Charles Brown9 said:"Quote"
Yeah, I messed up a little bit.😁
Listing names right now feels a bit pointless since we don't know who will actually make it into the US Congress. Once the election night dust settles, I'll be able to give you a real list. To put it simply, anyone you’ve never even heard of before this election cycle is likely just a placeholder for the party.
Here is an example for the ninth installment:
Ivan Malenica
2. Grozdana Perić
3. Ante Sanders
4. Marijan Kustic
5. Ante Sanders 4. Marijan Kustic 5. raditi Šimičević
Nediljko Dujić 7. Luka Brčić
Nediljko Dujić 7. Luka Brčić
8. Josip Bilaver
Branka Juričev
10. Anita Pocrnić Radošević
11. Nikola Baradić
Vinko Zulim
13. Josip Begonja
14. Božidar Kalmeta
I tend to view all those blacked-out entries as potential conflicts of interest, especially since their entire livelihood depends on taxpayer funding.
Bero won't even need to go out and recruit anyone. Just at the mention of snap elections, those little political pawns will start lining up on their own. You’re definitely underestimating the Republican Party; they're really just a group of incompetent folks who would starve without a seat in US Congress. For them, holding onto a spot in Congress is quite literally a matter of survival. We also shouldn't forget that Berin’s political mentor was none other than Ubersakupljač, the master of handing out favors, and that Bero has been consistently underestimated until now. He’s actually at his most effective when he's pulling strings to place family, friends, or partners into key positions—which is exactly how the whole patronage system works.
I suspect I am underestimating them far less than you are underestimating them. We can debate the Republican Party's motives all we want, but at its core, this is an organization with a rigid structure—one that members, in principle, follow with disciplined precision. A textbook example of how party discipline begins to erode would be Coley; his decision to back a rival presidential candidate without facing any subsequent sanctions suggests their internal standards are fraying. That decay is exactly what will cost them in the long run. Essentially, they populate their ballots with people who will raise their hands on command and serve the party interests faithfully. Whether the motivation behind that loyalty is purely political or something more transactional is almost beside the point. As Schlesinger openly admitted, they look out for "their own" people—generally speaking. And looking at the electorate, there are plenty of voters willing to accept those kinds of arrangements; the system has functioned quite smoothly up to this point. There are always those who refuse to cooperate, but they are mostly outliers—black sheep. In an environment like this, it is relatively easy to paint them as "unstable" elements of society. If necessary, the party can even settle scores through various means to ensure the public sees exactly what happens to those who refuse to join the machine.
Of course, this exact system impoverishes society as a whole. The decline—materially, morally, and in every other sense—is undeniable. Yet, for the party's inner circle, it works perfectly fine, provided they continue to extract more than everyone else around them. As long as their individual perks remain intact, they frame their political privilege as if it were some sort of personal merit. We shouldn't underestimate the mechanics of such a system; in a nation already hollowed out by a lack of spirit and integrity, it serves as an incredibly potent lever of power. The Republican Party functions essentially as an organization built around the material interests of its members. For some, that means a cushy pension or a certain social status; for others, it’s a guaranteed bureaucratic position within the federal government, or perhaps even a highly lucrative contract with the state. At the very top, you have those who simply want to feel the weight of authority in their hands—but in that regard, they aren't any different from any other political leaders.
Anyone attempting to rationalize this government apparatus must first dismantle the entire system of party patronage. It’s a two-sided trap: one side relies entirely on state resources, while the other remains tethered to providing political and material support to the Republican Party. If you leave that specific crew embedded within the civil service, all you'll have is a group of quiet partisan saboteurs. They will act as internal brakes, obstructing any rational initiative simply because their primary objective is to protect their own interests whenever the opposition takes power.
You are deeply mistaken if you believe this entire organization came into existence by "accident," or that its leaders are simply incompetent. They operate under a specific set of values, a structured hierarchy, and a powerful motivation for their actions. For us voters today, the fundamental question isn't about their competence, but rather whether there is a political force strong enough to dismantle this system—either from within or from the outside—without falling into the same trap of abusing power themselves, much like how the Republican Party currently exploits its position at the expense of the country.