but I can just as easily say that you are pro-crime because you share a coalition with progressives that get district attorneys like Chesa Boudin elected (just this week the newly-elected Democratic state legislature in Virginia introduced bills to reduce the penalties for burglary, a violent crime - no normal person was asking for this).

You have a point that anyone in a coalition supports the most extreme actions of that coalition, but if you can’t make any distinction between the intents of different actors in the coalition, the only option becomes total defeat of the other side. But that is difficult to achieve in practice, particularly with a near 50-50 party split like we have in the US today. Even when the US decisively defeated the Confederacy, there were still a lot of people that either sympathized with the South or at least thought an indefinite military occupation of the South wasn’t worth it (like the US tired of occupying Iraq and Afghanistan), which is why Reconstruction ended.

So counting on total defeat of the other side is a fool’s errand, unless one side or the other executes a coup, which sadly is looking more and more likely. Trump supporters argue that the Democrats and their sympathizers in the Republican Party performed a soft coup during Covid and the 2020 election, which is why Trump has taken care to surround himself with loyalists this time around.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: