[Apreche]

The word you’re looking for is hypocrisy. If Mitch really believed in climate change, he could vote to end the fillibuster, pass a green new deal, not appoint judges to the Supreme Court who vote against the EPA. He doesn’t have one ounce of the bravery or leadership he claims to be looking for.

[zaptheimpaler]

Mitt Romney is the author, not Mitch.

[hotpotamus]

Are there any practical differences between the two? They talk very differently but how do they vote?

[zaptheimpaler]

Yes, there are practical differences between two completely different people. There is cynicism, and then there is uninformed doomerism. There are very good websites tracking voting records of senators - maybe you could start there if you really want to know.

Here's one - https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/mitt_romney/412841

[hotpotamus]

Do their voting records reveal them to be anything other than mainstream Republicans? I'll admit that Romney's votes to impeach the man whose endorsement he sought in 2012 were unusually bold,but I can't think of any effect he's had on his party. Quite the opposite actually - at one point Romney claimed he was pro choice, but he's clearly fallen in line. His evolution towards mainstream Republicanism also put him in the comical position of running against the "Romneycare" universal healthcare plan once Democrats adapted it into the Affordable Care Act or "Obamacare".

There's a reason that Romney, McConnell, and Trump share the same party, dysfunctional thought their relationship might be.

[zaptheimpaler]

You said it yourself - he was the only republican senator who voted for impeachment.

When he voted against the party - you say he had no effect on his party.

When he votes with the party - you say he has fallen in line.

What exactly is he supposed to do? No one person has the power to change the party.

I just appreciate someone, an individual, doing a good thing when they do it. This post is a good thing. The least I can do is express my gratitude for that good decision. This endless demonizing of every politician from a party X is what further entrenches tribalism. If every politician is rotten no matter what they do, do you think that leaves them with any incentive to serve a public that hates them either way? When people only see them as tribe members and not individuals, they will act that way.

[jfengel]

What exactly is he supposed to do?

Join the other party. They may be unpalatable to him, but his own party has become despicable. He would be considerably more influential with the other party: he could make substantial policy demands in exchange for his support.

[hotpotamus]

What is he supposed to do? I don't know - I agree it's a hard problem, but Romney has clearly chosen his tribe, though he's had an on-again-off-again relationship with the chief of that tribe. If anyone could run as an independent in Utah, it would be him, but do you think Romney would do such a thing?

Men like Romney tear at the social fabric of America for financial gain, that's what he and his party are dedicated to. To be fair, if they could make more money by not tearing at it, they would - the point is the money; the rest is meaningless. I've worked for private equity, they're every bit the monsters we've been told. Of course they put on a good show and a nice suit - and that's who Romney is and what posts like this are all about. But at the end of the day, he and McConnell and their party are just trying to create a moral justification for greed, the same as any conservative. They just don't like Trump because he lets the mask slip.