South Dakota Republican Senator admits election was not faudulent

[Schiff for Senate]

Not too surprising, honestly. The context makes it clear he couldn't avoid the subject, and he voted to certify. The GOP senators are actually sane for the most part about the Big Lie - the problem is the GOP representatives. Out of 50 GOP senators, 7 (14%) actually supported impeachment and just 8 (16%) supported the Big Lie (i.e., voted to overturn; they disproportionately came from southern states - 6 of the 8 come from states that used to allow slavery; one of the other two comes from WY, America's reddest state). Out of 211 GOP representatives, 139 (66%) supported the Big Lie and just 10 (less than 5%) voted to impeach. I don't know exactly why this is, though probably because Senators are generally more dignified and less wildly partisan than their House counterparts (on the other end of the spectrum, you don't see Democratic senators calling for the police being abolished). They also seem to oppose objecting to election results - in 2000, some 20 House Democrats tried overturning FL's 'results,' while 0 Senate Democrats did.

[Schiff for Senate]

Not too surprising, honestly. The context makes it clear he couldn't avoid the subject, and he voted to certify. The GOP senators are actually sane for the most part about the Big Lie - the problem is the GOP representatives. Out of 50 GOP senators, 7 (14%) actually supported impeachment and just 8 (16%) supported the Big Lie (i.e., voted to overturn; they disproportionately came from southern states - 6 of the 8 come from states that used to allow slavery; one of the other two comes from WY, America's reddest state). Out of 211 GOP representatives, 139 (66%) supported the Big Lie and just 10 (less than 5%) voted to impeach. I don't know exactly why this is, though probably because Senators are generally more dignified and less wildly partisan than their House counterparts (on the other end of the spectrum, you don't see Democratic senators calling for the police being abolished). They also seem to oppose objecting to election results - in 2000, some 20 House Democrats tried overturning FL's 'results,' while 0 Senate Democrats did.

Bold part: Gerrymandered super-safe R districts, while senators always need to win an entire state which also consists of lots of Democrats and Independents?

Enough represent seats that aren't solid, and even more don't represent gerrymandered districts. For instance, Beth van Duyne was elected in a Biden district in 2020, and she only narrowly won, yet she voted to overturn (though in redistricting she was shored up). Similarly enough other GOPers from competitive or moderately competitive seats have voted. I think it is because they are more scared of the Orange Man and don't want their political career to implode, while Senators already have experience and incumbency and are established figures in their own right. Representatives also face less scrutiny since there are 87 representatives for every 20 senators.

[Schiff for Senate]

Not too surprising, honestly. The context makes it clear he couldn't avoid the subject, and he voted to certify. The GOP senators are actually sane for the most part about the Big Lie - the problem is the GOP representatives. Out of 50 GOP senators, 7 (14%) actually supported impeachment and just 8 (16%) supported the Big Lie (i.e., voted to overturn; they disproportionately came from southern states - 6 of the 8 come from states that used to allow slavery; one of the other two comes from WY, America's reddest state). Out of 211 GOP representatives, 139 (66%) supported the Big Lie and just 10 (less than 5%) voted to impeach. I don't know exactly why this is, though probably because Senators are generally more dignified and less wildly partisan than their House counterparts (on the other end of the spectrum, you don't see Democratic senators calling for the police being abolished). They also seem to oppose objecting to election results - in 2000, some 20 House Democrats tried overturning FL's 'results,' while 0 Senate Democrats did.

Bold part: Gerrymandered super-safe R districts, while senators always need to win an entire state which also consists of lots of Democrats and Independents?

Lots of Republicans in swing districts voted to object too, and 2/9 Biden district Republicans objected. The main difference seems to be that McCarthy objected while McConnell told Senate Republicans it was a stupid idea and they shouldn't indulge it.

Yeah more or less this, McConnell is an actually strong leader who knows how to pick his fights. McCarthy is a total clown who has absolutely no control over his caucus. I'm already dreading his Speakership for the clown show that it'll be.

Well, the last time McCarthy was in line to become speaker they hauled in Paul Ryan instead. Maybe something similar will happen again.

This is probably why McCarthy has been "sucking up" to Trump ever since 1/6 and why he recently announced that he was going to expel controversial Democrats from committees if Republicans got the majority. He's trying to fend off potential leadership challenges now and is trying to win over the Republican caucus.

I think another key difference is that McConnell is at his apex while McCarthy has further ambitions. What I mean is McConnell is the top Senate Republican (top Republican period, in fact, officially speaking) and was just reelected to a 7th (and very possibly last) term. McConnell has no further ambitions at this point. McCarthy is much younger and has still not reached what he hopes is the climax of his career - the Speakership. He needs to appease the Trumpish wing of the party and make sure Trump himself is mollified, in order to make sure he becomes Speaker of the House. Having already been jilted at the altar once, he's probably being particularly careful not to make the same mistake this time. Returning to McConnell, he has literally nothing to lose - I mean, if Trump decides to endorse a primary challenger in 2026, McConnell can simply bow out after a long and full career. McCarthy doesn't have that luxury and therefore recognizes the need to stay in Trump's good books if he wants to advance his career any further (spoiler alert: he does).

EDIT: Another key point I should add is that Trump himself might want to be Speaker if/when the GOP retakes the House, so McCarthy is probably willing to lick Trump's shoes and suck up to him that much if that's what it takes to keep Trump out (and keep Trump's support) and finally become Speaker.

Trump already responded

On Monday morning, Trump responded, calling Rounds “woke” and falsely claiming that the election had, in fact, been stolen.

“Even though his election will not be coming up for five years, I will never endorse this jerk again,” Trump said of Rounds.

Quite frankly, Trump will turn 80 in 2026. It's actually possible he's not even alive at that point. If he is, hopefully his clout within the GOP will have declined by then. I predict that if Rounds runs in 2026, he wins.

Not too surprising, honestly. The context makes it clear he couldn't avoid the subject, and he voted to certify. The GOP senators are actually sane for the most part about the Big Lie - the problem is the GOP representatives. Out of 50 GOP senators, 7 (14%) actually supported impeachment and just 8 (16%) supported the Big Lie (i.e., voted to overturn; they disproportionately came from southern states - 6 of the 8 come from states that used to allow slavery; one of the other two comes from WY, America's reddest state). Out of 211 GOP representatives, 139 (66%) supported the Big Lie and just 10 (less than 5%) voted to impeach. I don't know exactly why this is, though probably because Senators are generally more dignified and less wildly partisan than their House counterparts (on the other end of the spectrum, you don't see Democratic senators calling for the police being abolished). They also seem to oppose objecting to election results - in 2000, some 20 House Democrats tried overturning FL's 'results,' while 0 Senate Democrats did.

Bold part: Gerrymandered super-safe R districts, while senators always need to win an entire state which also consists of lots of Democrats and Independents?

Lots of Republicans in swing districts voted to object too, and 2/9 Biden district Republicans objected. The main difference seems to be that McCarthy objected while McConnell told Senate Republicans it was a stupid idea and they shouldn't indulge it.

Yeah more or less this, McConnell is an actually strong leader who knows how to pick his fights. McCarthy is a total clown who has absolutely no control over his caucus. I'm already dreading his Speakership for the clown show that it'll be.

Well, the last time McCarthy was in line to become speaker they hauled in Paul Ryan instead. Maybe something similar will happen again.

Any ideas as to whom? Also, Paul Ryan has basically vanished off the face of the earth.

Trump himself is an actual possibility. Otherwise, thinking uncreatively, they could go with Steve Scalise (the Minority Whip).

[Schiff for Senate]

Not too surprising, honestly. The context makes it clear he couldn't avoid the subject, and he voted to certify. The GOP senators are actually sane for the most part about the Big Lie - the problem is the GOP representatives. Out of 50 GOP senators, 7 (14%) actually supported impeachment and just 8 (16%) supported the Big Lie (i.e., voted to overturn; they disproportionately came from southern states - 6 of the 8 come from states that used to allow slavery; one of the other two comes from WY, America's reddest state). Out of 211 GOP representatives, 139 (66%) supported the Big Lie and just 10 (less than 5%) voted to impeach. I don't know exactly why this is, though probably because Senators are generally more dignified and less wildly partisan than their House counterparts (on the other end of the spectrum, you don't see Democratic senators calling for the police being abolished). They also seem to oppose objecting to election results - in 2000, some 20 House Democrats tried overturning FL's 'results,' while 0 Senate Democrats did.

Bold part: Gerrymandered super-safe R districts, while senators always need to win an entire state which also consists of lots of Democrats and Independents?

Lots of Republicans in swing districts voted to object too, and 2/9 Biden district Republicans objected. The main difference seems to be that McCarthy objected while McConnell told Senate Republicans it was a stupid idea and they shouldn't indulge it.

Yeah more or less this, McConnell is an actually strong leader who knows how to pick his fights. McCarthy is a total clown who has absolutely no control over his caucus. I'm already dreading his Speakership for the clown show that it'll be.

Well, the last time McCarthy was in line to become speaker they hauled in Paul Ryan instead. Maybe something similar will happen again.

Any ideas as to whom? Also, Paul Ryan has basically vanished off the face of the earth.

Trump himself, but I predict that Trump really isn't interested as he would have to put in some actual work. Unfortunately, I think they are stuck with McCarthy.

No, they can go with Scalise. He's Trumpish enough as well, having voted to overturn and everything (and he has what Trump described in American Carnage as 'street cred' for getting shot back in 2017 at the congressional baseball game).