Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

[deleted] t1_j5ur101 wrote

[deleted]

79

lochlainn t1_j5v6lb4 wrote

Because nobody, even him, is seriously interested in cutting off their ability to put their hands in the cookie jar.

This is grandstanding. It's something the American citizen desperately needs, and that no elected official on either side of the isle has any motivation to fulfill.

29

Always_0421 t1_j5utoni wrote

The problem is the name is all that will keep it in the news. It might make it out of committee, but it will never pass on the floor regardless of the name.

These money grabbers will never vote against their own personal interests...I hope to be proven wrong.

18

sullivan80 t1_j5vmtfs wrote

Even though I am generally conservative I dislike Hawley (almost) as much as most of the liberals on this site. But this is a good thing here.

Like you I am not really a fan of the name because it makes it sound like a joke and dials up the partisanship when in reality it's not a partisan issue. Automatically makes it a non-starter for most if not every democrat and that's unfortunate.

But you are right it will never get any traction and the fact that it won't get traction just underscores how corrupt and self serving politicians generally are.

In all reality this is probably just another political stunt by this guy to generate some headlines and buzz and keep his name in the spotlight.

4

bobone77 t1_j5vyh6s wrote

It doesn’t even do what it claims to do. It’s like a Swiss cheese of family exemptions and carve outs for blind trusts. Completely performative, just like everything else this fascist prick does.

8

turbulance4 OP t1_j5vxq65 wrote

Just curious, what do you dislike about Hawley? I have heard enough from all the liberals on this sub about how horrible he his, but I haven't heard it from a conservative perspective.

−7

sullivan80 t1_j5vzquh wrote

Well...for starters I just find his slick ivy league persona to be slimy and prototypical politician who carefully curates his positions and statements based on what is most likely to propel him up the next rung in the ladder. On that note - everyone knew he had bigger ambitions when he first ran for statewide office and still he denied/lied about it.

I don't hate all his positions, I just don't care for him as a politician because I think he is too into making waves and big splashy scenes. I believe his one and only motive is advancing his career as far as he possibly can - I just don't see him as a public servant, maybe I'm wrong. In my opinion the left hates him for much of the same reason the right so vehemently hates AOC. Yeah the positions are trash but all the talk and attention getting on top of it just makes it unbearable.

Most conservative people I know don't really seem to view him as a very useful or productive senator. But they would vote for him vs someone who will go along with Biden and the democrats.

5

Sad-Investigator-155 t1_j5wrngv wrote

I’m not a conservative but I agree and echo your sentiments. My problem with Josh is that he doesn’t seem to be trying to help his constituents. He rails against big tech and neoconservatism. He is always quick to trash the other side and hate on democrats but I don’t see him putting in any real work for the people of Missouri. He doesn’t seem to have a good agenda and rather seems to pursue aggressive sound bites. I think he is trying to position himself and his wife as the all American, wholesome family…a cleaned up version of Trump. It doesn’t come off as genuine at all.

3

turbulance4 OP t1_j5w0ss0 wrote

I never really thought about it like that, but he does seem like the other side of the coin from AOC.

−2

Mungx t1_j5w387g wrote

Except AOC just wants to give you Healthcare and stop polluting the planet. Not extreme things at all.

7

turbulance4 OP t1_j5w5vv7 wrote

She is just saying those things for the publicity, exactly as many are claiming about Hawley in this thread.

−7

Mungx t1_j5w6z61 wrote

No, there are people in govt that want better social programs and the govt to actually help people. Just because republicans don't, doesn't mean you need to project that shit on the opposite side.

7

turbulance4 OP t1_j5wbrs2 wrote

> Just because republicans don't

You seriously think all Republicans are bad faith? And the only ones actually interested in helping are Dems?

−5

Mungx t1_j5wffy9 wrote

Yeah I would say 99% of Republicans don't give af about Americans at all. There's plenty of corporate dems that also don't give af as well but there are democrats that do actually care. Elizabeth Warren trying to cap interest rates on credit cards is another example. The only reason I say 99% is because I'm sure there's 1 or 2 Republicans somewhere that have a decent take on something but those people won't ever see the light of day. It's Marjorie Taylor green, Lauren boebert, and DeSantis show now. Absolute psychopaths.

6

Ogtrot t1_j5vn8ge wrote

Well said. Credibility lost at first sight of the title is a prime red flag for clout chasing. Simply enact change. We don't need to see which side is snickering at said change, you're all capable of it which is where we should draw the line.

3

turbulance4 OP t1_j5urn1y wrote

I agree. The name could have been better. I mean, Pelosi is pretty well known as the worst violator of insider trading... But I'd prefer if Hawley left room for bipartisanship instead of slapping the Dems in the face.

−1

Mungx t1_j5w3frw wrote

Last I saw she was the 5th best trader in congress with 4 other republicans ahead of her. With Dan Crenshaw either 4th or 6th on the list.

5

Dontlookimpeeing t1_j5uv1ln wrote

Can you link to a source that shows her being the worst violator?

4

turbulance4 OP t1_j5uvz65 wrote

I'm not actually trying to make that claim (although it may be true). I am claiming she is the most well known for being an inside trader. In other words, her name shows up most in news headlines and whatnot about it. She has the name recognition for this particular form of corruption.

4

Saltpork545 t1_j5w5k96 wrote

She does because of her husband. She gets a lot of the headlines for it but she's typically not at the top herself, her husband is.

https://unusualwhales.com/politics

Unusual whales is the biggest tracker of all of this and they call it the Pelosi metric for a reason, but there's plenty of Republican Congressional members who take part as well. This isn't one sided at all.

Congress members and their immediate families should not be allowed to trade while they're in office. If they need to make 150 million dollars like what the Pelosis are worth, they can retire.

5

Dontlookimpeeing t1_j5v2q4e wrote

You literally made that claim. Read your own comment again.

Her name shows up most on alt-right blogs and propaganda sites, I'll agree to that. The left isn't obsessed with her.

−1

turbulance4 OP t1_j5v48a3 wrote

My apologies if I typed it out poorly and you misunderstood. I did not mean to make that claim.

Are these "alt-right blogs and propaganda sites"?

Business Insider

The NY Post

The Hill

CBS News

Forbes

14