The gop speaker vote - finally final

[seeyalater52]

Jan 5, 2023 19:38:42 GMT -5 mrsslocombe said:

Jan 5, 2023 19:12:13 GMT -5 devonpow said:

What do people think the best possible outcome
is for democrats? Is there anyone the Rs will stand behind that isn’t a clown show? And at this point, from my understanding, anyone they do get behind will also need to agree to all the concessions McCarthy has agreed to, correct? I guess my question is, are we hopeful in any direction? Or is it all bad and we just watch the fun while it happens?

I mean, a fantasy would be not enough Republicans present, which lowers the majority threshhold and Jeffries wins. 

It's hard for me to see a world where a "compromise" candidate wins, because Kevin McCarty et al will literally hand over anything rather than work with the Dems. Also, find me enough Republicans and Democrats who would vote for...I don't even know who? 'Moderate' Republicans with enough experience to be Speaker don't exist. And while the Speaker doesn't have to be a member of Congress this fantasy scenario where they choose John Kasich or Larry Hogan seems even less likely to me (and they don't know shit about fuck about how the House works?).

Honestly best case scenario seems to be that this drags on for another few days and humiliates the GOP and somehow in our goldfish  brains we remember it enough to matter in November 2024? 

This is good analysis and I agree. It’s also all very fleeting because even if Dems were to procedural-maneuver themselves into a speakership it would be incredibly unstable. And undoubtedly so will any GOP Speaker, who is likely now stuck with the raw deals McCarthy conceded to in his “negotiation.” Hot mess express. Even though it’s entertaining there are really no winners here once the House gets to the point of not being able to carry out even mundane and perfunctory governing duties.

I think my very early hypothesis about Dems negotiating a shared power agreement is probably the best “best case scenario” but I’m still not convinced there’s an actual GOP Speaker candidate that could pull it off.

[seeyalater52]

Omfg they lost the motion to adjourn.

As “nice” as this has been I’ve grown tired of their incompetence and I’m getting bored.

[mpm]

Jan 5, 2023 19:49:10 GMT -5 seeyalater52 said:

Jan 5, 2023 19:38:42 GMT -5 mrsslocombe said:

I mean, a fantasy would be not enough Republicans present, which lowers the majority threshhold and Jeffries wins. 

It's hard for me to see a world where a "compromise" candidate wins, because Kevin McCarty et al will literally hand over anything rather than work with the Dems. Also, find me enough Republicans and Democrats who would vote for...I don't even know who? 'Moderate' Republicans with enough experience to be Speaker don't exist. And while the Speaker doesn't have to be a member of Congress this fantasy scenario where they choose John Kasich or Larry Hogan seems even less likely to me (and they don't know shit about fuck about how the House works?).

Honestly best case scenario seems to be that this drags on for another few days and humiliates the GOP and somehow in our goldfish  brains we remember it enough to matter in November 2024? 

This is good analysis and I agree. It’s also all very fleeting because even if Dems were to procedural-maneuver themselves into a speakership it would be incredibly unstable. And undoubtedly so will any GOP Speaker, who is likely now stuck with the raw deals McCarthy conceded to in his “negotiation.” Hot mess express. Even though it’s entertaining there are really no winners here once the House gets to the point of not being able to carry out even mundane and perfunctory governing duties.

I think my very early hypothesis about Dems negotiating a shared power agreement is probably the best “best case scenario” but I’m still not convinced there’s an actual GOP Speaker candidate that could pull it off.

Not that I think a deal should be made, but would it even be enforceable? These are not trustworthy people.

[seeyalater52]

Jan 5, 2023 19:55:06 GMT -5 mpm said:

Jan 5, 2023 19:49:10 GMT -5 seeyalater52 said:

This is good analysis and I agree. It’s also all very fleeting because even if Dems were to procedural-maneuver themselves into a speakership it would be incredibly unstable. And undoubtedly so will any GOP Speaker, who is likely now stuck with the raw deals McCarthy conceded to in his “negotiation.” Hot mess express. Even though it’s entertaining there are really no winners here once the House gets to the point of not being able to carry out even mundane and perfunctory governing duties.

I think my very early hypothesis about Dems negotiating a shared power agreement is probably the best “best case scenario” but I’m still not convinced there’s an actual GOP Speaker candidate that could pull it off.

Not that I think a deal should be made, but would it even be enforceable? These are not trustworthy people.

I have no idea. Dems and GOP had power sharing in the Senate for the 117th Congress and it was functional but obviously these people are amateur hour compared to McConnell as much as I loathe him.

[NewOrleans]

Jan 5, 2023 19:38:42 GMT -5 mrsslocombe said:

Jan 5, 2023 19:12:13 GMT -5 devonpow said:

. 

this fantasy scenario where they choose John Kasich or Larry Hogan seems even less likely to me (and they don't know shit about fuck about how the House works?).

Honestly best case scenario seems to be that this drags on for another few days and humiliates the GOP and somehow in our goldfish  brains we remember it enough to matter in November 2024? 

😂😂😂

[Poeticxpassion]

I can hear men shouting vote, go vote on cspan.

[seeyalater52]

mrsslocombe you should come here more often, this is good shit!

[Poeticxpassion]

Why do they adjourn until noon? Shouldn’t it start earlier?

[NewOrleans]

Jan 5, 2023 19:59:32 GMT -5 Poeticxpassion said:

I can hear men shouting 

that’s what everything comes down to, doesn’t it?

[Poeticxpassion]

One republican voted no to adjourn?

[pixy0stix]

Jan 5, 2023 20:04:12 GMT -5 Poeticxpassion said:

One republican voted no to adjourn?

One voted no yesterday as well.

[pixy0stix]

Jan 6, here we come.

[seeyalater52]

Jan 5, 2023 20:00:54 GMT -5 Poeticxpassion said:

Why do they adjourn until noon? Shouldn’t it start earlier?

Because they’re allergic to work?

(nO oNe WaNtS tO wOrK aNyMoReeeeee)

[bronxgirl]

Chris Hayes described the purpose of adjourning as "to take a break from losing."

[anodyne]

Fun fact:
The 1865 congress only got out of their gridlock by voting to lower the threshold for victory from a simple majority to a plurality.

[seeyalater52]

Jan 5, 2023 20:24:09 GMT -5 anodyne said:

Fun fact:
The 1865 congress only got out of their gridlock by voting to lower the threshold for victory from a simple majority to a plurality.

😂

[NewOrleans]

Jan 5, 2023 20:10:36 GMT -5 bronxgirl said:

Chris Hayes described the purpose of adjourning as "to take a break from losing."

🤣🤣🤣

[Deleted]

The thing is I don’t get the feeling that Republicans are even the tiniest bit embarrassed by this. The probably think they’re pWninG the liBz or whatever.

[Pom]

The GQP et al have zero shame.

This killed me:

[pixy0stix]

wapo.st/3WN7WG0

With the House in chaos, C-SPAN shows footage Americans don’t usually see

[wawa]

This all feels like some British Parliament craziness. I wish there was a point could we start yelling that they can't form a government and try again with fresh elections....

[wesleycrusher]

Jan 5, 2023 19:37:53 GMT -5 seeyalater52 said:

Jan 5, 2023 19:30:10 GMT -5 neverfstop said:

I wonder when those supporting McCarthy will give in and try somebody else….I heard Steve Scalise’a name thrown around a bit before all this.

This isn’t a “end game” scenario- this is “what the next two years are going to look like” preview. Doesn’t matter who they looked at this point, it’s gonna be a circus.

This is kind of where I land. Excepting rules shenanigans like bodies in the room they need McCarthy to step aside and a new candidate to back, but I have a really hard time imagining these holdouts agreeing to Scalise, and I have a really hard time imagining a candidate they would back to get a majority.

At this point it’s anyone’s guess what would happen, but there’s not going to be a lot of governing happening the next couple of years regardless.

I saw this quote after the first few votes: Even if we end the day with McCarthy as speaker, he's already demonstrated a level of inability to get things done I want in a Republican speaker. 

[jinkies]

I'm sorry, I swear there was a link in this thread but now I can't find it.

Can someone explain why McCarthy's concessions would be binding if they move on and decide to elect someone else? Presumably he is making those concessions on the condition that they vote for him? I'm confused as to why those concessions would transfer to someone who didn't make those promises.

[carmenere]

Matt Gaetz says he'll resign if there's a compromise to elect a moderate republican speaker. I hope someone got that in writing.

www.businessinsider.com/matt-gaetz-says-resign-if-democrats-elect-moderate-republican-2023-1

[NewOrleans]

Jan 6, 2023 9:47:23 GMT -5 carmenere said:

Matt Gaetz says he'll resign if there's a compromise to elect a moderate republican speaker. I hope someone got that in writing.

www.businessinsider.com/matt-gaetz-says-resign-if-democrats-elect-moderate-republican-2023-1

He won’t have to worry because they’re all extremists!  Just, some of them didn’t rape anyone or participate in a terrorist attack. 

But this is a double incentive to get someone besides McCarthy. A two-fer. Did Gaetz do it like Elon Musk’s Twitter poll when he asked if he should step down as CEO and then swore to abide by the results? 😂

[seeyalater52]

Jan 6, 2023 9:46:49 GMT -5 wesleycrusher said:

Jan 5, 2023 19:37:53 GMT -5 seeyalater52 said:

This is kind of where I land. Excepting rules shenanigans like bodies in the room they need McCarthy to step aside and a new candidate to back, but I have a really hard time imagining these holdouts agreeing to Scalise, and I have a really hard time imagining a candidate they would back to get a majority.

At this point it’s anyone’s guess what would happen, but there’s not going to be a lot of governing happening the next couple of years regardless.

I saw this quote after the first few votes: Even if we end the day with McCarthy as speaker, he's already demonstrated a level of inability to get things done I want in a Republican speaker. 

Yes and no. Obviously I do not want them to advance the Republican agenda in the House, especially with a small Dem margin in the Senate. But there are things we absolutely need the House to do — appropriations bills, raising the debt ceiling etc — that will negatively impact the country if they are not done. Theres a difference between them not making meaningful progress on their evil agenda and having a completely nonfunctional government.

[seeyalater52]

Jan 6, 2023 9:46:55 GMT -5 jinkies said:

I'm sorry, I swear there was a link in this thread but now I can't find it.

Can someone explain why McCarthy's concessions would be binding if they move on and decide to elect someone else? Presumably he is making those concessions on the condition that they vote for him? I'm confused as to why those concessions would transfer to someone who didn't make those promises.

Presumably another candidate would also need to agree to the same terms these holdouts have outlined to amass enough votes to win unless Dems were padding the margin.

[Bad Dingo]

Proxy voting was allowed? But now it's not? I'm so confused.

[seeyalater52]

Rep. Clyburn is incredible. What a gem of a person.

[Velar Fricative]

Already one flip to McCarthy.