Speaker of the House Vote Thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My prediction is that today, either McCarthy withdraws or a bloc of his voters starts voting for Scalise and urges others to follow.

Scalise won't get 218 either.

I don't disagree. But I see this lasting for a while.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Maybe today is the day he gets his speakership!

There are five. Count them 5, FC who are "never Kevin". They will not budge because they loathe KMc. The GOPers need to rally around Tom Cole of OK. A conservative milquetoast. He is respected by all and is not a RW nut.

I hope Kevin never withdraws. I love the 212-201 vote in favor of Jeffries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My prediction is that today, either McCarthy withdraws or a bloc of his voters starts voting for Scalise and urges others to follow.

No, he's making more concessions today. Which is a very bad sign for how he'll manage his speakership.

[Anonymous]

Politico has a good rundown of all the concessions McCarthy may be making. https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook/2023/01/05/inside-mccarthys-brewing-speaker-deal-00076507

One already made is that McCarthy's PAC has made a deal with the Club For Growth PAC to not put money in primaries against Freedom Caucus MAGA candidates.

[Anonymous]

So if he's not elected Speaker (which seems like the most likely outcome), then his PAC will continue to put money in primaries against Freedom Caucus candidates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A handful of Dems could vote for McCarthy, then freeze the nutcases out of committees.

Why would Dems want to do this? Just so you could feel better? This is the govt the people voted for: narcissistic bomb throwers how want to cut social security and run sham hearings.

Like their policies or not, Dems are there to govern. They should sit back and let GOP figure this out which could include 6 Team Normal Rs to cross the aisle and offer Dems a potential Speaker who would act in good faith. Dems have already said they are open to this.

There is no reason for Democrats to help elect any Republican Speaker because that wouldn’t change the fact that Republicans have a 222-212 majority that could approve or disapprove House rules, committee assignments, procedural votes, and the House agenda. The Speaker only has as much power as he/she has the votes to enforce.

This isn't true. There are bills that both sides can agree to, like the chips act, that cannot go forward until a speaker is chosen. What about Chip Roy of Texas? he seems the least objectionable of the freedom caucus. And he certainly couldn't hold the party well enough to enable them to stop things like passing a budget.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Maybe today is the day he gets his speakership!

There are five. Count them 5, FC who are "never Kevin". They will not budge because they loathe KMc. The GOPers need to rally around Tom Cole of OK. A conservative milquetoast. He is respected by all and is not a RW nut.

I hope Kevin never withdraws. I love the 212-201 vote in favor of Jeffries.

The bolded makes him unviable. The chaos is the point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So if he's not elected Speaker (which seems like the most likely outcome), then his PAC will continue to put money in primaries against Freedom Caucus candidates.

Oh, he'll be Speaker. He will grovel and hand over everything they want, and a sufficient number will vote for him.

It was always going to be this way. We're only in the third day. He shouldn't be groveling, but in this age of immediate gratification and 24/7 news cycle, people are impatient for instant resolutions, so... he's facing incredible pressure to solve this quickly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A handful of Dems could vote for McCarthy, then freeze the nutcases out of committees.

Why would Dems want to do this? Just so you could feel better? This is the govt the people voted for: narcissistic bomb throwers how want to cut social security and run sham hearings.

Like their policies or not, Dems are there to govern. They should sit back and let GOP figure this out which could include 6 Team Normal Rs to cross the aisle and offer Dems a potential Speaker who would act in good faith. Dems have already said they are open to this.

There is no reason for Democrats to help elect any Republican Speaker because that wouldn’t change the fact that Republicans have a 222-212 majority that could approve or disapprove House rules, committee assignments, procedural votes, and the House agenda. The Speaker only has as much power as he/she has the votes to enforce.

This isn't true. There are bills that both sides can agree to, like the chips act, that cannot go forward until a speaker is chosen. What about Chip Roy of Texas? he seems the least objectionable of the freedom caucus. And he certainly couldn't hold the party well enough to enable them to stop things like passing a budget.

The GOP in the House didn't support ANY of the bills passed last year.

[Anonymous]

Breaking: GOP learns why the filibuster is bad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A handful of Dems could vote for McCarthy, then freeze the nutcases out of committees.

Why would Dems want to do this? Just so you could feel better? This is the govt the people voted for: narcissistic bomb throwers how want to cut social security and run sham hearings.

Like their policies or not, Dems are there to govern. They should sit back and let GOP figure this out which could include 6 Team Normal Rs to cross the aisle and offer Dems a potential Speaker who would act in good faith. Dems have already said they are open to this.

There is no reason for Democrats to help elect any Republican Speaker because that wouldn’t change the fact that Republicans have a 222-212 majority that could approve or disapprove House rules, committee assignments, procedural votes, and the House agenda. The Speaker only has as much power as he/she has the votes to enforce.

This isn't true. There are bills that both sides can agree to, like the chips act, that cannot go forward until a speaker is chosen. What about Chip Roy of Texas? he seems the least objectionable of the freedom caucus. And he certainly couldn't hold the party well enough to enable them to stop things like passing a budget.

You’re missing the point. They don’t want anyone to govern. They think they and their followers will do better in a Hobbesian dystopia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A handful of Dems could vote for McCarthy, then freeze the nutcases out of committees.

Why would Dems want to do this? Just so you could feel better? This is the govt the people voted for: narcissistic bomb throwers how want to cut social security and run sham hearings.

Like their policies or not, Dems are there to govern. They should sit back and let GOP figure this out which could include 6 Team Normal Rs to cross the aisle and offer Dems a potential Speaker who would act in good faith. Dems have already said they are open to this.

There is no reason for Democrats to help elect any Republican Speaker because that wouldn’t change the fact that Republicans have a 222-212 majority that could approve or disapprove House rules, committee assignments, procedural votes, and the House agenda. The Speaker only has as much power as he/she has the votes to enforce.

This isn't true. There are bills that both sides can agree to, like the chips act, that cannot go forward until a speaker is chosen. What about Chip Roy of Texas? he seems the least objectionable of the freedom caucus. And he certainly couldn't hold the party well enough to enable them to stop things like passing a budget.

\

Democrats are not supporting any member of the freedom caucus. If they support anyone, it will be a very moderate republican who can get 10 other republicans to support them

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Politico has a good rundown of all the concessions McCarthy may be making. https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook/2023/01/05/inside-mccarthys-brewing-speaker-deal-00076507

One already made is that McCarthy's PAC has made a deal with the Club For Growth PAC to not put money in primaries against Freedom Caucus MAGA candidates.

The irony being more of this as a result?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A handful of Dems could vote for McCarthy, then freeze the nutcases out of committees.

Why would Dems want to do this? Just so you could feel better? This is the govt the people voted for: narcissistic bomb throwers how want to cut social security and run sham hearings.

Like their policies or not, Dems are there to govern. They should sit back and let GOP figure this out which could include 6 Team Normal Rs to cross the aisle and offer Dems a potential Speaker who would act in good faith. Dems have already said they are open to this.

There is no reason for Democrats to help elect any Republican Speaker because that wouldn’t change the fact that Republicans have a 222-212 majority that could approve or disapprove House rules, committee assignments, procedural votes, and the House agenda. The Speaker only has as much power as he/she has the votes to enforce.

This isn't true. There are bills that both sides can agree to, like the chips act, that cannot go forward until a speaker is chosen. What about Chip Roy of Texas? he seems the least objectionable of the freedom caucus. And he certainly couldn't hold the party well enough to enable them to stop things like passing a budget.

You’re missing the point. They don’t want anyone to govern. They think they and their followers will do better in a Hobbesian dystopia.

Pffft! What would Rs do without Democrats to blame?

Same skirmish is happening in counties and states across the country (there was craziness in my county) as MAGAs fight more mainstream Rs
Nary a Dem in sight to blame.

[Anonymous]

and weren't the R's so self righteous when Nancy was whipping for votes? Now Nancy KNEW how to get it done. Kevin could learn a thing or two from her.