Quote:A new poll out Wednesday shows House Republican Conference Chair Liz Cheney facing trouble on two fronts as she fights to retain her position in GOP leadership on Capitol Hill.

According to a new poll from the Club for Growth, a conservative political action committee with a focus on economic freedom, Cheney’s support is underwater at home as Republicans in Washington demand a second referendum to kick the Wyoming lawmaker from her number three role in leadership.

Fifty-two percent of likely Republican primary voters said they would vote against Cheney next year no matter the opponent. Only 14 percent said they would continue to support her.

Cheney’s tanking favorability ratings show the incumbent representative has a hard road ahead to win back voters disenfranchised with her persistent antagonism of former President Donald Trump and his base. Sixty-five percent of GOP primary voters in Wyoming saw their representative in a negative light, while less than 20 percent reported the same of Trump. In total, the at-large Wyoming congresswoman suffers a net-negative 36 percent favorability rating – a stark contrast to Trump’s in the state with a net-positive of 60 percent.

(05-05-2021 03:00 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  Admission by somebody who bills himself as a “Uniter”.

(05-05-2021 08:12 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(05-05-2021 07:24 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-05-2021 06:24 AM)fsquid Wrote:  Kinda weird that a woman who votes the line would be removed because she won't toe the line about election fraud.

I think that's not the only place where she won't toe the line. And quite frankly, I'd be quite happy for the republican party to replace the Cheney wing with the blue-collar working wing that Trump attracted. I have yet to understand why the RINO neocons chose to vote for Biiden--although I suppose it's in their blood, since the neocons started out as democrats.

Outside of her refusal to embrace the stolen election lie (not a lie) and her refusal to absolve Trump’s responsibility for the Capitol insurrection(A BALD FACE LIE), where is she out of step?

(05-04-2021 03:35 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(05-04-2021 03:19 PM)Danforth Wrote:  You know the Republican Party has gone off the deep end when Liz Chaney isn't conservative enough.

This simply illustrates just how little you actually know about conservatives and conservatism in general. Not that we weren't already aware of your ignorance...

(05-04-2021 03:46 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Pelosi praising Cheney is reason enough to ax her all by itself.

(05-04-2021 08:54 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(05-04-2021 08:19 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  I'm pretty sure that Liz knows her political career is over. Doubtful she can get elected again from Wyoming. If she changes parties, still won't.

Somebody needs to tell her that the GOP has moved on from her dad's days and her politics are not embraced by the current membership. She has acted in a manner that seems all about herself.

It’s definitely not the same party.

(05-05-2021 10:05 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(05-05-2021 08:38 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-05-2021 08:12 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Outside of her refusal to embrace the stolen election lie and her refusal to absolve Trump’s responsibility for the Capitol insurrection, where is she out of step?

Menso,

She's a neocon like her father, and that's the wrong way to go. I'll gladly give the neocons back to the democrats in exchange for the blue-collar working class. Let democrats have the patrician finance class and the non-working welfare class, let republicans have the doers and makers who actually make the country run.

As far as the stolen election, nobody has actually looked at where the real problems are, the proliferation of unverified and unverifiable ballots, and until that can be analyzed, I'm not willing to accept the assertion that the election was on the up and up. The problem obviously is that it can't. The only thing that can be done is to place adequate controls on future elections. Democrats clearly don't want that, because that impacts their ability to cheat. There is no other viable reason for opposing adequate election controls except the desire to cheat.

So, do you have any examples or simply more supposition, conspiracy and innuendo?

(05-05-2021 01:54 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-05-2021 10:05 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(05-05-2021 08:38 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-05-2021 08:12 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Outside of her refusal to embrace the stolen election lie and her refusal to absolve Trump’s responsibility for the Capitol insurrection, where is she out of step?

Menso,
She's a neocon like her father, and that's the wrong way to go. I'll gladly give the neocons back to the democrats in exchange for the blue-collar working class. Let democrats have the patrician finance class and the non-working welfare class, let republicans have the doers and makers who actually make the country run.
As far as the stolen election, nobody has actually looked at where the real problems are, the proliferation of unverified and unverifiable ballots, and until that can be analyzed, I'm not willing to accept the assertion that the election was on the up and up. The problem obviously is that it can't. The only thing that can be done is to place adequate controls on future elections. Democrats clearly don't want that, because that impacts their ability to cheat. There is no other viable reason for opposing adequate election controls except the desire to cheat.

So, do you have any examples or simply more supposition, conspiracy and innuendo?

Supposition, conspiracy, and innuendo? You mean, like, "Russia, Russia, Russia"?

What I know to be factual from 40+ years working with physical and information security in the military and as an auditor/internal controls consultant, is that the procedures for securing elections in a number of states were simply and grossly inadequate. And although I am not privy to specific details, what that experience also suggests very strongly is that when controls are that lax, breaches typically occur right and left.

(05-05-2021 08:23 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(05-05-2021 01:54 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-05-2021 10:05 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(05-05-2021 08:38 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-05-2021 08:12 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Outside of her refusal to embrace the stolen election lie and her refusal to absolve Trump’s responsibility for the Capitol insurrection, where is she out of step?

Menso,
She's a neocon like her father, and that's the wrong way to go. I'll gladly give the neocons back to the democrats in exchange for the blue-collar working class. Let democrats have the patrician finance class and the non-working welfare class, let republicans have the doers and makers who actually make the country run.
As far as the stolen election, nobody has actually looked at where the real problems are, the proliferation of unverified and unverifiable ballots, and until that can be analyzed, I'm not willing to accept the assertion that the election was on the up and up. The problem obviously is that it can't. The only thing that can be done is to place adequate controls on future elections. Democrats clearly don't want that, because that impacts their ability to cheat. There is no other viable reason for opposing adequate election controls except the desire to cheat.

So, do you have any examples or simply more supposition, conspiracy and innuendo?

Supposition, conspiracy, and innuendo? You mean, like, "Russia, Russia, Russia"?
What I know to be factual from 40+ years working with physical and information security in the military and as an auditor/internal controls consultant, is that the procedures for securing elections in a number of states were simply and grossly inadequate. And although I am not privy to specific details, what that experience also suggests very strongly is that when controls are that lax, breaches typically occur right and left.

So again, you come back with nothing. I couldn’t give a flip about your message board credentials; which also include self declared expertise in con law when you need to pull out that card…
No, you made claims yet you support them with nothing more than “trust me”. Sorry, I don’t.

(05-05-2021 06:24 AM)fsquid Wrote:  Kinda weird that a woman who votes the line would be removed because she won't toe the line about election fraud.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

(05-06-2021 05:06 AM)swagsurfer11 Wrote:  She's playing the long game. She will be the GOP nominee in 2028

Quote:and hero of the future GOP when everyone sobers up.

Quote:Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) is reportedly “checked out” and “already accepting her fate” ahead of her potential ousting as Republican Conference Chair.

“House Republican sources tell us Cheney is ‘checked out’ and already accepting her fate. Unlike the last attempt to oust her in February, which she handily defeated, she’s not making calls or whipping,” Politico Playbook asserted Thursday.

The Playbook also contended, “A source close to Cheney said she intends to lean on the argument that leaders should be able to say what they think is right without repercussions.”

But Cheney defended herself in a Washington Post op-ed Wednesday afternoon by accusing McCarthy of having a “changed… story” on Republican caucus politics. Cheney went on to claim she is the true “conservative Republican.”

“I am a conservative Republican, and the most conservative of conservative values is reverence for the rule of law. Each of us swears an oath before God to uphold our Constitution,” she argued.

However, President Joe Biden and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) alongside a host of Democrat pundits have backed Cheney’s family-like style of big government politics and opposed McCarthy’s concern over “her ability to carry out the job as conference chair” and “the [Republican] message.”

Breitbart News reported Tuesday Cheney met “off-the-record” with Fox News board member Paul Ryan amid rumors of a plot to dismantle her leadership position within the party.

Bill Kristol, editor-at-large of the Bulwark, recognized the meeting as perhaps Cheney’s last gasp to remain in power by tweeting Tuesday, “Super cool of Paul Ryan to listen to all that from Liz Cheney, whom he probably agrees with, and then…go back to his well-compensated position on the board of Fox News Corporation.”

Cheney and Ryan’s history reaches as far back as 2017 during Trump’s presidency, when Ryan, then-House Speaker, was unable to find 216 votes needed for passage of legislation to overhaul the U.S. healthcare system.

Fox News’s Paul Ryan is not the only moderate Republican displaying opposition to McCarthy’s leadership. Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT) tweeted his support for Cheney, praising her impeachment vote of former President Trump, who obtained votes totaling roughly 70 percent of Wyoming’s 2020 electorate.

(05-06-2021 12:03 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

Quote:Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) is reportedly “checked out” and “already accepting her fate” ahead of her potential ousting as Republican Conference Chair.

“House Republican sources tell us Cheney is ‘checked out’ and already accepting her fate. Unlike the last attempt to oust her in February, which she handily defeated, she’s not making calls or whipping,” Politico Playbook asserted Thursday.

The Playbook also contended, “A source close to Cheney said she intends to lean on the argument that leaders should be able to say what they think is right without repercussions.”

But Cheney defended herself in a Washington Post op-ed Wednesday afternoon by accusing McCarthy of having a “changed… story” on Republican caucus politics. Cheney went on to claim she is the true “conservative Republican.”

“I am a conservative Republican, and the most conservative of conservative values is reverence for the rule of law. Each of us swears an oath before God to uphold our Constitution,” she argued.

However, President Joe Biden and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) alongside a host of Democrat pundits have backed Cheney’s family-like style of big government politics and opposed McCarthy’s concern over “her ability to carry out the job as conference chair” and “the [Republican] message.”

Breitbart News reported Tuesday Cheney met “off-the-record” with Fox News board member Paul Ryan amid rumors of a plot to dismantle her leadership position within the party.

Bill Kristol, editor-at-large of the Bulwark, recognized the meeting as perhaps Cheney’s last gasp to remain in power by tweeting Tuesday, “Super cool of Paul Ryan to listen to all that from Liz Cheney, whom he probably agrees with, and then…go back to his well-compensated position on the board of Fox News Corporation.”

Cheney and Ryan’s history reaches as far back as 2017 during Trump’s presidency, when Ryan, then-House Speaker, was unable to find 216 votes needed for passage of legislation to overhaul the U.S. healthcare system.

Fox News’s Paul Ryan is not the only moderate Republican displaying opposition to McCarthy’s leadership. Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT) tweeted his support for Cheney, praising her impeachment vote of former President Trump, who obtained votes totaling roughly 70 percent of Wyoming’s 2020 electorate.

Link

GOP Rep. Biggs: By Ousting Liz Cheney, We Are Repudiating Her Attacks on Trump

Quote:When Utah Republicans booed Mitt Romney off the stage at their party convention on Saturday, the Massachusetts governor-turned-Utah senator responded, “Oh yeah, you can boo all you like, but I’ve been a Republican all my life.” It was a bold claim from a man who famously has not voted for a Republican presidential nominee since he himself was on the ballot. But Romney’s defection from the GOP goes back even further than that.

In 1994, during his ill-fated run for Senate against Ted Kennedy in Massachusetts, Romney boasted of his liberal bona fides. “I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country,” Romney averred at one debate. “I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush! I’m not trying to return to Reagan-Bush!” he insisted at another. So he was, and indeed he did not. During the 1992 presidential primaries, Romney voted for Democrat senator Paul Tsongas. He joined the Republican Party in 1993 and was elected governor of Massachusetts in 2002 on a “progressive” platform, a promise he proved in 2006 when he enacted “Romneycare,” the healthcare reform that laid the groundwork for “Obamacare” three years later.

Romney hails from the Republican Party’s liberal wing, which his father George represented as governor of Michigan and as a presidential candidate in 1964 and 1968. When the liberal wing dominated and offered him opportunities for advancement, Romney happily supported the party; when more conservative and “populist” elements took control in 2016, Romney largely withdrew his support.

Liz Cheney, the embattled leader of the House Republican Conference, has followed a similar political trajectory. Cheney represents the neoconservative faction of the GOP — liberal imperialists more interested in projecting American influence abroad than waging cultural battles at home. Like Romney and many other leading squishes, Cheney owes her political career to her father, during whose vice presidency she worked in the State Department on Near East affairs. When the neocons dominated the party, Cheney lent it her full support. When more traditionally conservative elements regained influence, Cheney largely withdrew her support, voting for the farcical second impeachment of President Trump and, just this week, parroting Democrat talking points.

“The 2020 presidential election was not stolen,” Cheney tweeted on Monday. “Anyone who claims it was is spreading THE BIG LIE, turning their back on the rule of law, and poisoning our democratic system.” For months, Democrats have condemned concerns over the integrity of that election as “the big lie,” a phrase coined by Adolf Hitler in Mein Kampf. (Ironically, the phrase initially referred to the alleged strategy of German Jews to blame the pro-Nazi general Erich Ludendorff for Germany’s loss in the First World War—an historical circumstance that casts Democrats as the Nazis in their own analogy—but I digress.)

Reasonable people may disagree over the “irregularities” in the 2020 election: the changes to voting rules, the expansion of ballot “drop boxes,” and the constitutionality of mail-in ballots in Pennsylvania, among other things. But Liz Cheney refuses to abide such disagreement. The moment her party faction lost influence, Cheney turned on the party, even from a position of leadership.

David French, the sometime conservative columnist, took umbrage at the campaign to remove Cheney from Republican leadership. “If the House GOP ultimately takes stronger action against Liz Cheney than it did against Marjorie Taylor Greene,” he tweeted, “then one has to wonder if it’s time to make tough choices about the continued unity of the party.” What choices? What unity? David’s threat to withdraw his support from the GOP might carry more weight had he not already left the party in 2018.

The “fusionist” arrangement of the Cold War conservative movement brought together free marketeers, foreign policy hawks, and traditionalists to defeat the Soviet Union abroad and its useful idiots at home. The fusionists promised a “three-legged stool,” but the respective legs never stood on equal ground. The traditional conservatives supported the free market fundamentalist faction even when its economic schemes threatened to disrupt cultural stability. They supported the hawks in their oft-misbegotten crusades despite an aversion to overseas adventurism. But the moment traditional conservatives regained influence within the party, their fellows from the other factions headed for the hills when they weren’t attacking them outright.

Politics is the art of inclusion. But calls for a “big tent party” ring hollow when they come from fair-weather friends who abandon their co-partisans the moment political winds stop blowing in their favor. One cannot count as a teammate the sore loser who takes his ball and goes home. If the squishes will not stand by the conservatives, they have no business in party leadership. Indeed, the have no place in the party at all.