▲ 787 ▼ Rep. George Santos expelled from Congress on bipartisan vote (wapo.st) submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world 112 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 79 points 2 years ago (1 child) Hell, he literally stole money from another Republican Congressman and his wife. You almost have to respect it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] superduperenigma@lemmy.world 52 points 2 years ago (3 children) For how blatant his lies and fabrications were, and how brazenly he stole and misued money, I'm honestly impressed that he got into office in the first place (who tf was running his opponent's campaign?). Surviving 11 months after that was just standard "Republicans refusing to hold each other accountable" behavior. But man, gotta admit the guy pulled off a pretty decent con. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [+] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 53 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] psmgx@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago The GOP wants blackmail and leverage options, and only when they have the power. Santos's lies were pretty clear, blatant, and he was grifting his own party. Useless as an asset, and detrimental to his own people. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Furedadmins@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) He is from a safe very red district so the craziest person wins the primary and then basically gets in free after that. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] frezik@midwest.social 10 points 2 years ago (1 child) It's a blue district, though only D+2 (meaning it tends to be 2 points more towards Dems than the national average). It did vote for Bush in 2004, but is otherwise straight blue for President since 1992. Most recently went for Biden by +10 points. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Furedadmins@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago Republicans have historically held that seat with very large majorities. Over 70% during Bush and Obama presidencies. Trump was enough to drag it down but then as soon as he was off the ballot it's back to crazy land Republicans. I might be wrong but to me that says deep red. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] superduperenigma@lemmy.world 52 points 2 years ago (3 children) For how blatant his lies and fabrications were, and how brazenly he stole and misued money, I'm honestly impressed that he got into office in the first place (who tf was running his opponent's campaign?). Surviving 11 months after that was just standard "Republicans refusing to hold each other accountable" behavior. But man, gotta admit the guy pulled off a pretty decent con. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [+] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 53 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] psmgx@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago The GOP wants blackmail and leverage options, and only when they have the power. Santos's lies were pretty clear, blatant, and he was grifting his own party. Useless as an asset, and detrimental to his own people. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Furedadmins@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) He is from a safe very red district so the craziest person wins the primary and then basically gets in free after that. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] frezik@midwest.social 10 points 2 years ago (1 child) It's a blue district, though only D+2 (meaning it tends to be 2 points more towards Dems than the national average). It did vote for Bush in 2004, but is otherwise straight blue for President since 1992. Most recently went for Biden by +10 points. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Furedadmins@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago Republicans have historically held that seat with very large majorities. Over 70% during Bush and Obama presidencies. Trump was enough to drag it down but then as soon as he was off the ballot it's back to crazy land Republicans. I might be wrong but to me that says deep red. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 53 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] psmgx@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago The GOP wants blackmail and leverage options, and only when they have the power. Santos's lies were pretty clear, blatant, and he was grifting his own party. Useless as an asset, and detrimental to his own people. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Furedadmins@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) He is from a safe very red district so the craziest person wins the primary and then basically gets in free after that. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] frezik@midwest.social 10 points 2 years ago (1 child) It's a blue district, though only D+2 (meaning it tends to be 2 points more towards Dems than the national average). It did vote for Bush in 2004, but is otherwise straight blue for President since 1992. Most recently went for Biden by +10 points. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Furedadmins@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago Republicans have historically held that seat with very large majorities. Over 70% during Bush and Obama presidencies. Trump was enough to drag it down but then as soon as he was off the ballot it's back to crazy land Republicans. I might be wrong but to me that says deep red. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] frezik@midwest.social 10 points 2 years ago (1 child) It's a blue district, though only D+2 (meaning it tends to be 2 points more towards Dems than the national average). It did vote for Bush in 2004, but is otherwise straight blue for President since 1992. Most recently went for Biden by +10 points. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Furedadmins@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago Republicans have historically held that seat with very large majorities. Over 70% during Bush and Obama presidencies. Trump was enough to drag it down but then as soon as he was off the ballot it's back to crazy land Republicans. I might be wrong but to me that says deep red. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Furedadmins@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago Republicans have historically held that seat with very large majorities. Over 70% during Bush and Obama presidencies. Trump was enough to drag it down but then as soon as he was off the ballot it's back to crazy land Republicans. I might be wrong but to me that says deep red. permalink fedilink source parent