As long as the sociopathic wing* of the party keeps grumbling and picking fights with him, it may work out better for us after all. It'll still be bad, don't get me wrong (Thune will never be a friend to us), but that was decided when the Senate flipped.
*Yeah, I know... the obvious question is "which one?"
As long as the sociopathic wing* of the party keeps grumbling and picking fights with him, it may work out better for us after all. It'll still be bad, don't get me wrong (Thune will never be a friend to us), but that was decided when the Senate flipped.
*Yeah, I know... the obvious question is "which one?"
That would be nice. My expectation is that he'll do a better job keeping their senate caucus focused on what they need to get done, but will curb the worst ~5-10% things to be merely "really bad" instead of "incredibly, truly horrific." Cornyn would have done that half as much, and Scott would have insisted on making things even worse.
As long as the sociopathic wing* of the party keeps grumbling and picking fights with him, it may work out better for us after all. It'll still be bad, don't get me wrong (Thune will never be a friend to us), but that was decided when the Senate flipped.
*Yeah, I know... the obvious question is "which one?"
That would be nice. My expectation is that he'll do a better job keeping their senate caucus focused on what they need to get done, but will curb the worst ~5-10% things to be merely "really bad" instead of "incredibly, truly horrific." Cornyn would have done that half as much, and Scott would have insisted on making things even worse.