"GOP senators remind Musk that they need to be given a piece of the action for the grift to continue"
this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2025
292 points (98.7% liked)
politics
21259 readers
3854 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
closed door meeting
Ah yes, real transparency at work
Transparency maximalism. Just like the free speech maximalism that we all know fElon for.
So they don't want the voters to know they voted for cuts?
There are no cracks. If you read the article, this is nothing more than promises to ensure DOGE gets their rubber stamp and a sense of legitimacy. It’s collusion.
there are cracks. The Supreme Court just ruled against Rump again, has approval rating is already diving, Republicans are protesting against rump, there are literally Nationwide protests with tens of thousands of people, and judges all over the country are blocking rump policies.
there are cracks, don't pretend here.
Tiny cracks. No one should get even remotely complacent, either.
There's almost zero chance of things not continuing to get much, much worse. But it is non-zero.
There being cracks is a motivation to act. It's a point to apply pressure, not a reason to stop
Things don't get better by magic, no, they get better when we stand up
That's a fair point.
"tiny cracks" like dozens of judges blocking presidential executive orders and blocking administrative Nationwide policy.
tiny cracks like your own party turning against you, like literally Nationwide protests and civil rights union suing the presidential administration?
those are not little cracks, and it is ignorant and meaning a few to pretend that they are.
those Resistance movements are very clear demonstrations that everybody, even the extremists think Trump is harmful.
no one talked about complacency before you did.
there are cracks, these are the facts. you don't have to caution against things that are not happening, you have to recognize what is happening and deal with the reality there.
They're currently tiny, yes. But good.
You are incorrect. A nationwide movement of judges, lawyers and activists actively halting the President's will and chosen policy is not a "tiny crack". Billions of dollars redirected is not a "tiny crack".
It is compared to what it's up against.
But I'm glad you're optimistic.
despite changing the goal posts, you are still incorrect; your uninformed anxiety is why I have to be realistic.
I changed nothing. "Big" or "small" is relative, which was exactly my original point.
But anyway, that's all the interest I have in arguing with someone about this. I hope you're doing well.
""Big" or "small" is relative, which was exactly my original point."
you are incorrect.
your original point was that the cracks showing in Trump's administration were tiny cracks, which is objectively false.
then you changed it to say that the cracks were relatively tiny compared to a vague, unquantifiable overwhelming opposition, which is a different comparison (those are the goal posts you changed), which is also objectively untrue, as shown above.
now you are pretending that an objective statement is the same as a relative statement, which it objectively is not.
you don't have to hide behind reinterpreting what you said; accept your mistake and move on.
"that's all the interest I have in arguing with someone about this."
obviously untrue, as you concocted a reimagining of events and posted them.
"I am not talking to you" he claims, talking to you.
"Tiny cracks" is absolutely a relative statement, and is in no way objective, what are you even talking about?
"tiny cracks" is an incorrect objective statement.
Nationwide movements, billions of dollars and presidential policy halts are objectively not "tiny cracks".
"tiny cracks compared to the size of....", is an example of a relative statement, which was not said in the original comment.
they later changed what they said, trying to change their original, incorrect statement.
doesn't work for them when they have a public comment history, of course.
Ok
yup
Uh huh
sure
Oh, you're one of those.
OK, blocked. Bye!
One of those people who don't put up with your garbage?
Yes, I'm one of those.
goodbye.
Ehh... I dunno. This could be the old power brokers letting the Doge pups know that they hold the real reins of power and the newcomers better play ball with them. I mean, that'd still be collusion, but more in a kiss the ring sort of way.
They don't hold that power. If they step out of line Trump and Elon will berate them on Twitter and set their followers after them. If they still don't fold they'll "mention" their family members in the tweets. They will play ball. This is them pretending to have free will, not them actually having any .
But they demonstrably don’t hold the reins of power
Yes, but, there is a possible silver lining here. It may also provide some accountability to those in congress. This way they're not just grossly negligent standing by and letting it happen. It will make them specifically vote in favor of it, making them directly complicit. And they can't afford to have hardly anyone abstain from voting on it because congress is so close. This means that the few GOP congresspeople that represent purple districts that are up for election in 2026 will have to choose. 1) risk losing their seat to a dem for supporting wildly unpopular cuts, or 2) split from the party on the votes for those cuts and then the worst cuts don't go through. It's a small victory, but a welcome one to me.
you mean like a congress? interesting
It's all just dick measuring. I say let them fight each other.