Lol, let me clarify. The two of you took the opposite meanings of "process".
The "process" was that a law was passed (Obamacare/ACA), upheld by the Supreme Court, & implemented starting lass Tuesday REGARDLESS of the government shutdown. The shutdown only happened because some uppity pubbies are still /butthurt about it & have little clue how Congress actually works.
If they also allow us to default because of it, they're insane. I predict the "shutdown" stays until zero hour of the debt ceiling increase & they have no choice but to eat their hats or bankrupt the USA. Why take two bullets when you only have to take one, ya know?
You are absolutely correct. That wasn't the process that I was referring to. In this instance, if you want the GOP to stop abandon this plan, the proper way would be to convince the leader to let the bill go up for the vote. This is as opposed to rallying a group of people to persuade the leader to do something different. At that point, he is no longer a leader, but a follower.
I can see that point of view, but unless I have mistaken his argument (which maybe flawed) is that there's a process, and when you decide to bypass the process and take matters in your own hands, then you're doing exactly what Ted Cruz did.
Cruz didn't bypass any "process", he just convinced a bunch of Tea Party affiliated Republicans to agree with him and pressure Boehner into doing what they wanted. Nunes, at this point, is essentially saying "I think this shutdown is wrong and damaging and we're in it for the wrong reasons but party unity beats what's best for the country right now".
I think asking him why he thinks that is a perfectly legitimate question.
Read above. Don't get me wrong, it's a legitimate question, but he gave a legitimate answer. The problem is, they kept on the subject as if they didn't understand or wanted him to change his position. That's what I didn't like.
Followers don't make decisions, they follow. If a follower has a suggestion, then s/he can voice their concern to the leader. If the leader decides to go against it (which Boehner originally did), then you follow.
Now, I understand what you mean, there is no FORMAL process and at the end of the day, 'twas the GOP who decided to go along with the strategy. However, the point that Nunes is making, is if he rallies up a group of people to follow his strategy, then he can't criticize Cruz for doing the same thing. Furthermore, he would only be dividing the GOP even further. Nunes realizes that in this instance, he is a follower and as a follower, he is giving his opinion. It's the leader's responsibility to voice the message and persuade the people. If you believe that the leader is weak and should be replaced, then you take his spot, else remain tacit.