Trump, Scalise Back Elise Stefanik To Replace Liz Cheney In House Leadership
Trump: “Elise Stefanik is a far superior choice, and she has my COMPLETE and TOTAL Endorsement for GOP Conference Chair. Elise is a tough and smart communicator!”
As the saying goes, you don’t get many do-overs in politics. Still, the House Republican conference is about to get—and apparently take the best advantage of—a second chance to oust Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney from the #3 spot on the House GOP leadership team.
The first failed attempt was a ludicrous RINO display that disgusted voters who, unlike the Cheney types, prefer to leave the failure of leftist-rooted “compassionate conservatism” and non-stop war-mongering back where they belong: in the Bush-(Dick) Cheney administration.
The Democrat propagandist media, #NeverTrumpers, and the usual leftist suspects cheered the failed vote to remove Cheney as a “rebuke to Trump loyalists” and a sign that the GOP was returning to the good ole days of decades of failure pre-Orange Man Bad. The delight on the left (and the squishy right) was palpable.
But Cheney has spent the last three months, emboldened by her survival and believing her own press (i.e., mistaking the Democrat activist media as actual purveyors of truth), doubling down on her anti-Trump, America Last rhetoric . . . to the point that GOP leadership this time around is openly supporting New York Rep. Elise Stefanik to replace Cheney.
So much news this morning in @PunchbowlNews AM.
The leadership has completely turned on Cheney, and is backing Stefanik’s bid, and working to make her the No. 3 House Republicanhttps://t.co/dg451HnwW3 https://t.co/TomF8l6QpJ
— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) May 5, 2021
JUST IN: House Minority Whip Steve Scalise is openly backed Rep. Elise Stefanik to replace Rep. Liz Cheney as House Republican Conference Chair, according to a statement from his spokesperson. https://t.co/D82EjroH7Z
— Axios (@axios) May 5, 2021
Not only is GOP House leadership backing Stefanik, but so is President Trump.
“Liz Cheney is a warmongering fool who has no business in Republican Party Leadership. We want leaders who believe in the Make America Great Again movement, and prioritize the values of America First. Elise Stefanik is a far superior choice, and she has my COMPLETE and TOTAL Endorsement for GOP Conference Chair. Elise is a tough and smart communicator!” the former president said in a statement.
Stefanik, who is 36, is seen as a rising star in the party, in large part because of her vocal support for Mr. Trump and her efforts to recruit Republican women as candidates.
Cheney used the press attention at the latest GOP retreat to escalate her ongoing war against Trump and to share her self-aggrandizing aspiration to a possible (and so clearly doomed) run for president in 2024—none of which will help the GOP regain the majority in 2022, the focus of the retreat.
This “me, me, me” attitude did not endear her to House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy.
McCarthy (R-Calif.) was caught on a hot mic Tuesday stating, “I think she’s got real problems. I’ve had it with … I’ve had it with her. You know, I’ve lost confidence. … Well, someone just has to bring a motion, but I assume that will probably take place,” while speaking with Fox News anchor Steve Doocey off camera, Axios first reported.
. . . . “I have heard from members concerned about her ability to carry out the job as conference chair, to carry out the message,” he said.
“We all need to be working as one if we’re able to win the majority. Remember, majorities are not given, they are earned. And that’s about the message about going forward.”
By contrast, Stefanik, who must have higher political aspirations of her own, clearly gets what is important to the GOP at this moment in time. (Hint: it’s not Liz, Liz, Liz.)
Thank you President Trump for your 100% support for House GOP Conference Chair. We are unified and focused on FIRING PELOSI & WINNING in 2022!
— Elise Stefanik (@EliseStefanik) May 5, 2021
Stefanik, you may recall, was a star during the first Trump impeachment trial.
- Elise Stefanik’s Stardom is Born
- Jordan, Stefanik Challenge Schiff at the Beginning of Impeachment Hearing
- Elise Stefanik skewers Dems impeachment case with classic cross-examination techniques
Stefanik dominated the hearings, as Professor Jacobson noted at the time: “She cross-examines witnesses the way cross-examination should be done: A tightly controlled examination that does not allow the witness to vary from prior testimony or to deny the obvious.”
Her examination of former Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch showed Stefanik’s approach.
She told the witness what territory she would cover not because she wanted to make it easier, but to signal to the witness that you are boxed in, I’m in control, and I’m covering topics about which you are going to have to capitulate. Pay attention to how many of the questions are answered with a simple “Yes” because the question was framed in such a way that Yes was the only viable option.
Those simple “Yes” answers were devastating to the Dems impeachment narrative.
Watch:
So effective was Stefanik that Kellyanne Conway’s #NeverTrump husband immediately attacked her in particularly venomous, dishonest, and spiteful ways:
- Kellyanne Conway’s NeverTrump husband calls Elise Stefanik “lying trash” (Updates)
- Kellyanne Conway’s NeverTrump Husband Retweets Clear Photoshop of Elise Stefanik
Meanwhile, Mittens McRomneyCare has thrown his diminished clout behind Cheney in his typical out-of-touch fumbling way.
Every person of conscience draws a line beyond which they will not go: Liz Cheney refuses to lie. As one of my Republican Senate colleagues said to me following my impeachment vote: “I wouldn’t want to be a member of a group that punished someone for following their conscience.”
— Mitt Romney (@MittRomney) May 4, 2021
Too bad for Cheney that Smarmy McMittens is in the Senate and can’t actually vote for her to remain in House leadership.
The vote is expected to take place next week, and it seems that Republicans will soon have a team player in Stefanik in the #3 House leadership spot.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
If Cheney is ousted from the leadership position, will she run as an independent in 2022?
No, she’ll run as the throw-back, regressive Republican she is; she’s not about to lose a chance, however slim, to serve in future party leadership (indies don’t), and she really really really wants to be in charge, wants to be president. She’s in a bad place at a bad time because her brand of progressive RINO politics is loathed by the base, and she can’t overcome that fact by doubling down on anti-Trump, anti-America stupid (though she’s giving it the old college try).
She can pick Megan McCain as a running mate. Given the state of voting machines, they just might win, despite no one voting for besides Romney and McConnell.
In Wyoming it won’t matter. Trump is way more popular there than she is.
Run for what and where?
Her political career is over. She’ll screech and scream a lot on the way out and for as long as NYT/WaPo/CNN/MS-NBC and their ilk pay attention to her. But she’ll have zero influence.
Rumor has it the Lincoln Project Boys Club has an opening and needs a token XX chromosome member..
Personally I think it is highly unlikely Cheney would run as an independent – unless she has the rock-solid backing of the Wyoming GOP Establishment the way Murkowski did the the Alaska GOP. I don’t know anything about Wyoming politics, which is why I posed the question.
If I had to bet money, she is either angling for a high-paying gig with the Joseph Goebbels media or – joy of joys! – a sinecure in the Biden* administration.
Murkowski ran as a write-in, but she ran as a Republican, not an Independent (and she won). She won her next election outright as a Republican.
Depending on Wyoming rules, Cheney may try the same thing, but no way Cheney runs as an indie, no power there, and all she craves is power.
Both Angus King and Bernie Sanders are pretty powerful, and neither is officially a Democrat.Obviously the House is a different creature, but depending on what deals she can cut Cheney might have surprising power as an independent.
Point is that I don’t intend to underestimate her. Like her counterparts (Pelosi, the Squad) Cheney combines brazenness with an amoral thirst for personal power. And there always seems to be an opening for a Republican to rat out their former supporters (see Bush the Younger).
Angus King I have no idea about, and Sanders keeps getting out-maneuvered and totally trashed by his own allies. Not much power there. Sanders has a large following, but they are equally-ignored by the Dem Party . . . unless it’s useful to do otherwise. He had the Dem nom sewn up last year, but it was taken from him (just as in 2016). He’s not bitter, he just keeps being the Dem Party butt monkey. Pretty sad, really.
Ignored, shafted butt monkey is not the ‘power’ Liz seeks. She wants to be able to weild actual power, not be able to whip up the base as Shouting Bernie the Commie can. Which is good, because she can never command a crowd or attract tens of thousands to a Liz Cheney rally. She has zero interpersonal or social skills, and she is completely off-putting and unlikable, so her only real option is to be granted power by the GOP (as #3 in House leaderhip in this case). She wants to be so-anointed (avoiding the unwashed, unruly Republican voters she loathes) all the way to the Oval.
If she weren’t Dick Cheney’s daughter, she wouldn’t even be in the House. Heck, if her last name wasn’t Cheney, she’d be nobody anybody anywhere would notice. Her married name is “Perry” but she still uses “Cheney”–not even “Perry-Cheney,” just “Cheney”–because she HAS to have that name to get anyone to look at her for more than two seconds.
She’s a grasping nonentity who is counting on political dynasty as destiny. What else does she offer? She is a horrible speaker (typing this, I can’t think of ONE thing speech she ever gave, one exciting moment in her political career), with a horrible message–not that I can think of what her message even is off the top of my head . . . other than I’m Dick Cheney’s Daughter, Orange Man Bad, and Let’s Bomb Some Stuff!
She has to go, though, I agree not that she cannot be underestimated (she’s nothing without her name) because her name cannot be underestimated, after all, look how far its got an unlikable, self-aggrandizing, self-involved, power-hungry political hack.
It doesn’t matter what label she tries to run under, Wyoming has learned who she really is and she’s done. Her ceiling is probably 25% or a bit lower.
Why would she do that? Why should losing a leadership position affect her party affiliation?
Let me rephrase your question so that it makes sense: If Cheney loses the 2022 primary for her seat will she run as an independent? That is something that might make sense for her to do, and if that comes about she will have to make that decision.
When that happens (I’m pretty sure it’s when, not if), she will pull a Murkowski and run a write-in campaign . . . if that’s even possible in Wyoming, which I care so little to know that I can’t be bothered to perform to the two-second search it would require. If it’s possible, that’s what she will do because like Murkowski, Liz believes her political dynasty credentials are more important that anything else. Alaska bought that, will Wyoming?
“Alaska bought that, will Wyoming?”
No. Unlike Alaska, Wyoming is not a socialist state. Cheney is done. She will not run because losing by at least 2/3rd’s would be embarrassing.
Unlike Alaska, there are no large Eskimo Communities to organize a “Write-in-Campaign” as Lisa Murkowski once did. And in 2022, not even the Eskimo Communities will support Murkowski. Like Lousy Lizzie Cheney, Lisa is finished.
Not necessarily. In the early 1980s Phil Gramm (who was a Democrat in the US House) switched to the GOP after he was kicked off the Budget committee by the Democrat leadership.
By contrast running as an independent/3rd party after losing a primary tends not to go well. I know Murkowski did it in Alaska, but she has the dubious distinction of never having won a majority of the vote (she was elected to the Senate by a plurality three times).
Gramm was not in a leadership position. A committee membership is not a leadership position. He switched parties because he realized he was out of place in the Democrats, and that his electorate had changed enough that he could be elected as a Republican.
Lieberman lost his primary, ran as an independent, and won big.
And we must never lose sight of the fact that Lisa got placed into the Senate by her corrupt Daddy, Frank Murkowski, who decided to resign his U.S. Senate to pursue the office of Governor of Alaska. Once elected Governor, he appointed Lisa to finish out his term that ended on Jan. 2005. She won a full term in 2005, but got a Tea Party Challenger, Joe Miller, who defeated her in the 2010 Republican Primary, She managed to pull off only one of the two times in U.S. History that a Write-In Candidate won election to the U.S. Senate. She’s been there ever since as one of the 2 or 3 RINO Prima Donnas to defile their office voting against the best interests of the Republican Base. She’s never attained majority support and never broken through with a 50% voter affection.
THE VOTERS OF ALASKA WOULD DO THEMSELVES A HUGE FAVOR OUSTING THIS AWFUL PERSON WHO CAN NEVER BE TRUSTED TO SUPPORT CONSERVATIVE VALUES.
CONTEXT IS IMPORTANT
This is a fight between the ESTABLISHMENT and the POPULIST wings of the party.
Cheney and Romney are part of the Establishment. They play nice with the Democrat ESTABLISHMENT.
The POPULISTS in both the Dem and Republican parties are against the politics as usual that has sold-out the American people. Their eyes are open – they will NEVER go back.
The Republican ESTABLISHMENT (mostly, Bush allies) hate Trump. Trump was not the best candidate to advance the POPULISTS cause — but he was the only one that was willing to do so and had a chance of winning. And he did win – confounding all the political talking heads.
The question is not are you for or against Trump. (The media always wants to tag you with any of the baggage of a personality.)
The real question is are you a POPULIST or an ESTABLISHMENT hack? Populists stand for liberty and freedom and America First. Establishment works for big-business and want to control the people while they pursue globalist ideas.
…and she’ll lose, no matter what sheruns as…
The term “The Big Lie” has very real meaning, even though the war generation is almost to the last person dead.
You can’t compare your side including the cooks of your side (I honestly do not think the election was stolen by voter fraud. I think big tech, and media bias combined with corporate help to the Democrats made the election unfair but I don’t think there is anything there to find with voter fraud).
Enough people here have argued with me to know that I actually do think Trump’s “I won” claims are lies I think if he believed that he would have made those claims in court when it actually counted.
That said Liz Cheney compared people on her side to the Nazis when she used the term “The Big Lie”, she is an intelligent educated person who knows what “The Big Lie” refers to and she knows she was invoking the Holocaust (The biggest insult I ever give Dems is “Fascist” as in Mussolini not Hitler).
Hitler is a bridge too far for a politician even if you are attacking the other side. Actually Hitler/Nazis are too far even if you aren’t a politician (never use an insult worst than fascist it demeans you to call people Nazis only the actual Nazis could be called Nazis).
I don’t think it is a coincidence that this is the insult that triggered Republican leadership. It triggered me and on the substance (Did Trump win the election) I actually agree with Cheney Trump lost and we need to accept it and move on in order to win future battles.
I agree, the “Big Lie” assertion is a definite and deliberate invocation of Nazi Germany, and yes, it is beneath even the lowest political hack.
As I have said before, I, too, think we should move on from the 2020 election (though I, unlike you, do believe that it was stolen). The problem for Liz is that she’s the one clinging to it, even as reasonable Republicans and GOP voters who think the election was stolen AND those who do not think it was stolen completely agree that moving on is the only thing to do at this point. This is . . . well, just plain stupid, out-of-touch, and a complete misreading of this historical moment. Not to mention a clear illustration of lack of political instinct and savvy.
She’s a horror show anachronism who must be purged from party leadership immediately, she can be run out of office later.
I completely agree with everything you said with one little caveat that I think Liz Cheney is just for a sports comparison playing on the other team while wearing our jersey to confuse us.
That’s what a “compassionate conservative” is, Danny. So we’re not in disagreement at all. 😛
Then we are in complete agreement 🙂
In support of your “stolen” perspective on the election, I offer Occam’s Razor – simplest explanation is the best. If I were a Dem and it was not stolen, I would welcome reviews, instead of fighting them. Well-supported legitimacy has loads of political advantages when you basically have ties in the House and Senate, huge bills on the table and are soon headed into the 2022 election season.
jb4 – I have said the same thing since Jan 2.
What are the Democrats afraid of? If the election was not stolen (which they say all the time) Then why would they not want a review of the election to ensure the USA can improve future elections. A review would also enhance Biden’s legitimacy. But everytime I bring this up online or in person – Democrats change the subject.
“…I, too, think we should move on from the 2020 election…”
Sure, we should all move on and except our position as slaves.
Unlike you, I have no problem at all calling evil people nazis, especially democrats, because that is the historical group they most closely represent.
Dems are nothing like Nazis, its not representative of any policy they have, or indeed any action. And as Danny pointed out Cheney calling some of her fellow Republicans Nazis’s (or at least comparing) was not appropriate either.
Some Dems are like the Nazis. The Holocaust isn’t the only bad thing the Nazis did, you know.
And it’s fair to compare abortion to the Holocaust.
Absolute rubbish, the whole idea of calling someone a Nazi is to try and make the two equivalent which is clearly false. If it were a a genuine attempt to compare what you suggest then they would use that bad thing not the generic Nazi term.
Sorry since when was abortion, which can be morally argued (and has been concluded as reasonably moral by many countries including religious ones like Ireland) , comparative to the holocaust. That’s in no way equivalent.
Ace of Spades is concerned — see his post today. He has a pretty good nose for who is a ‘duck’, and he’s not convinced that Rep. Stefanik is completely on-board. I think booting Rep. Cheney and replacing with Stefanik is an upgrade, but she’d better remember — trust is earned. Dump on us once, ma’am, and you’ll follow Ms. Cheney out the door.
To counter that the position is literally all about talk and I think Cheney is (correctly) being replaced because hers not only wasn’t helpful but she invoked Holocaust imagery against her own side.
Stefanik is a “moderate,” but she’s also been a staunch Trump supporter when it counted. Bottom line: Stefanik is a vast improvement over Cheney, and if this pans out as expected, she’ll know better than most that she can be just as easily replaced if she veers off course.
Stefanick’s voting record aligns with NE lib Republican. Romney Lite.
I can’t say I’m enthusiastic. Maybe she’s seen the light. I’ll reserve judgement and wait and see. I think I may have seen this movie before.
Is it too much to ask for the GOP to have at least one solid MAGA Rep in one of the three leadership positions?
I had intended to address this point in my post, but it was getting long, and I figured Trump’s full-throated support would be enough. Stefanik’s voting record reflects her priorities for her district (#NY21), so she did vote against some bills that Trump supported, but it is also important to note that she was never a deciding vote and that we don’t know what her vote would have been if it had “mattered” in terms of it passing rather than in terms of building her political profile.
We’ve been watching this game long enough to know how it works, and we know that when a vote is game-changing, the member is under different pressure then when he or she or it or what the hell ever is voting for the record. I’m not bothered that she voted against some GOP legislation since she never voted to impeach Trump or voted in any way that actually damaged Republicans. And she’s certainly not stomping around the country spouting anti-Trump crazy or claiming he was responsible for the events on January 6th at the Capitol. That already makes her better than Cheney in so many ways.
As to a MAGA rep for the #3 spot . . . who? We already have Scalise, and he’s no America Laster, that’s for sure. Whatsherface Q-queen is not an option, nor is Matt Gaetz, so who else? Really, I’m asking, I can’t think of anyone who would be better than Stefanik in this moment.
To give a friendly (and intended as a friendly one) counter point in her favor I know a lot of New Yorkers and the ones I know who are Republicans are on the more moderate side of things. This is 100% anecdotal and I’m not pretending it isn’t but I think Stefanik is just as conservative as her constituency would allow because New York conservatives are a lot more moderate than other conservatives and in my experience many of them are former Democrats who just feel the party has gone to far to the left so became Republicans for that reason.
Again 100% anecdotal if you know otherwise I’m not claiming this is solid fact.
I think this is the case. I’m not actually working today, just hanging out with you guys, but I do recall that Stefanik, as a for instance, supports some gun/ammo control. While I could be misremembering, she’s definitely not a constitutional conservative of my ilk.
I think the problem we run into as Republicans is that the uber-right base wants every Congresscritter to look just like them. That’s impossible given that upstate NY conservatives don’t think like deep red Texas or Florida conservatives. I lived in Massachusetts for over a decade, and there are a LOT of conservatives there (outside Boston, the Cape, and the Berkshires), but they either don’t vote because they think it won’t matter or they vote and expect to lose to commie Dems. So when a moderate Republican comes along, they jump at the chance to affect some small change that even some indies and conservative Dems will vote for.
I think the first step to taking back our country from the America-hating left is recognizing that this is a big country and that is full of deeply-ingrained and largely regional ideals. Patriots from ruby red Florida and from upstate New York have far more in common than we do with lunatic lefties who want to control our every thought and action. It’s not compromise so much as accepting reality.
The left/Democrats struggle with this, too. The radical fringe loon leftie base can’t understand how every single Congresscritter on their side is not an AOC or a Bernie. The answer is that even some blue-leaning districts will never embrace communism, though they might find socialism-lite appealing.
The party who first figures out how to get their base on board with non-base candidates is going to win not just politically but culturally, and so far, the left is winning.
As long as on the subject since you seem knowledgeable about it in MA and other leftwing states with moderate Republican governors I am wondering are those governors successfully pulling those states further to the right?
The short answer is ‘no.’ Instead, they reflect the moderate/conservative leanings of the vast majority of Mass residents. Keep in mind that a LOT of Massachusetts’ citizens are very very Roman Catholic (you literally cannot drive down any street in most towns with seeing at least three yard with prominent statues of the Virgin Mary).
What was happening in Massachusetts pre- and during Obama was that the voters were not yet aware (and may not yet be) that the Democratic Party they supported, the one their parents and grandparents supported, was not the same any longer. Trump did a lot to bust the myth that the Democrats were the party of the common/working man, and that’s to the good. Republicans, more generally, are absolutely horrible at messaging, at conveying why not just America is the best nation ever to grace this earth but that the Republican Party is the one that actually cares about American values and the American Dream, that their policies strengthen both while Democrats’ America Last/America Sucks message does just the opposite.
But no, Republican govs in blue states don’t pull those states to the right; if they do anything, they stop them from becoming the absolute hellhole that California has become. They also tend to pull the national GOP to the left, advocating crazy crap like RomneyCare that ends up being pointed at as blueprints for the commie left (remember how ObamaCare was JUST LIKE RomneyCare, so we were supposed to love it? Maybe some Mass Republican voters did, but most of us did not. At all. Thus the Tea Party).
This sort of pulling the national GOP to the left is one of the things that the conservative/populist base hates about them (thus the RINO tag), but they do have their purpose for our side (like putting brakes on the Crazy Commie Train long enough for us to get our act together and push these neo-racist, anti-American commies in Democrat costume back to the fringes where they belong).
There seems to be, finally, a seismic shift, though, in that these squishy progressive Republicans are no longer afforded some lauded space and indeed are being kicked out it. The establishment is taking notice of the base as it hasn’t since ’09, and that momentum must be maintained. That’s why Trump is more important than ever right now. He’s leading the charge, and love him or hate him, he’s right about purging the GOP of as many RINOs as possible, and failing getting them out of office, at least keep them out of leadership.
Another factor in favor of Ms. Stefanik here in New York is she was very vocal in sticking it to Guv #CaesarCuomo after his grotesque Wuflu deceit was revealed.
Don’t know about Wyoming, but in most states you get to run EITHER in a party primary or bypass the primary and run as an independent in the general election.
New York, however, is not one of those states. Period for independent candidacy nominating petitions circulation starts AFTER the primary, so if you lose the primary you can still run again in November. Too bad for Liz she doesn’t live in New York–like in Elise’s district.
How about a Rep who doesn’t have to pander to his/her left leaning constituency? A Rep from a district that voted enthusiastically for Trump and totally rejected the human vegetable serving as the radical left wing’s Big Brother puppet?
Since I no longer consider myself a Republican I haven’t been keeping up on who in the GOP swamp might fill that bill. But there should be someone, shouldn’t there? That there isn’t, that a NY state Rep is the ‘best’ available candidate, signals maybe the GOP hasn’t really learned or changed much as a party.
While I respect Trump’s endorsement, history shows that Trump has yet to establish his endorsements can be taken to the bank.
To answer your question without saying if this is the correct approach
1. Job-Communications to convince swing voters to vote Republican
2. Qualification-Know how to get votes in an area that wouldn’t vote for a glass of water if it had the letter R on it
3-Therefore you need someone from a district that has to be fought over in the position.
Sounds like the usual knee-jerk GOPe/NeverTrump prescription in a nutshell.
It’s like we read completely different posts.
I hear you, JHogan. For me, the bottom line is that Liz Cheney has to go; she is the embodiment of both the swamp and the deep state, and she is poison to the MAGA/America First movement. They could replace her with my dead cat and it would be an improvement.
We agree on that.
I’m not sure we agree that Trump changed everything and that many of the rules the GOP followed in the past to, allegedly, change the minds of ‘Dem’ leaning voters are no longer operative.
Rather than offer Dem Lite to ‘swing’ voters Trump blazed an entirely new trail and showed voters a starkly different path.
That is what this particular unseating of a #NeverTrumper is about, JHogan. It’s not about finding the most Trumpiest Trumper around, it’s about getting rid of the worst and most vocal and most potentially-dangerous #NeverTrumper. Baby steps.
Fuzzy, sorry to hear about your cat.
Aw, thanks, Fine! <3 He was old (almost 20!) and diabetic, so it was kind of expected, but still a kick in the gut. I'd still nominate him to any GOP position over Liz, though 😛
I live in her district and volunteered in all four of her campaigns, including the last two in which the Dems threw everything they had against her with Tedra Cobb and still came up short. She’s still a step up from Liz Cheney.
Of course, the knives are out for her in Albany, especially what with NY losing a House seat, and rumors of throwing her into the same district with neighbor Claudia Tenney, who just regained the seat she lost in 2018 by the barest of margins. Guess they have to protect AOC down in the Bronx.
They do this every time there is a whiff of potential future political success. They did it to Sarah Palin, they did it to Ted Cruz, they are doing it now to Ron DeSantis, and yes, they are also doing it now to Stefanik.
The politics of personal destruction is one of the things that the left excels at (as we saw with the totally fake Russia allegations against President Trump). When they thought he was a joke that Hillary would beat in a landslide, they lauded Trump (yes, look back at the early CNN, MSNBC, etc. clips, they were rocking him hard . . . thinking they would boost Hillary’s chances). They got it so wrong that the only recourse once he won was to demonize him, silence his supporters through outright and shadowbans, and to do everything possible to undermine him and the 2020 election (as outlined in gloating detail in that Time article). And with all that, he still (I will maintain until my last breath) won the presidency with the most votes for any sitting president in history.
But yeah, no surprise they are coming for Stefanik. We need to figure out how to counteract them. It’s a tough slog since they have the Democrat activist media in their pocket, but we are Americans, we can do it!
Jim Jordan
Oooh, that’s a good one, gonzotx!
I was and remain a huge fan of Cheney’s father, but she must go. No matter what you think of Trump, either as a man or as a president, the impeachment was simply wrong.
BOTH impeachments were simply wrong /fixed it for you 😛
Yes, but she didn’t support the first one, did she?
It’s got to be a woman why?
Honesly, this is, to my mind, a huge mistake. The GOP is working for “diversity,” apparently to impress Democrats and the left. Obviously, this is a stupid strategy since black Republicans are not actually, authentically black and female Republicans are not actually, authentically female (and so on).
The GOP should be leading by example and eschewing these BS “requirements” of X number of [fill-in-the-identity-politics-blank], and they should be doing it loudly and boldly. We want the BEST PEOPLE for any spot. Period. The first GOP pol who makes that point gets my vote whether they are running for dog-catcher or president. But I won’t hold my breath.
Remember who is the GOP party chair. Of course she’s a knee-jerk hack.
Hear! Hear!
Woman here—TOTALLY agreeing with you on this point.
Thanks, alohahola! I’m a woman, too, and I am sick to death of being pandered to with this crazy promotion of women simply beacuse they are women (and all the other identity politics favors showered on the least best simply because they tick a box on the left’s intersectional checklist). We want THE BEST. If that’s a woman, yay! If not, then still yay! because we have the best.
Considering it was an overwhelmingly Republican set of votes that gave us the Civit Rights Act of 1964 which led to quotas, I think what they are doing is right in line with their thinking.
And, that has to be some really awful sentence structure…
Yet after the CRA was passed in 1964, it was Pres. Johnson and his Administration of Democrats which put in place the legislations for the ” Great Society programs ” that would “keep” the newly eligible voters beholden with what was then and continues to be their plan to become financially beholden to the party for these numerous entitlement programs. What we are seeing now is push back to programs fully endorsed by the Democrats that money was not what they wanted in 1964. They wanted full recognition. As was the intent of the Republicans since 1863.
Being Dick Cheney’s daughter, standing alone, got her pretty far considering she has nothing to offer and what a drag she is.
Elise Stefanik would be great, I’m very impressed by her. Excellent strategic skills.
Don’t forget that Liz tried to get office in Wyoming by challenging then-Senator Mike Enzi, and she tried to do it from the right. He was something like the 5th most conservative senator at the time. She withdrew when she realized the race was unwinnable and she had been tagged as a carpetbagger since she had only recently moved to Jackson Hole from Virginia.
I’d bet good money that someone could beat her in a primary race next year.
Could she please take McCarthy with her?
Got a phone call today from the GOP wanting me to renew my giving to them. I told the nice lady that they would not see a dime from me as along as Cheny and Mittens were in any position of power. She said that she understood, and they were planning on trying to get the best new candidates to run. I said that I was not in the least interested in future promises because talk is cheap. The lack of action NOW showed me that the GOP had no interest in doing what was the correct action right now to correct the problems in the party. Therefore why should I bother to support them. I told her to get back to me when the weak minded quit running the GOP. She said she would.
Can anyone tell me what Cheney’s angle might be? It seems to me from a political point of view that she is exiting out of politics, there doesn’t seem to be any other angle? Seems like she has doubled down on a position that puts her at odds with GOP as a whole.
JMO, she’s not exiting politics unless she’s primaried out. She holds the House seat of the most Republican state in the nation and does so largely because of her last name, but I believe she’s certainly vulnerable.
That being said, for the GOP conference to be attempting to change its leadership in the middle of a Congress for reasons other than death or resignation is highly irregular. Also, the GOP conferences in both the House and the Senate tend to be “climb the ladder” when it comes to leadership positions, so to be putting Stefanik in at #3 without her working her way up to that position is also irregular.
I can guarantee you Cheney has her sights set on being Speaker one day, if not running for POTUS. She’s incredibly ambitious. Removing her from the leadership ends the first and does a lot of damage to the prospect of the second.
I don’t see it, she is conservative in tone but managed to annoy practically all conservatives. Not sure she has support for any meaningful position of power. The only thing I can think of is she will sit on the bench sniping building up an anti trump credit and hope that the wind changes on GOP support for Trump. Idk
Cheney is a progressive (big, bigger, biggest government) neo-con, not a conservative, and thus, she is a dinosaur in today’s populist, small(er) government, pro-America, anti-useless foreign war-mongering Republican Party.
Is she? Would never have guessed she was pro big gov at all, I don’t know much about her policy preferences other than she voted for Trump policies the majority of the time. I heard 93% floating around somewhere but no idea how accurate that is?
Interesting thanks
I think her angle is forgetting exactly how little Republican leadership positions matter to the Republican voter.
She knows that a Republican congressman who appeals to all Republicans just doesn’t exist if you find someone 100% pure on every issue there are Republican heretics who might wish that congressman would revisit a few orthodoxies.
Therefore she is hoping for her departure will cause a Republican civil war costing Republicans the house 2022 as one part of it doesn’t show up to vote and that the party will come crawling back to her.
Interesting theory thanks
My guess about Cheney’s motive is that she is positioning to be the leader in, to her mind, getting the GOP ‘back on track’ to the failed past of progressive, war-mongering, big government largess it was forced to leave behind. She’s putting all her eggs in the basket that she hopes will drag the GOP back to the Bush-Cheney era. It’s madness, of course, and horribly bad politics, but that’s what she’s trying to do. She is trying to lead us all back to “compassionate conservatism.” To be fair to her, she–unlike Smarmy Mittens Which Way’s the Wind Blowing McRomneyCare–is a true believer. She loves bombing places for the Greater Good, she loves a huge, unfettered surveillance state, and she love love loves bleeding Americans dry to feed her power-hungry fantasies.
Being at odds with the GOP is favored, or was once upon a McCain, among the Republican voting base. That “maverick” thing had an appeal that couldn’t be beat, at least in Arizona, but she’s not being a maverick, she’s being who she is, and who she is happens to be completely out of step (as you rightly note) with where the GOP is now and with where we all dearly hope it goes (far, far away from the progressive right). Her intention is to personally and solely “fix” the GOP, repair it in the image we have all left behind decades ago.
This is doomed to failure because, as she is quickly finding out, Republican voters have moved on and have no desire to re-embrace failed polices that helped decimate the middle classes in America while squandering trillions of dollars and the untold, pointless sacrifice of our nation’s warriors in “nation-building” lunacy.
What cannot be lost here is that she truly, madly, deeply loathes Donald Trump and every single one of his supporters down to the last man, woman, and child. She is poison. Getting her out of House leadership is very important.
Screw all this verbiage. Where do we send money, and who will assure us it won’t end up in a RINO campaign slush fund?
Ponder the feckless, narcissistic, delusional, so-called “Republicans” who are prominent in the Party – Liz Cheney, Mitt Romney, Lisa Murkowski, etc. No wonder the GOP plays the game like a bunch of rank amateurs, while the vile Dhimmi-crats are united on every issue and consistently grind our faces in the sand, like the beach bully having his way with a 95-pound weakling.
Cheney, horrible
McCarthy , distasteful
Scalise, uneven
they are a terrible bunch
Stefaniak is a horrible mistake. While Trump is right on most of the issues, he’s also a terrible judge of character. Look at the deadbeats and turn-coats he surrounded himself with his entire tenure. Stefaniak isn’t materially different than Liz Cheney. The only difference is she was nominally loyal to Trump. That’s not the stuff that makes a CONSERVATIVE House leader.
Are you saying she actively plays on the other team, backs direct comparison of Republicans to Nazis and Trump to Hitler and will be backing Biden if Trump is the 2024 nominee?
This isn’t a purity position it is a position built for the purpose of trying to improve the Republican brand and make more people vote Republican.
Maybe a moderate Republican isn’t good for that I don’t know if it is or isn’t but this is a gigantic improvement because at least she is trying to help instead of hurt her side (even if she sucks at it better than someone trying to hurt her side).
Stefanik may not be as conservative as you’d like – BUT she is a POPULIST – she is not ESTABLISHMENT. That means she and Trump philosophically agree. Therefore she is a good choice to replace Cheney who is 100% in the ESTABLISHMENT wing of the party
From someone sitting in a Republican area in NYS, we find Congresswoman Stefanik (R) a breath of fresh air compared to what goes for representation in D.C. . She is much more direct and open than anyone of the other Democrats who dominate in representing voters from Up-State both in Albany or D.C.
Chip Roy is a better choice than Elise Stefanik