95
oh she gets to be the “disapproving one” since she needs a vote bump? Traitors to the USA, she should be on trial
Exactly. And Collins gets to play "concerned" too, because they have they votes without them.
Surely he's LEARNED HIS LESSON Susan you idiot fascist.
remember she was the so-called "moderate" republican who made waves criticizing trump and then voted for the bbb.
edit:
oh, i should also mention, she tried to carve out a temporary exception to the cuts for alaska in the bill and it got thrown out but she still voted for it anyway.
I so hate this charade. They have zero principles. Someone will probably turn and let this asshole be approved.
This is in the news and trumps money laundering isn't.
That is all.
Your usual suspect Rapeublicans with spaghetti spines. Let's see how they vote when they are called on. Color me skeptical
She wants something. Only thing I can think of, but I can't imagine its something any of us would approve of.
Ahh, it's her turn to be the "good" Republican. Her and Collins take turns passing the moderate Republican title back and forth on close decisions.
It usually comes down to Republicans needing one more vote..... Either her or collins will have a change of heart after getting a deal for their state and having a one on one with the nominee where the nominee pinky promises to behave themselves.
I hope this holds but I won’t hold my breath
God how tired I am of all these wrinkly-ass motherfuckers fucking things up for the rest of us. Can't we just put them all in a nice retirement home or something?
Their age is not the problem.
It most assuredly is part of the problem.
Yes, there are younger folks with criminal minds and/or stupid ideas in politics as well but this gerontocracy has a lot of people deciding on things they don't have the fuckingest clue about.
Nope, not buying that for instant. I refuse to fall into the ageism trap.
Their age absolutely figures in, when you consider the last time they set foot in a grocery store
Not seeing how that is the least bit relevant. Separating us by age and other demos is part of the plan, though, and I refuse to fall into the trap.
You don't think there's something wrong with your elected representative not having any idea how much a loaf of bread costs?
I am not sure there is a direct correlation between something like that and age and I don't think it is the least bit useful to assume that it does. Also, even if someone has never set foot into a grocery store, that kind of data is easily found.
I'd rather focus on the policies and the character traits, and less on physical attributes of politicians themselves. Someone could be 100 and still have the morality and empathy required to understand the needs of the average American. Someone could be 20 and a child of privilege having never stepped into a grocery store, and neither know nor care at all about the lives of average Americans.
There are plenty of people who are that age who understand grocery prices because they haven't been in Congress for 60 years, floating on a cushion of fat money donations and indifference.
So perhaps age is not the issue, and the issue is more that they've been there too damn long. Point to the ones who are still doing good works and not just legislating to maintain their seats.
She needs the hall pass.
Blanche will be confirmed, these people have no morals.
this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2026
95 points (98.0% liked)
politics
30703 readers
3004 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS