Here is what the GOP should do, IMHO

[WVPATX]

1. Move on to tax cuts for individuals and corporations.
2. Continue executive orders to rein in out of control agencies.
3. Dramatically reduce the size and role of Washington by significantly cutting the funding and the employees of our central government.
4. Cut the EPA by at least 25% or more and roll back destructive regulations.
5. Cut back on all regulations.
6. After taxes, move to infrastructure.
7. Name Newt Gingrich as Speaker of the House. Ryan never wanted the job and is very poor at it. Gingrich knows his way around, is absolutely brilliant and can move Trump's agenda.
8. Build the wall and install other high tech surveillance techniques to seal the border.
9. Deport all felony, criminal illegal aliens.
10. Defund to the extent possible, sanctuary cities.
11. Announce a policy of legalization of existing illegals if they meet stringent conditions and register. Whoever does not register should be deported.
12. Execute extreme vetting of people from very dangerous countries that all want to do us harm.
13. Withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord.
14. Withdraw from the Iran Deal.

If the gets this done by the end of his first term or at least underway (e.g. the wall), he will get reelected.

 

[op2]

The problem with "what the GOP should do" is there's no GOP per se but rather a bunch of GOP politicians and getting them to agree is hard in general but especially hard with Trump in and the GOP being more fractured than a ruling party usually is as a result.

As far as Newt Gingrich being Speaker of the House goes, you have to be in the House before you can be Speaker of the House and Gingrich hasn't been in the House for a long time. (Then again, I wouldn't put it past Trump to try naming Gingrich Speaker of the House anyway.)

 

[Boomboom521]

Does the H in IMHO stand for humble?

 

[WVPATX]

The problem with "what the GOP should do" is there's no GOP per se but rather a bunch of GOP politicians and getting them to agree is hard in general but especially hard with Trump in and the GOP being more fractured than a ruling party usually is as a result.

As far as Newt Gingrich being Speaker of the House goes, you have to be in the House before you can be Speaker of the House and Gingrich hasn't been in the House for a long time. (Then again, I wouldn't put it past Trump to try naming Gingrich Speaker of the House anyway.)

You're dead wrong about Gingrich. The House with a simple majority vote can name a Speaker and that Speaker does not have to be an elected official.

Can An Outsider Be Speaker of the House?
by PETE WILLIAMS

• SHARE

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Embed

After McCarthy, Pressure Builds for Paul Ryan Speakership Run 2:32
As Republicans search for someone to succeed John Boehner as speaker of the House, some have suggested bringing in an outsider, such as former House speaker Newt Gingrich or Colin Powell, the former secretary of state and onetime chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

But does the speaker have to be a member of the House?

The Constitution is silent on that question, saying simply, "The House of Representatives shall chuse (sic) their Speaker and other Officers."

The Clerk of the House agrees with the office of the House Historian, which says the speaker "has always been (but is not required to be) a House Member."

Most historians and legal experts who've looked at this issue conclude the founders simply assumed the speaker would be drawn from among elected members.

Related: House Republicans Gather To Figure Out Speaker Debacle

"It would have been unthinkable for the most populous house not to have its leader be part of the representatives who were elected by the people," says David Forte, a constitutional scholar at Cleveland State University.

"Nothing fits that would make the speaker anything other than a member of the house," except for the Constitution's silence on the issue, Forte says, noting that the Articles of Confederation said members of Congress shall have authority "to appoint one of their members to preside."

Related: With McCarthy Out, Who's Next?

The Massachusetts Constitution of 1780, an influential document for the framers, had similar language.

But given the Constitution's silence on the matter, what if the House did elect an outsider to be speaker? Someone affected by a law passed during a Congress that included a non-member speaker could file a lawsuit, but such an effort probably wouldn't go very far.

The federal courts — and especially the Supreme Court — are reluctant to wade into cases that raise such purely political questions.

"There's no way the Court's going to get involved in that. Such internal aspects of each branch of government are appropriately untouchable by another branch. And that certainly would be one," Forte says.

Bottom line? Though it's inconceivable the framers would have elected an outsider to be speaker of the House, there's nothing to stop the House from doing it now.

 

[WVPATX]

Does the H in IMHO stand for humble?

Yes, I'm a very, very humble guy Boom.

 

[op2]

You're dead wrong about Gingrich. The House with a simple majority vote can name a Speaker and that Speaker does not have to be an elected official.

Can An Outsider Be Speaker of the House?
by PETE WILLIAMS

• SHARE

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Embed

After McCarthy, Pressure Builds for Paul Ryan Speakership Run 2:32
As Republicans search for someone to succeed John Boehner as speaker of the House, some have suggested bringing in an outsider, such as former House speaker Newt Gingrich or Colin Powell, the former secretary of state and onetime chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

But does the speaker have to be a member of the House?

The Constitution is silent on that question, saying simply, "The House of Representatives shall chuse (sic) their Speaker and other Officers."

The Clerk of the House agrees with the office of the House Historian, which says the speaker "has always been (but is not required to be) a House Member."

Most historians and legal experts who've looked at this issue conclude the founders simply assumed the speaker would be drawn from among elected members.

Related: House Republicans Gather To Figure Out Speaker Debacle

"It would have been unthinkable for the most populous house not to have its leader be part of the representatives who were elected by the people," says David Forte, a constitutional scholar at Cleveland State University.

"Nothing fits that would make the speaker anything other than a member of the house," except for the Constitution's silence on the issue, Forte says, noting that the Articles of Confederation said members of Congress shall have authority "to appoint one of their members to preside."

Related: With McCarthy Out, Who's Next?

The Massachusetts Constitution of 1780, an influential document for the framers, had similar language.

But given the Constitution's silence on the matter, what if the House did elect an outsider to be speaker? Someone affected by a law passed during a Congress that included a non-member speaker could file a lawsuit, but such an effort probably wouldn't go very far.

The federal courts — and especially the Supreme Court — are reluctant to wade into cases that raise such purely political questions.

"There's no way the Court's going to get involved in that. Such internal aspects of each branch of government are appropriately untouchable by another branch. And that certainly would be one," Forte says.

Bottom line? Though it's inconceivable the framers would have elected an outsider to be speaker of the House, there's nothing to stop the House from doing it now.

Okay, I looked it up and you're right, the Speaker of the House does not have to be a member of the House. I was going to respond to the other person asking if the H in IMHO in your response stood for Humble by saying that in your case it stood for Half-Assed but I guess I can't say that now.

The Speaker of the House is 3rd (behind the POTUS and the VPOTUS) in line for the Presidency and yet he doesn't even have to be in the US Congress. Seems pretty dumb to me. Why don't the politicians remedy that?

 

[WVPATX]

Okay, I looked it up and you're right, the Speaker of the House does not have to be a member of the House. I was going to respond to the other person asking if the H in IMHO in your response stood for Humble by saying that in your case it stood for Half-Assed but I guess I can't say that now.

The Speaker of the House is 3rd (behind the POTUS and the VPOTUS) in line for the Presidency and yet he doesn't even have to be in the US Congress. Seems pretty dumb to me. Why don't the politicians remedy that?

I agree with you and feel the Speaker should be in the House because you are exactly right, the Speaker is 3rd in line for the Presidency. But, the Founders overlooked this stipulation. We could Amend the Constitution to require it which is the solution prescribed by our Founders. Hard to do, but possible.

 

[Keyser76]

But they have already shown a "simple majority vote" is not so simple in the fractured GOP. Pray tell me how the freedom caucus and the moderate blue state GOPers will agree on tax cuts if they couldn't agree on repealing Obamacare? Quit pretending your boys aren't a mess and there is a concensus on anything in todays GOP. Healthcare for every body at a lower cost, I like Trumps plan, get r done!

 

[WVPATX]

But they have already shown a "simple majority vote" is not so simple in the fractured GOP. Pray tell me how the freedom caucus and the moderate blue state GOPers will agree on tax cuts if they couldn't agree on repealing Obamacare? Quit pretending your boys aren't a mess and there is a concensus on anything in todays GOP. Healthcare for every body at a lower cost, I like Trumps plan, get r done!

Tax cuts much, much easier. Every GOPer wants tax cuts. Come want them very large, others a little smaller. But they all want cuts, they all want smaller government and they all want our companies to be more competitive world wide.

 

[Keyser76]

Tax cuts much, much easier. Every GOPer wants tax cuts. Come want them very large, others a little smaller. But they all want cuts, they all want smaller government and they all want our companies to be more competitive world wide.

They all said they wanted to repeal Obamacare too! Tax overhaul so easy it's been done a bunch of times! lol, you are divorced from reality.

 

[WVPATX]

They all said they wanted to repeal Obamacare too! Tax overhaul so easy it's been done a bunch of times! lol, you are divorced from reality.

The Ryan plan was NOT a full repeal of Obamacare and that was the issue. Taxes a far different story. If you'd like to make a wager, I'm sure I can find some coin to cough up?

 

[Original Mountaineer1]

The problem with "what the GOP should do" is there's no GOP per se but rather a bunch of GOP politicians and getting them to agree is hard in general but especially hard with Trump in and the GOP being more fractured than a ruling party usually is as a result.

As far as Newt Gingrich being Speaker of the House goes, you have to be in the House before you can be Speaker of the House and Gingrich hasn't been in the House for a long time. (Then again, I wouldn't put it past Trump to try naming Gingrich Speaker of the House anyway.)

Actually, I liked some of the ideas until I saw Gingrich classified as brilliant.

 

[WVPATX]

Actually, I liked some of the ideas until I saw Gingrich classified as brilliant.

You don't think Gingrich is intelligent and yes brilliant? If you don't, then ideology is blinding your judgment. I don't know of many prominent libs that don't agree that Gingrich is extremely smart.

 

[Original Mountaineer1]

You don't think Gingrich is intelligent and yes brilliant? If you don't, then ideology is blinding your judgment. I don't know of many prominent libs that don't agree that Gingrich is extremely smart.

Some would say Senator Dianne Feinstein is brilliant too......

 

[WVPATX]

Some would say Senator Dianne Feinstein is brilliant too......

I'm not sure who those "some" are, but she is not in his league. Not sure what Di Fi has to do with this conversation. Gingrich is not likable. Personally, I don't. But he is one very, very smart guy.

 

[Original Mountaineer1]

I'm not sure who those "some" are, but she is not in his league. Not sure what Di Fi has to do with this conversation. Gingrich is not likable. Personally, I don't. But he is one very, very smart guy.

well she did go to Stanford..... I just looked that up. Another "brilliant" member of Congress, Maxine Waters went to UCLA.

 

[WVPATX]

well she did go to Stanford..... I just looked that up. Another "brilliant" member of Congress, Maxine Waters went to UCLA.

You want to compare Maxine Waters with anyone of intellect? I know many people that got into schools for lots of reasons that had nothing to do with intellect.

 

[Original Mountaineer1]

You want to compare Maxine Waters with anyone of intellect? I know many people that got into schools for lots of reasons that had nothing to do with intellect.

Brilliant was in quotes..... I am sure she is a nice person though

 

[WVPATX]

Brilliant was in quotes..... I am sure she is a nice person though

I don't see anything nice about Maxine. She is shrill and unhinged. And yes, Gingrich is brilliant. Helping to engineer the 1994 takeover of Congress was a staggering accomplishment after 40 years in the minority.