Liz Cheney, the Republican From the State of Reality
Category: News & Politics
Via: hallux • 2 years ago • 110 commentsBy: Mark Leibovich - The Atlantic
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
LARAMIE, Wyo.—Liz Cheney will probably lose her job on Tuesday, in large part due to her crusade against Donald Trump. Trump will surely taunt her as a big RINO loser, but Cheney has no plans to end her fight against him. She is already looking past her anticipated defeat here and into a future that could include—I suspect—a primary challenge to the former president in 2024.
“It’s clear that our party is really sick right now,” Cheney told me when I spoke with her last week. “The Trump forces that are trying to pull us into the abyss are really strong and really fighting.” Punching back has not been a winning formula for Cheney’s reelection bid in America’s reddest state. Her Trump-certified challenger, the election-denying Harriet Hageman, is well ahead in the polls .
At the very least, though, Cheney won herself another big celebrity endorsement the other day: Kevin Costner! She tweeted a photo of the cowboy-hatted actor wearing an i’m for liz cheney T-shirt on what appears to be the set of the hit Paramount series Yellowstone . “Real men put country over party,” she captioned her photo of Costner, who is in many ways a typical Cheney supporter circa 2022: a liberal-leaning recent convert who does not live in Wyoming.
Cheney has raised more than $13 million in this election cycle, nearly all of it from out of state . Strangers keep running up to her, sometimes in tears, to thank her for her onslaught against Trump. They tell Cheney that she is the paragon of American courage at a time when the country so desperately needs it. “I haven’t always agreed with you,” they inevitably begin, and the reverence flows from there.
And then there are the death threats. They mostly come from people who have typically agreed with her. Cheney has, let’s just say, fallen out of favor in the state and party where she, until recently, was royalty. Most Republicans have zero use for her these days, which is just as well, because the feeling is mutual.
But Cheney is playing a longer game, she says. She has spent many hours working on her address for Tuesday night. It will almost certainly be a concession speech, but Cheney seems to view her primary more as a speed bump—and her address as a prime-time launching pad into a political future far more consequential than anything she could have achieved in Congress. Whatever Wyoming Republicans decide will be secondary to Cheney’s pursuit of her real opponent, Donald Trump. Will Harriet Whatshername even rate a mention?
I joined Cheney in the college town of Laramie, at a house party hosted by one of her supporters. As usual, people were coming up to her—very young people and very old people and liberals who probably used to deride her father, Dick Cheney, as Darth Vader and a war criminal . Now they were praising Darth Daughter, reminding her that she is playing for history and on a stage much bigger than Wyoming. They tell her not to be deterred—by the abuse or the ditch liz signs or whatever ugly results come in after the voting’s done.
“I consider you an absolute hero,” an 89-year-old local Democrat named Jim LaFleiche told Cheney. “Just keep doing what you’re doing.” Cheney thanked LaFleiche and assured him that she would not give up. “This is about preserving the Constitution and the rule of law and the basic seriousness of politics,” she said. “And it is about”—wait for it, as it’s become Cheney’s mantra—“making sure that Donald Trump does not get near the Oval Office again.”
Cheney also called the former president the greatest threat to our republic in the country’s 246-year history—words that her father echoed almost precisely in an ad that her campaign released the next day. No office is worth having if it means signing on to a big lie, she told me.
At nearly that same moment, Hageman was in Casper, Wyoming, declaring the exact opposite. “Absolutely the election was rigged,” she said about Joe Biden’s defeat of Trump nearly two years ago—an assertion she had not made explicitly until that point. Hageman probably does not believe this, but uttering the line has become the price of admission into Trump’s party. It is, in many cases, the cost of viability for Republicans running in states like Wyoming, where Trump won 70 percent of the vote—his largest share—in 2020.
A day later: Hungary’s ultra-right-wing prime minister, Viktor Orbán, was in Dallas kicking off the Conservative Political Action Conference. The annual CPAC gathering has become a kind of MAGA jamboree celebrating all the flavors of Republican denial (the election, January 6 , COVID, etc.). Trump hosted Orbán, the European Union’s only autocrat, at his New Jersey resort last week, and both men enjoyed wildly enthusiastic receptions at CPAC. Marjorie Taylor Greene, Sarah Palin, the My Pillow guy, and Papa John also spoke. Cheney was nowhere to be found, though her name was hurled about as a slur.
I reminisced with Cheney a few months ago about a CPAC I had covered in 2010. She had been greeted at the event, held that year in Washington, as a bright light of the Republican Party’s future . Her remarks culminated in her introduction of a special guest, Dick Cheney, whom she called the man who “taught me what it means to have the courage of your convictions.” The former vice president walked out to Beatles-worthy shrieks from the young crowd and a few scattered “Run, Dick, run!”s When he said, “I think Barack Obama is a one-term president,” the audience jumped to its feet and whooped. The line was considered red meat by the base back then, though Cheney wasn’t even calling for Obama to be locked up or, for that matter, hanged. Those were innocent times.
B eing a lonely exemplar of courage in a party otherwise bloated with cranks and cowards has made Liz Cheney one of the most admired political leaders in America—at least among Democrats. “The world is upside down,” Cheney has been saying. Indeed, the marvel of Dick Cheney’s daughter now having a 59 percent approval rating among Democrats, and only 14 percent among Republicans, has not been lost on anyone.
Cheney voted in line with Trump’s positions 93 percent of the time when he was president. But after he lost the election and lied about it, Cheney turned hard against him and almost immediately became a pariah in her party. Now 66 percent of Republicans view her unfavorably. The vitriol that Republicans direct toward her is typically reserved for their go-to Democratic villains—often female ones: Hillary, Pelosi, AOC. Because of threats to her safety, Cheney’s campaign events are never publicized, and reporters are only selectively alerted. Security is heavy and paranoia runs deep in Cheney World, probably for good reason.
Back at the Laramie house party, a young woman—a recent University of Wyoming graduate, voice hushed and earnest—was urging Cheney to keep fighting. She implored her not to be deterred by what keeps happening to her fellow Republican Trump-resisters in other states. The night before, Representative Peter Meijer, one of 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach the defeated president, had lost his primary in Michigan, as had Rusty Bowers, the Republican House speaker in Arizona, who gave some of the most damning testimony against Trump before the January 6 committee. I asked Cheney how dispiriting it was for her to see them go down in defeat. “It just makes me more determined,” Cheney said. “We have a lot of work to do. It’s not just this election cycle.”
Alan Simpson, the 92-year-old former Republican senator from Wyoming and a longtime friend of the Cheneys, placed her congressional race in the context of American heroes doing unpopular things—routed, perhaps, in the short term, but vindicated by history. “Look, she’s going to go on into eternity, or as long as is necessary” to stop Trump, Simpson told me. “She’s going to keep doing everything she can to bring down this oafish man, who’s filled with revenge and hatred and total disregard for the laws of the United States.”
As a preamble to brief remarks Cheney made, another local supporter, Laura Lewis, shared a quote attributed to Abraham Lincoln that she said applied to the trailing candidate. “A statesman is he who thinks in the future generations,” read Lewis. “And a politician is he who thinks in the upcoming elections.”
These are the kinds of rationalizations that are often trotted out about candidates who are about to lose. But in the context of Cheney’s campaign—and the bravery she has exhibited—it feels wholly appropriate. Of all the elements of cowardice that have afflicted the Republican Party, a particularly pathetic one is the terror so many of Cheney’s colleagues appear to have about losing their jobs. Maybe they can’t bear the thought of forfeiting their congressional parking spaces or fancy pins, or maybe they simply lack the stomach to get called bad names by Donald Trump. So they do whatever it takes to pass their tribal loyalty tests and survive their next election. They’re so afraid of being called a “former member of Congress” that they’ll never know what it feels like to be called “courageous.”
I f cheney takes any consolation from her likely ouster from Congress, it is that she will no longer be part of a caucus that she’s lost all regard for. “I say this to my Republican colleagues who are defending the indefensible,” Cheney said in what may be remembered as her signature line in the January 6 hearings. “There will come a day when Donald Trump is gone, but your dishonor will remain.”
A mere mention of colleagues such as Kevin McCarthy and Elise Stefanik, Republican leaders with whom Cheney once worked closely, elicits from her a kind of visceral contempt. “It makes me really sad and it makes me really angry,” Cheney told me in Laramie in a slow, measured tone. She said she has watched in disgust as so many people she once admired have stood by and not only ignored the obvious threat of Trump, but embraced him. “It makes me realize: We have too many people in our party who don’t understand our history, who don’t understand why we take the oath, who don’t understand what our obligation is,” Cheney told me.
The colleagues she speaks of most favorably these days tend to be Democrats, many of them female. In Laramie, she singled out Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, Mikie Sherrill of New Jersey, and Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania as “serious people who do their homework and love their country.”
Cheney identifies her work on the January 6 committee—made up of seven Democrats and two Republicans—as the most important thing she’s done in her professional life. The hearings, she said, have served as an antidote to the many derelictions that so many of her party’s putative “leaders” have been guilty of. “People don’t realize how fragile our system is,” Cheney told me. “We just get accustomed to thinking, you know, we’ll survive anything.”
Whatever happens Tuesday, whatever remains of the January 6 committee, Liz Cheney’s work will continue. She says it’s too early for her to discuss the prospect of a presidential run. But not for me. I’m guessing Cheney will run, and I believe that she absolutely should, especially if Trump does. It would almost certainly be another losing primary for her. Yet it would nonetheless be a fascinating matchup, much more compelling than any challenge a Trump-derivative character such as Ron DeSantis or Mike Pence could ever pose. It’s hard to imagine DeSantis or Pence seriously mocking Trump for losing to Brandon in 2020, or challenging his election lies, or slamming him for his complicity and desertion on January 6, or mentioning the FBI’s search of his residence or his need to plead the Fifth.
Even in defeat, Cheney could emerge from Wyoming tough and unencumbered enough to serve as a one-woman wrecking ball against Trump and as a reckoning for a party that’s been terrified to speak honestly about him for years now. I imagine Trump and the RNC will do whatever is necessary to avoid such a reckoning and to keep Trump as far away as possible from a debate stage with Liz Cheney: Republican from reality.
Tags
Who is online
403 visitors
Liz taking on Donald for 2024? Too bad Stephen Sondheim is dead.
Liz Cheny is greed personified and is her father's daughter after all. Personally, I don't see Trump running in 2024 so that should not be a issue.
You forgot to mention Liz's husband works for a law firm that has Chinese clients ...
I had Chinese clients - absolutely wonderful people. But after all, CHINA = "The Kiss of Death" and so used to smear others by some on this site. LOL
The National Pulse
Another Questionable Conservative banned source.
Sad.
I do not follow this Ed. The context is Cheney taking on Trump and you deem Cheney the one who is greed personified??
I would put it down to grasping at straws, even if those straws are imaginary.
One need only follow the money with Cheney from her family connections and her political and celebrities with deep pockets. As I said, I doubt Trump will be running, so Cheney will be running against someone else if she throws her hat in the ring.
Again, Ed, the context is Liz Cheney and Donald Trump. Deem Liz Cheney greedy (of all things) and be absolutely silent on Trump's greed??
Okay, Trump is a greedy SOB. I thought that was pretty much well known and established already.
It is extremely well known. That is why comparing Trump to almost anyone in terms of greed is curious. In other words, if one would not vote for Cheney because she is 'greedy' one would expect that they surely would not even consider Trump.
I did not vote for Trump the first time and I certainly have zero intention of voting for him this time around either.
I was not implying that you would, Ed.
liz cheney, a patriotic republican, so very rare and unique in the american political landscape today.
The GoP is still quite infected with the Trump parasite and some just cannot see it.
The writer of this piece, Mark Leibovich, is an expert on the dysfunction of the Republican Party, and in fact has written a best selling book about it.
Nice tribute to Liz Cheney, who has remade her image as a hard right ideologue into that of a patriot.
some how with 3 days left to the primary , that enough people can be moved to the state and establish residency to vote to save her is not a possibility.
i have been saying for months now there is one word that describes Cheney with Wyo voters in charge of the state and how they vote , toast is the polite word .
With apologies to you personally, Mark, I would say that if anyone ever did a study and determination of the average ignorance of the population in the 50 States, Wyoming would probably take the prize.
the results might actually surprise you. and that would depend on the metrics one would choose to use .
dont fall for the trap of because the state is predominantly rural ( and likes it that way) that they are a bunch of easily led rubes .
30 years + here i have found out thats not the case .and even I consider myself an outsider here even after all those years .
buzz , no need , your being honest with your view and perception based on how you see things and what you individually believe and think , i have absolutely no problems or issues with that .
you are one of the few that i CAN have a civil conversation even if we disagree and still respect each others thoughts , even with some sarcastic or sardonic humor .
I think the metric to be used is the ability to think critically, not IQ or level of education.
that narrows it down but is still a pretty broad area that is influenced by individual thoughts and beliefs .
Now when it comes to those thoughts ,i can only tell you how i think and what i know and believe .
keep in mind i am an outlier , i am neither rep or dem , and i definitely dont fit the common mold for a wyo resident , not with my background , experiences , beliefs and any number of other things i could add but wont .
I think the ability to think critically would be instrumental in directing what those thoughts and beliefs might be.
true, but then the analysis would also depend on the thoughts and beliefs of who is doing the judging , would that not be true?
if you judge fish on its ability to climb a tree vs a monkey , the fish is lacking .
same holds true for this line of discussion .
Yep. So see you at the movie quiz.
dont have time this week , and not a big gary cooper fan , maybe the next one .
about the only 3 movies i know for sure he was in are 3 i wont mention , other than that i would be pissing in the wind , but best of luck to those that play , im going to go hunting antelope .
Antelope? Are they more numerous in America than unicorns?
pronghorns - Search (bing.com)
we also call them speed goats , 0-50 mph in a blink of an eye , and very skittish .
hope the link is good for you .
Yes, thanks, I've learned something today.
I never thought I would ever see another American woman politician I could admire as much as I admired Anne Richards, and if I were an American and if LIz Cheney were to run for POTUS, not only would I vote for her but I would knock on doors campaigning for her. I have done that before - when a woman doctor ran to be a member of the Ontario provincial legislature. She became the Minister of Health.
hot off the news feed
Liz Cheney's Chances of Winning GOP Primary With 4 Days to Election (msn.com)
will wait to say "told ya so "
That's been a forgone conclusion for some time.
I think that is common knowledge Mark.
I did not seed this under any illusion that Ms. Cheney had a chance of winning, only because she has become a remarkable lady who history will one day elevate far higher than any deep hole her party can dig.
Tis humorous around here in the wee hours...
Trumps favorite time, no ? Caught a few headlines earlier closing up at the bar, and they were not sounding so swell for Trumpy
Why is this funny? It has long been expected that Cheney would lose her seat for standing up against Trump. She did it anyway. That translates into doing what she believes is the right thing in spite of personal consequences. History usually does hold high those who stand tall if it turns out that they were correct. And at this point, the evidence is intense that Trump engaged in acts that at the very least should disqualify him from being trusted to hold any position of public authority. It is likely that this will lead to an indictment and conviction. If so, Cheney will be entirely vindicated in history.
The only way I see Cheney looking bad in history is if this goes to trial based on Jan 6th committee findings and Trump is deemed not guilty.
That's what's going to happen....count on it
How on Earth can anyone think, given all the evidence publicly available, that Trump would be found not guilty of anything?
How does one imagine that Garland would bring forth a case of this magnitude unless it was extremely strong?
Will admit , that is how the MSM has painted the picture for those that dont live in the state , and i cant blame people for believing it as well, it does have a kernal of truth too. but it is not the whole , or rest of the story as paul harvey would say .
being i do live here , i do have a different take on it , even with my own biases . i have never voted for her, usually vote 3rd party for that seat even knowing it wont happen . I dont even vote in the party primaries because i feel personally that it is up to the members of each party to select the candidate they wish to run in the general , i get to make my choice in the general not being a party member . I feel cross over voting in primaries is dirty politics .
the things that i do see having more effect is the optics and the fact that because of the trump issue , she has not been doing the job of being the people of wyomings voice in the house to the peoples satisfaction . to put it plainly she is so intent on trump , she isnt doing the job the voters think she should be focused on , and since the state has but the single seat in the house , the voters likely feel slighted because , the things they think are important are not being addressed or done as they see they should
that exasperates another issue some have , the fact that she is not from Wyoming and had never lived or raised here . to a good portion of the voters , that actually does matter to a degree, and how much so is open to debate.
another issue is the habit the voters of the state have , they actually passed term limits back in the 90s , but it was deemed unconstitutional by the state supreme court , but the same court pointed out that if the voters wished to term limit anyone they can do so by simply not voting for that individual , and that is pretty much what the voters have been doing .
As it stands , govenors get 2 terms last gov that thought of running for a 3rd term backed out when he found out that voters were vocal about voting for the opposition , he didnt want to just hand the govenorship to the opposing party so he stepped aside and let someone else run for his party.
senators in DC usually get 4 or 5 terms and decide to not run again that has never been tested by the voters so there is that .
we now come to the house seat in DC, the one currently held by Cheney , what i have seen is its 3-4 terms and they dont run again for that seat Cheney is finishing up her 3rd term , but as with anything , a proposed 4th and final term , would depend on the voters of the state and their approval / disapproval ratings of the individual candidate .
And since the state has but that single seat at large , the people take that it is rather important that the person that holds it , follow the job description for that seat and not go, as i have heard in state , rouge .
So there is my take , its not as simple as some ( like the MSM ) would like to paint it , but its not all that complicated either .
How would Cheney look bad in history (the focus of my comment)?
if your asking my personal opinion , subject to what i think?
history will show she was fair to middlin as a representative , who lost sight of what the voters thought they hired her to do and paid the price for it .
which in itself is neither good or bad just not as good as some would want , but not as bad as others .
I think, if history concludes that Trump did wrong and needed to be held to account, that Cheney will be treated well by history by standing up for what is right even though it cost her dearly politically.
and that will always be open to debate or discussion , as is most history .
Being a Wyoming native born and raised, Mark hit the nail on the head with this comment. Of course I cannot speak for everyone in this state, but the ones I talk to say they did not elect her to go after Trump. She was elected to represent the concerns of the majority of the people of Wyoming and Trump is not high on that list for most folks in Wyoming.
Did she stop representing all the other interests of the people of Wyoming, just because she was named to the January 6th committee? Has she stopped voting on legislation that affects them, or furthering legislation and policies that further what their interests?
Or do the people of Wyoming not care if criminals get away with crimes? Such investigations are part of the job she was elected to perform.
Politically, Cheney has generally been in agreement with Trump. Her politics have not changed. That leaves Cheney losing because the majority of the people of Wyoming don't want criminals to be investigated or prosecuted for their crimes, if they're committed in the name of overturning a fairly-elected Democratic President.
That does not speak well of the majority of the people of Wyoming.
LOL , thank you , what about the rest of it ?
"'How on Earth can anyone think, given all the evidence publicly available, that Trump would be found not guilty of anything?"
Not until he's indicted , tried, and convicted.
"I did not seed this under any illusion that Ms. Cheney had a chance of winning, only because she has become a remarkable lady who history will one day elevate far higher than any deep hole her party can dig."
She'll end up a disgraced has been, like her criminal father
That would be your view , and your welcome to it , the view thats going to count is the view of the voters of the state and how they decide if she has done the job she was elected for . i highly doubt they care what anyone else thinks when its their decision to make .
It is all pretty much spot on, Cheyney is not really considered to be from here, and where she considers home in Teton County is one of the few liberal areas of the state, and is not really considered to be a part of the state by most Wyoming natives, and is avoided by most.
As for voter imposed term limits, you are correct, voters in Wyoming, will not usually support more than 2 terms as governor, Senators usually 4 terms, and representatives usually 3-4. What is interesting is that most people running for office know this, and will not even try to run past these basically voter initiated terms limits.
LOL , teton county , where the millionaires fled to after the billionaires chased them out of vail colorado.
basic tourist trap with only one real town , jackson .
cheney chose wilson because her dad has property in teton pines out on the moose - wilson road also known as the village road because of the teton village ski resort . and the only reason he had that was because of the law that states that the president and vice president can not be from the same state . bush being from texas , and dick also being a texas resident forced the choice of a different residency state , he could choose between virginia or wyoming , history shows which he chose .
Did she stop representing all the other interests of the people of Wyoming, just because she was named to the January 6th committee? Has she stopped voting on legislation that affects them, or furthering legislation and policies that further what their interests?
In my opinion no she did not stop representing other interests. The perception in the state is that she did and that she has a personal vendetta against Trump. Right or wrong that is what people in this state perceive her to be doing.
Or do the people of Wyoming not care if criminals get away with crimes? Such investigations are part of the job she was elected to perform.
What kind of a horse shit statement is that? Wyomingites care if crimes are investigated, and charges brought if probable cause exists and the accused getting a fair trial in a timely manner in a court of law. Cheyne has no power to investigate, charge, or punish anyone period that is up to the judiciary. Director Wray, is the one who should be in the hot seat in front of the committee, that is who the committee has some power over, with the threat of impeachment.
Politically, Cheney has generally been in agreement with Trump. Her politics have not changed. That leaves Cheney losing because the majority of the people of Wyoming don't want criminals to be investigated or prosecuted for their crimes, if they're committed in the name of overturning a fairly-elected Democratic President.
Politically, Cheyney was never really conservative enough for republican voters in this state. She was elected because of her name, (the devil you know, is better than the devil you don't). The majority of the people of Wyoming want someone to investigate Jan 6, that has the power to do something about it and that is not a house committee.
I my opinion if the Jan 6 committee had taken an oversight role into an investigation of the events of Jan 6th instead of investigating it like they have the power to do something about it, then she would probably have stood a chance at being re-elected.
It's basically a reiteration of what you've said, so you can drop the histrionics. You have admitted that politically, she represents Wyoming interests. The reason she's losing is because of her role in investigating Trump. They don't want her doing that. You basically agree with me, but don't like it when I say the quiet part out loud (so to speak). As far as Wray - what, exactly, should he be investigated for? Not protecting Trump doesn't count.
i would say thats a wash , for some she wasnt conservative enough , yet for others both in and outside the party she was too conservative .
Teton county an amazing place just don't go there in the summer, Wyoming's tourist trap for sure.
Wilson, Jackson that is splitting hairs when you are talking to someone from here, it is all considered Jackson if you are from here. And I think Dick chose Wyoming for his daughter's political asperations, because she was a dead duck in Virginia.
lol worked in that county for almost 8 years , i did of course live in a differnt county without the expenses incurred there.
use to have fun with the tourists , marveling at the snow on the tetons in the middle of Aug in 100 degree heat , some claiming it had to be styrofoam , i would giggle and say naw we truck man made snow up the secret road on the backside and dump it off the top at night .....
or when they found bear sign wondering what kind of bear it was ( everyone wants to see grizz), i told them look for bear shit , when asked how that helps , i told them black bear shit had berry seeds , nuts and a little fur in it , grizz shit smelled of hot peppers and had little silver bells in it .....of course they were all wearing those bear alert bells ( little silver bells ) and carying bear spray ......
That's pretty much it in a nutshell...
Austin Powers "Help! I'm in a Nutshell!" - YouTube
Pre breakfast Cassino hours ...
Sunrise must have been beautiful..
She is loosing because she is perceived to be running outside of her lane, making law and oversight is what her perceived elected job is. I hear all the time why is a house committee investigating Trump instead of the FBI. In the perception of a large amount Wyoming voters she is making it political instead of having oversight and holding the FBI accountable for investigating those events.
well she chose her role , choices always have consequenses .
now do i think that and the other things i brought up contributed ? i will say yes , but it is up to the individual to decide eachs importance to them .
i will say she worked herself into a perfect political storm in the state where she was already suspect and had just barely enough votes to get elected in the first place , and i think its a combination of all things brought up and it is not just any one thing it can be pinned on .
remember the old saying? it only takes one "aw fuck " to wipe out a hundred or a million attaboys or girls as the case may be .
I was there on a fishing trip years ago, and was asked by a tourist what time they turn the bears loose. I told him that they were not scheduled to be released until the following week, that he came a week to early.
Although I did see this little guy last week.
If perceptions are flawed, those holding those flawed perceptions should be examining them, rather than resenting those who know more about civics than themselves.
Politically, she agrees with Trump, as apparently do Wyoming voters. Their reason for not electing her is not about her politics. It's about what they choose to believe are her politics. They choose to believe that this is about a political disagreement with Trump, in opposition to the evidence of her voting record.
all i can say to that is WOW, how conceited to think one can tell others how they should vote and to think that they know better....way to influence people , NOT
that could be added to the reasons she will lose as well
and could add her call for cross over votes in the primary to vote for her to keep her seat or name on the general ballot as well , things like that are not looked at kindly , not that there was enough democrats and indies that would make the difference if they all voted for her .
i get the feeling most out of staters have the same feeling as you , and are not liking that you have no influence to tell people how to vote or how they should vote .
the voters will be voting in their own self interests , people that disagree will simply have to live with that those self interests are not the same as their own .
They're entitled to their beliefs. I'm entitled to point out where their beliefs are based on either false information, or where the beliefs they choose to report seem to be based on something other than what they say they are.
That's how discussions work.
You're telling me that this is about her politics, and the facts say otherwise. It's about Trump, and too many folks' defense of his criminality.
Yes, because nobody who has disagreed with me has ever told me how to vote before
It only works the other way around - me telling them. Or at least it's only resented when it's the other way around.
according to you and your interests , still a conceited and flawed premise to think they would listen to your opinion .
which does beg a question , if it doesnt work on you , what make one think it will work when they try it ? and why should it work at all?
if one doesnt like it done to them , they likely shouldn't try it with someone else either , it could not only backfire , but bite someone in the butt.
I have pointed out other reasons the voters can and likely will base their votes on that would in this state be considered a negative for her other than politics .
first and foremost not being from the state
the next biggest no-no would be a disregard of the people that voted her into office , call that one broken trust if one will.
the next big no-no , calling on the opposition party to cross over vote , just simply smells of bad and dirty politics all around . and i personally consider unethical and cheap.
I don't imagine any of them are listening to me. That's your straw man.
I just call bullshit when I see bullshit.
History will look on Cheney kindly. It will look on the loss of her seat as being motivated by cultism among her constituents.
maybe
or it could be a cautionary tale of what not to do if one seeks re election .
time will tell.
not really , because im the one saying they wont be listening , oh they may listen and consider , but as for changing their mind , usually thats already made up .
You're the one saying I think they'll be listening. I do not. That’s you attributing views to me.
For some, integrity matters more than votes.
thing is i know they aren't
and for politicians , that doesnt pay the bills or nessisarily keep them seated .
she likely knew she was out anyway after 3 terms, see other reasons people might not vote for her , so she was free to have all the intergrity she could want or muster . .
Ok, and? I never said they were, either. You seem to think that's what I think. Ask, and I'll tell you what I think. That's generally safer than making assumptions about what I think.
oh i think what you have wrote is pretty plain and easy to understand so its not hard to figure out what your thinking actually . i say have at it , its easily ignored and disregarded . especially if its tinged with conceit and condemnation of any form , that happens your audiance leaves usually .
old saying when i moved here was welcome to wyoming , we dont care how you did/do things back where your from or how you think things should be done .
it went out of disuse for a while , but every now and again i hear it again and have been hearing it more often lately .
Still fighting your straw man?
It doesn't seem so.
your perception .
if you wish to clarify what your position is or what you think , no one is stopping you its an open forum.
I am just not going to ask because as i said what you wrote already is pretty self explanatory and really needs no interpertation for someone that understands the english language .
if you feel there has been a misunderstanding in what you have said , feel free to clarify and or rectify what you think the misunderstanding is . .
Make up your mind, Mark. You said:
So why would I want to clarify? How bizarre.
This is where YOU are willfully misunderstanding:
I never said they would listen. YOU said I think they would. That's the straw man you're fighting so hard.
I'm saying basically what jw is saying - it's about Trump. Y'all just don't like how I'm saying it. "She needs to stay in her lane" and "do her job." She IS doing her job. Those phrases are euphemisms for "leave our cult leader alone, or we'll elect somebody who supports his lies."
I won't have euphemisms imposed upon me. It is ridiculous that you all can actually agree that it's about Trump, but get so bent out of shape when it's pointed out that there is an integrity problem with that.
You want to tone-police those who call a spade a spade.
I hope to God all Wyoming voters are not like this moron. But since a Trump sucking election denier seemingly has a 30 point lead in the polls a few days before the primary I'm afraid they are a lot of non thinkers in "the most conservative state in the union".
Its not that they are conservative , which is a legitimate ideology, its that they dont know right from wrong.
Cheney did them dirty? By investigating, and reporting the results of that investigation to the American people? Seriously?
The moron in the video says Cheney is SUPPOSED to support Trump because she is a Republican. Doesnt matter what evidence there is against him. Just support him no matter what? This shit is what has the country in the trouble it is in now. The country has now gone 7 years where it has babied Trump.
I already stated why i thought she wouldnt be re elected and trump is way down on that list , her actions and choices as far as trump is concerned , as i have said in my first response to TG , do play a part but not the biggest or only part because of those other factors that are indicative of wyoming politics in general such as the voter induced term limits or the perpensity of voting fore someone tht was born raised and educated here and know what life is like in the state from experience , lets not forget what the voters think the House seats job is doesnt matter what the person in the seat thinks , what matters is what the voters think , since she deviated from that , the voters have lost trust in her and her job preformance , which JW also agreed with my assesment of those those things . trumps stench is permiating a lot of it , but its been her own actions and choices and voter perceptions that ultimately will explain her loss.
what i am ridiculing and deriding is the belief that its because of trump and only trump . trump played his part , she played her own part with her choices and actions , the voters will choose of those things i already mentioned as reasons to not vote for her .
history in wyoming will likely use her as a cautionary tale of what a representative shouldnt do for the state that elects them , im sure elsewhere she will be lionized and canonized , but the story that will matter is the story that the voters make themselves . and no amount of out of state whitewashing or redirected blame will change that .
the true end of the story will be she did it to herself with a possible term left by losing the voters she needed for that term and their trust for more than just trump.
once a politician loses the voters trust , they seldom get it back .
she carries more negative baggage than posative across the board in the views of voters here and thats the real reason she will lose .
So they'll choose someone with pretty much the same ideology, but who supports the Big Lie, and nobody is allowed to call shenanigans on that?
Yeah, life doesn't work that way.
What a bunch of nonsense. What you are basically saying is that if Cheney had "stayed in her lane" concerning Trump she would have lost anyway. What is the evidence of that?
That was just two years ago in the Republican primary for the same House seat from Wyoming. What is different now? She has become a leader on the House committee investigating Trumps involvement in the Jan 6 attempt to steal the election. She has betrayed Trump, the cult leader of MAGA, so she must be destroyed.
you can call whatever you want , its a free country , just as this is an open forum ., problem is , though people have the right to say what they want and point out things , those same people dont have the right to make anyone listen , or agree or do as they say .
Just as i have simply put the visible facts , traditions and histories of wyoming politics in view
thats how real life works .
as far as this primary race is concerned it started out with 6 candidates that i know of , 3 have dropped out , 3 remain maybe 4 so all one would need is better than 25% of the vote to get the nom with 4 running , with 3 , that ups the needed to better than 30% of the vote , the race is mainly between hageman and cheney in the view of the voters , that 3rd guy isnt expected to get 10% of the vote on primary day , i can believe that because wyoming has for the past 30 years always sent a woman to DC for the house seat , call it historic tradition .
hageman also announced her run long before she got trumps endorsement , and was still beating cheney without it , i think trump on her side might be a detriment for her, if anything its fuel for the fire , with those that are sick and tired of all things trump his endorsement likely hurt a little but not enough to make her lose .not considering the negatives of the obvious alternative , someone the voters lost trust in .
now the posatives she has over cheney was she was born and raised and educated in the state , came back and worked in the state and understands the conditions and the thoughts of the voters of the state , remember i said that has a lot of pull with the voters here.
Of course they don't. Why would you feel the need to say this? You are the only one who seems to think that anybody feels this way, as I have pointed out repeatedly.
in her last election she got 73% in the GOP primary and 69% in the general against the Democrat. That is not any sort of "barely enough votes" I've ever heard of.
The committee has the power to educate the American people about the truth, and they have done an exceptional job of it so far. They held prime time hearings for just that reason.
Stop making excuses for Trump and the fools who have his back.
and she won her seat against greybull the dem with only in the mid 60 percentile to greybulls 30% , the rest went 3rd party in the general , she didnt do as well as most people would think one would do in a rock solid red state either .
both jw and i have explained what is different 2 years later , voter trust , view of being an outsider , voter belief that she was more intent on trump than they thought the issues she should have been concerning herself with .
you want to call it staying within her lane , thats fine , but its not for her to define her job and whats important , its the job of those that voted her into office . and at that she failed to live up to their expectations , she chose poorly if she really wanted re election and im still on the fence as to if i think she really wanted to be re elected or not .
now do i think she could have got that 4th term? yes , all it would have taken was for her to appear to be paying attention and saying nothing in public and deriding in private . that probly would have been more effective and benefitial for her in the long run . and she would have likely been able to change more in the party that way . that was not the course she chose .
I just saw a video where Harriet Hageman says "the election was definitely rigged against Trump". Do you support that level of idiocy?
john , registered repubs during that election totalled about 200,000 voters
registered dems sits at about 30.000, considering there is a total of roughly 250,000 voters from all parties , every vote here actually counts a lot .
what does matter is she did get the majority of votes then in both primary and general keep in mind both have more than one candidate as is usual anywhere . and the sticker is she went from that 73% last primary to being 30 points or percent behind witth this primary, thats even with cross overs from indies and dems , that will likely revert back to their parties of origin for the general
barasso said it a month ago when she called for cross overs , there isnt enough dems and indies in the state to save her seat even if they all crossed over with her voter disapproval rating of 70+%.
she is projected to win the nom , but hasnt yet , frankly since im not a repub , i wont be voting in said primary , and will likely continue to vote 3rd party as i have been doing in the general , so barring some really shitty choices ? i would say thats a no .
*sorry john i thought this was directed to me , just saw its to JW , but it still stands as to what i will likely do .
Cheney is nothing more than a Bush era never Trumper. Nothing more.
It is pretty funny though. All you liberals suddenly supporting an establishment Republican like her. Damn funny.
A better example of crazed TDS I have not seen.
You did not answer the question. I did not ask what is required for him to be found legally guilty. I asked:
That means: how can anyone possibly think that a trial would ensue without an extremely strong case and that the evidence in such a trial is more likely to produce a not-guilty vs. guilty verdict?
Hint: Such thinking would be irrational.
What is sad is people who dislike Cheney simply because she has the temerity to stand up against the MAGA forces and deal with Trump.
https://thenewstalkers.com/community/discussion/59379/liz-cheney-the-republican-from-the-state-of-reality?auto#cm1837925,"> , might want to read that ,
i do as stated before think she might have had a "better" chance of re election doing certain things , i never said until later anything about staying in her lane that was JW but she got to choose the way she would go and her choice was a poor one in my eyes if she wanted re election .
it is explained in that link/post why i think she would likely have lost anyway no matter what she did , what she has done though , pretty much sealed the deal . the factors of being considered an outsider not from wyoming and never having lived here for any substantial amount of time goes against her , she has managed until now to over come that even if she still carries the moniker of " political carpetbagger ".
the one she really cant avoid though is the voter imposed "term limits "wyo has a historic tradition of limiting its house member to 3-4 terms , usually 4 if the voters are still happy with the job they are doing less if not so , and being the incumbant is usually a good and big boost at any of the polls on election day unless you have served the term limit the voters choose above .and its been that way for the last 30 years anyone that runs in the state for govenor or a seat in DC knows that itsan unwritten law/ rule , and i can only think of one that even thought to challenge it , but thats explained in the link as well. self imposed term limits by the voters doesnt even have to be supported by written law . serve X number of terms we are not voting for you anymore past that .
here is where some will differ , what is her actual job ? and duties ? the constitution both of the US and the state have their own descriptions but they are pretty similar , the voters of the state also have theirs which they adhere to , its not exactly a good thing for the politician to say what their job is past those 3 things and the one that will matter to the voters the most is usually what THEY think the job entails so if she went past what the voters that elected her thought , she screwed up and broke trust with those that she would need to vote for her for a 4th and final term . a politician that breaks the trust of the base that votes for them usually isnt re elected
i posted also i think cheneys loss is because of a so called "perfect political storm " some of the negatives the state voters gave passes on before are now more highlighted , trump of course is permiating the issue with his stench , but only because of cheneys actions she chose to follow , the culmination and combination of all those things basically made her unreelecable to the electorate in the state . way i see it she was elected 3 out of 4 times , the voters lost trust in her because of what they think is her important job duties and their perceived , view of failure to meet the standard they the voters set factor in that the voters also think it is important for their representation to actually be from the state , and admittedly there is some variance there otherwise she would have NEVER been elected , but it is something the voters think is important .
to put it simply , she simply has more negative political baggage from the last year or so's actions and choices , than positive political baggage that carried her to winning 3 terms in the eyes of the voters of the state . thats it
* before i am accused of being a partisan trump hack , i will go on record yet again , i never voted for trump in any election , i also never voted for Cheney as a representative , i can simply see the reasons why some voters would choose not to cast their vote for her in this state .
Isn't that what we largely have? A whole Congress rarely doing what is right for
the country, instead only worrying about their own next election?
sorry TG but my dislike and deciding to never vote for her statrted long before trump came on the scene , most people either dont know or have forgotten she ran for a wyoming seat in DC in the senate , but she ended up dropping out of that race back in 2014.
my major issue may seem trivial but it was enough to make up my mind . and it was so small one would think it didnt matter .
she was running or going to run against incumbent . Sen Enzi ,thats when she bought her place in wyoming to establish residency and ability to run ., she decide she wanted to do a little fishing , that area is famous for its trout fishing , so out she went and got a resident fishing lic , no problem right ?
Wrong .
wyoming has a residency requirement to purchase a resident lic of any kind of , the person must have lived in state for 1 calender year ., she had been here all of i think 2 months or so before going for a resident lic .
she fucked up, didnt know or read the law .
if she didnt know the law and decided to do it anyway , im suppose to trust her to actually vote on making laws ? not hardly . that simple little mistake , is all it took for me to say not no never but fuck no, never , so i have never voted for her .
other than the fact that Enzi was so popular with the voters ( in state polls never said she couldnt unseat him and him being an incumbant helped him very much) that was one of the biggest reasons she dropped out , her screw up with a simple fishing lic had her being made fun of all over the place .
so she set her sights lower on an easier seat , the lone house of rep seat in 2016 when Lummis , now Sen Lummis had served her 4 terms in the house , so it was an open seat with no popular incumbant to face or run against , she was sort of forgiven by voters with a win . after all it was only 2 years ..
Since you're that good at predicting the future, I assume you're the one who won the Mega Millions. So why aren't you sharing it with the rest of us NT family?
If you say so. Keep on arguing with yourself, then.
I think Cheyne had a decent shot at being re-elected until she focused on trump and not issues that were deemed important by the voters in Wyoming. Voters did not elect Cheyne, as the sole house representative to the state, to educate the American people, she was elected to make law and shape policy that effects the residents of Wyoming, and that is what the voter want her to concentrate on.
Cheyne is now viewed as a politician and not a representative by voters, and that is not a winning strategy in Wyoming.
Mark I think you are exactly right, Cheyne was approaching the end of her political career in Wyoming, due to historic voter imposed term limits, and she knows it.
It does not really matter what she or the rest of the country perceive as her job, what matters is what the voters in Wyoming perceive as her job, and her actions are not aligning with voter perception.
I do think she had a chance at a 4th term but it would have been her last.
Nah, nothing to debate. I’ve already covered the really sad thing.
TDS crazed liberals supporting an establishment, never Trumper Republican. A very interesting dichotomy to say the least.
Why are you spelling her name wrong so many times? Is that supposed to be a deliberate sign of disrespect?
She will land on her feet , she is a cheney and they always land on their feet even in defeat , it will just likely be somewhere else other than this state and judging from the size of her fan club nationally that could be anywhere .
i think it was the end of her political career in the house , but look at lummis , she served 4 terms in the house respected voters self imposed term limits without a peep, took a couple years off politically and when an open senate seat came up, she ran and won , Cheney might have been able to do the same in the future , barrasso is getting close to mandatory voter imposed term limits himself but i would say that possability of her taking her dads old seat are out the window now as far as the voters of Wyo are concerned .
that is alittle guy.
i will be taking off in the morning to head to sheridan to hunt pronghorn in that area on opening day the 15th archery opens then . got lucky enough to draw a tag as did the grand daughter , daughter and son in law .
2nd year in a row without a pronghorn tag for me. Good luck on the hunt and may your freezer be full!
also drew a limited draw cow elk tag for that area as well
first time in 30 years i drew tags for limited quota .
i remember when goat tags were general and available OTC , but thats like a true conservative democrat these days . extinct species .....
but thats like a true conservative democrat these days . extinct species ..... yep just like the bear tag that came with your elk tag years ago!
or lion tag with the deer general.....
ummm, we be old if we remember that ...