Why did Republicans kick Santos out so early?

[Tekken_Guy]

Why did Republicans choose to get rid of George Santos? If anything they could have kept him around for the rest of the term and not have to worry about losing his house seat in a special.

[Ferguson97]

Because he's gay.

[Born to Slay. Forced to Work.]

Because he's gay.

Gay and media lightning rod. Ogles is still in his seat cause he’s straight and hides from the camera

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

It won't matter NY is going solid blue this time not like 22 with Gillibrand and Biden anyways

[TML]

I believe the red line that Santos crossed was using campaign contributions from special interest donors for personal expenses. This evidently upset the special interest donors enough such that they convinced enough Republican lawmakers to go ahead and kick him out.

[Schiff for Senate]

He was devouring media attention and was a complete and utter embarrassment to the whole party. Eventually, try as they might, they couldn't ignore the elephant in the room any longer, and just chucked him out, evaluating that the (likely) loss of one seat from their majority was worth it if it eradicated the continual ridicule that Santos brought with him.

[Mr. Smith]

Salvage their chances of winning 2024 ofc.

[Smash255]

Why did Republicans choose to get rid of George Santos? If anything they could have kept him around for the rest of the term and not have to worry about losing his house seat in a special.

For some hs actions and what he did was simply too much, especially after the ethics report, and was slso likely a bit of self preservation.   After the Ethics report they realized keeping him around would hurt them more politically than the likely loss of one seat even with the slim majority. 

[Minnesota Mike]

If Republicans did not bring expulsion to the floor Democrats had their own resolution lined up. Of course Republicans could have voted NO but that would be held against them in competitive districts. Bottom line Santos was more trouble than he was worth. With a Democratic President and a Democratic Senate any bills in the House that are for more than messaging have to be bipartisan anyway, one more R is not going to matter at all.

[Progressive Pessimist]

They knew they wouldn't really need his vote for anything important anymore.

[Alben Barkley]

Because he's gay.

LOL, no,  it's because he's a sociopathic felon to such an insane extent even the GOP -- the Party of Trump -- can't deny it and can't help but recognize him as an electoral liability.

If it was because he was gay, Lindsey Graham wouldn't have been there for decades!

Hell, I'm not even convinced Santos really IS gay! Can't believe anything the man says. And considering he was married to a woman for 7 years and even he said he wasn't "always" gay, there is reason for doubt.

This is the folly of kneejerk defaulting to identity politics at every turn. If I make you my running mate in my Campaign Trail mod, your gaffes on this sort of thing are definitely going to be an issue I have to deal with as a headache for my campaign to offset your benefits as a mainstream liberal Democrat, because frankly you'll embarrass me to moderates and independents.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

For likely a few reasons. Him being gay was not one of them.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

It's hypocrisy on Rs part after they went after Charlie Rangle

[Pres Mike]

Because he's gay.

No, because he is a clown. Who lies about their mom dying on 9/11? Or his grandparents being holocaust victims? Who lies about a pet charity?  Or about being a drag queen or being on Hanna Montana? He was a stain on the US congress

[oldtimer]

Why did Republicans choose to get rid of George Santos? If anything they could have kept him around for the rest of the term and not have to worry about losing his house seat in a special.

Oh now you worry.

I wrote that Republicans had no hope in winning a special election in NY-3, but some wrote otherwise.

The answer is: Because Congressional Republicans are usually dumb about politics.