[Bruce Campbells Chin]

"It’s always...”We can’t elect a conservative because there are too many moderates who won’t vote for him.”. Why don’t we start from the point of....”We can’t elect a moderate because there are too many conservatives who won’t vote for him.”?” Because the overwhelming majority prefer Johnson to the conservative alternative. It a majority of representatives wanted the conservative, I'd say the moderates should go along with that.

The rule has to be that the caucus will unify by whomever wins a majority of the caucus vote. Otherwise, you can't elect anyone.

[Danie_2023]

“The rule has to be that the caucus will unify by whomever wins a majority of the caucus vote. Otherwise, you can’t elect anyone.”

Just an FYI... that (below in quotes)... was a comment Nitzy made that I was replying to. Not my comment, IOW. But yeah, you have a valid point there. The GOP needs to purge those “”moderates”” that always seem to vote with Democrats (when the vote actually matters) or when they help the Democrats defeat the GOP votes. Even one time of voting with the Democrats to defeat a major bill should equate to the “”moderate”” being pushed out of the GOP. Should, but never seems to.

“It’s always...”We can’t elect a conservative because there are too many moderates who won’t vote for him.”

Why don’t we start from the point of....”We can’t elect a moderate because there are too many conservatives who won’t vote for him.”?”