3 ms·

> In many cases, the Freedom Caucus actually drives policy to the left, as they leave the leadership no choice but to use Democratic votes to approve must-pass

> In many cases, the Freedom Caucus actually drives policy to the left, as they leave the leadership no choice but to use Democratic votes to approve must-pass spending bills or keep the government from shutting down. But this is exactly what many Freedom Caucus members desire: by withdrawing their support for leadership, they can position themselves as true and pure conservatives. When the leadership then has no choice but to cut deals with Democrats, the Freedom Caucus can hammer the leaders in public for being weak and unprincipled. In some sense the Freedom Caucus can’t lose, because every loss is just another betrayal by the hated GOP leadership, which is often exactly what they are seeking. Interesting and probably accurate. But I think it underlines a more important point. The freedom caucus is basically an enemy faction to the mainline GOP. At some point they’re going to need to be disowned if they don’t fall in line. Probably quite soon if the orange loses the presidential run.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> some point they’re going to need to be disowned if they don’t fall in line They're still being elected by their voters. In many cases, with high approval ratings. You aren't going to mute them without addressing their districts' problems.
- jncfhnb 3y ago
  Shrug. If they make an enemy of GOP leadership I could see a world where GOP leaderships decides it’s better to just cut them off. No more funding. No more Republican endorsement. They can just kick them out of the party. Would they be able to win elections as independents? Probably not imo.
- alextingle 3y ago
  They are a tiny minority. It makes no sense for them to have any influence whatsoever. They are not really the problem. The problem is that your institutions offer no mechanism for a majority that agrees on a particular course of action to actually make it happen. Silly partisanship trumps running the country. Perhaps you need to consider secret ballots in your legislature. That would eliminate partisanship in a trice.
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    > The problem is that your institutions offer no mechanism for a majority that agrees on a particular course of action to actually make it happen Yes, it does. What it also does, sometimes, is create incentives for that consensus on some important issues not to form for electoral tactical reasons that go beyond thr immediate issue, even where there would otherwise be consensus on the immediate issue. (Conversely, it sometimes creates a tactical incentive for majority consensus despite disagreement on the merits of the immediate issue.) > Perhaps you need to consider secret ballots in your legislature. That would eliminate partisanship in a trice. It wouldn't eliminate partisanship, but it would eliminate individual accountability of legislators to the electorate, making the system less democratic but equally problematically partisan.
anigbrowl 3y ago
It's a bit late for that, isn't it? 2019 was the last time that this was a practical option, at this point they're in a ride or die situation. None of the moderates are willing to declare themselves independent or split off as a bloc - they might get corporate donations but experience has shown that voters would punish them for their betrayal, even to the point of electing Democrats for one cycle.
dragonwriter 3y ago
> The freedom caucus is basically an enemy faction to the mainline GOP. At some point they’re going to need to be disowned if they don’t fall in line. Probably quite soon if the orange loses the presidential run. They can't be disowned, practically, unless the rump GOP has a strategy for securing a majority without them (not just without those members, but also the people in the electorate and activist base thar share their views and are a significant share of the support for other GOP members.)

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

> some point they’re going to need to be disowned if they don’t fall in line They're still being elected by their voters. In many cases, with high approval ratings. You aren't going to mute them without addressing their districts' problems.

jncfhnb 3y ago
Shrug. If they make an enemy of GOP leadership I could see a world where GOP leaderships decides it’s better to just cut them off. No more funding. No more Republican endorsement. They can just kick them out of the party. Would they be able to win elections as independents? Probably not imo.
alextingle 3y ago
They are a tiny minority. It makes no sense for them to have any influence whatsoever. They are not really the problem. The problem is that your institutions offer no mechanism for a majority that agrees on a particular course of action to actually make it happen. Silly partisanship trumps running the country. Perhaps you need to consider secret ballots in your legislature. That would eliminate partisanship in a trice.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  > The problem is that your institutions offer no mechanism for a majority that agrees on a particular course of action to actually make it happen Yes, it does. What it also does, sometimes, is create incentives for that consensus on some important issues not to form for electoral tactical reasons that go beyond thr immediate issue, even where there would otherwise be consensus on the immediate issue. (Conversely, it sometimes creates a tactical incentive for majority consensus despite disagreement on the merits of the immediate issue.) > Perhaps you need to consider secret ballots in your legislature. That would eliminate partisanship in a trice. It wouldn't eliminate partisanship, but it would eliminate individual accountability of legislators to the electorate, making the system less democratic but equally problematically partisan.

anigbrowl 3y ago

It's a bit late for that, isn't it? 2019 was the last time that this was a practical option, at this point they're in a ride or die situation. None of the moderates are willing to declare themselves independent or split off as a bloc - they might get corporate donations but experience has shown that voters would punish them for their betrayal, even to the point of electing Democrats for one cycle.

dragonwriter 3y ago

> The freedom caucus is basically an enemy faction to the mainline GOP. At some point they’re going to need to be disowned if they don’t fall in line. Probably quite soon if the orange loses the presidential run. They can't be disowned, practically, unless the rump GOP has a strategy for securing a majority without them (not just without those members, but also the people in the electorate and activist base thar share their views and are a significant share of the support for other GOP members.)