|
Is #3 on this list actually an option? I thought it had to be a majority. https://twitter.com/LisaDNews/status/1611110772427341825
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 01:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 06:40 |
|
|
Oracle posted:Ok, so, this is in total Calvinball/No Rule that Says Dogs Can't Play Basketball territory, BUT IF I don’t think that would follow the Dems desired narrative of being the only adults in the room though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 01:50
|
|
|
God the laughter when she said Trump got one
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 01:50
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Is #3 on this list actually an option? I thought it had to be a majority. A majority can vote to allow the plurality winner to win
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 01:50
|
|
|
Voting to adjourn, No's win on voice vote, they're doing the yeas and nays count
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 01:51
|
|
|
ADJOURNMENT SHOT DOWN LET'S GO e; Oh no they're actually voting
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 01:51
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Is #3 on this list actually an option? I thought it had to be a majority. There are no rules right now, so yes, it has been done I think twice. "Politico posted:Is there any way to elect a speaker without a majority?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 01:51
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:A majority can vote to allow the plurality winner to win Ah, well I think that would be quite the ballsy move then. Vote for me or let the democrats win.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 01:52
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/bresreports/status/1611162882883952642
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 01:52
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Is #3 on this list actually an option? I thought it had to be a majority. A majority vote to change the method of voting is possible, and is how the longest contest for Speaker was resolved. If they wanted, the members-elect could vote to determine Speaker on basis of who could name all the State Capitals in alphabetical order the fastest.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 01:52
|
|
|
I wish I could go back to teenager me and tell her that she would be eagerly watching C-SPAN some day, even laughing at it, and see the look on her face.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 01:52
|
|
|
Youremother posted:ADJOURNMENT SHOT DOWN LET'S GO GOP pulling a spite all-nighter 
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 01:53
|
|
|
Natty Ninefingers posted:I don’t think that would follow the Dems desired narrative of being the only adults in the room though. It has historical precendent though, and I don't believe the loopholes that allowed the last two times have been closed. Also they were during and just after the Civil War so... yeah.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 01:53
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Ah, well I think that would be quite the ballsy move then. Vote for me or let the democrats win. It's not up to McCarthy, there needs to be a majority vote to change the rules. That's what ultimately happened in the 1855 Speaker election, I think.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 01:53
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:GOP pulling a spite all-nighter An all-spiter!
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 01:54
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/byrdinator/status/1611163748479238144?s=46&t=_rOtKi2GSKGpM2bMu65G5Q
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 01:54
|
|
|
nine-gear crow posted:An all-spiter!
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 01:54
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:https://twitter.com/byrdinator/status/1611163748479238144?s=46&t=_rOtKi2GSKGpM2bMu65G5Q Wow they really are working in the ideal conservative job.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 01:57
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/scottwongdc/status/1611162063837036544?s=46&t=ZVq0cfl_j7LYsMCstOzFgg
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 01:57
|
|
|
Elyv posted:It's not up to McCarthy, there needs to be a majority vote to change the rules. Surely both his loyalists and the Dems would both vote for that hoping they would win.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 01:58
|
|
|
Less than 20 GOP hasn't voted so I think they'll get the adjournment
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 02:00
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:https://twitter.com/scottwongdc/status/1611162063837036544?s=46&t=ZVq0cfl_j7LYsMCstOzFgg I love both sides of the poo poo show negotiating with Democrats, but only to determine if the ratfucking pauses for the night or not.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 02:04
|
|
|
"Lauren Bobert says she's not part of any talks" lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 02:06
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Surely both his loyalists and the Dems would both vote for that hoping they would win. That would be quite the throw of the dice by both the Dems and McCarthyites. I think they're both going to be too risk-averse to do something like that at this stage.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 02:07
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Surely both his loyalists and the Dems would both vote for that hoping they would win. I doubt it. It'd be hugely risky for him and his loyalists, and I don't think getting the Speakership as the minority party is actually worth much to the Dems.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 02:07
|
|
|
And they're adjourned booo 
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 02:08
|
|
|
I'm surprised none of the Freshmen Democrats have tried approaching McCarthy to see if he'll think they're new Republicans and toss them some concessions while he's on his abject debasement kick.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 02:10
|
|
|
This is a stupid question, but is there any mechanism to ensure that a speaker actually honors the concessions granted while they're running to be speaker?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 02:24
|
|
|
Do you guys have any mechanic that allows for a fresh election to be called if nobody is able to form a government?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 02:24
|
|
|
The Lone Badger posted:Do you guys have any mechanic that allows for a fresh election to be called if nobody is able to form a government? Of course not.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 02:25
|
|
|
Involuntary Sparkle posted:I wish I could go back to teenager me and tell her that she would be eagerly watching C-SPAN some day, even laughing at it, and see the look on her face. C-SPAN sells "C-SPAN and Chill" hoodies, if you find a way to send one back in time for her
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 02:27
|
|
|
I AM GRANDO posted:This is a stupid question, but is there any mechanism to ensure that a speaker actually honors the concessions granted while they're running to be speaker? They vote it into the House rules (for stuff like 'any member of the majority can no confidence the speaker') it still has to pass with a majority vote though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 02:28
|
|
|
Politico posted:The reports on the latest maneuvering put that in a vivid light. POLITICO’s story described the bargaining as a “glimmer of hope” for McCarthy. The details, however, are hopeful in the same way that a person dying of thirst might find a pitcher of saltwater hopeful.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 02:29
|
|
|
Haschel Cedricson posted:Of course not. Sooo.... what do you do?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 02:31
|
|
|
I AM GRANDO posted:This is a stupid question, but is there any mechanism to ensure that a speaker actually honors the concessions granted while they're running to be speaker? a motion to vacate the chair
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 02:34
|
|
|
The Lone Badger posted:Sooo.... what do you do? idk invade south carolina about it or something
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 02:35
|
|
|
Elyv posted:That would be quite the throw of the dice by both the Dems and McCarthyites. I think they're both going to be too risk-averse to do something like that at this stage. None of this is risky for the dems. Nothing is going to get done no matter who gets the gavel, the only difference would be how insane some of the bills brought to the floor are. They're fine KM, or Scalise, or whomever, it's going to be show votes and investigations for 2 years. And if Hakeem did get the Speakership, he still wouldn't have the votes to actually pass anything so it's basically nothing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 02:35
|
|
|
I always thought you guys were joking when you said the entire US political apparatus is held together by faith and duct tape.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 02:35
|
|
|
quote:The reports on the latest maneuvering put that in a vivid light. POLITICO’s story described the bargaining as a “glimmer of hope” for McCarthy. The details, however, are hopeful in the same way that a person dying of thirst might find a pitcher of saltwater hopeful. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/01/05/mccarthy-tried-compromise-now-hes-trying-appeasement-00076579
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 02:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 06:40 |
|
|
The Lone Badger posted:Sooo.... what do you do? I think your question wasn't properly phrased: the executive in the US is independent of the legislature. It's not a matter of a "government" not forming, it's a matter of one of the legislative houses not being able to function properly. The "government" (what people here usually call "the administration") is carrying on. If the Senate, rather than the House, were dysfunctional then there would be issues if any new secretary or other position holder that needs Senate approval had to be filled, and we've seen what happens when the Senate is just contrary throughout most of the Obama administration, so it would in some ways be similar.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 02:37
|
|
