|
It won't drag on three more months. It's one thing for a Republican Speaker to clash with a Democratic President and cause a government shutdown. It's another thing for a shutdown to be caused by the House not being able to elect a speaker to conduct basic business.
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 19:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 22:43 |
|
|
Skex posted:McHenry lost any chance of Democratic support when his first official act was to kick Pelosi out of her secret office while she was at Collins's funeral. Being a petty little turd doesn't generally make people like you more. Jeffries has explicitly stated that McHenry is acceptable to democrats (if he is willing to negotiate)
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 19:06
|
|
|
haveblue posted:What is the difference between this person and a non-acting Speaker then? Presidential succession seems like one difference?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 19:09
|
|
|
It's pretty funny how much republicans hate each other: https://twitter.com/RepMikeCollins/status/1714678481341034939
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 19:27
|
|
|
Extremists always think, "if we get more extreme, we'll get more support!" Has that ever worked?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 19:34
|
|
|
Jesus III posted:Extremists always think, "if we get more extreme, we'll get more support!" I'd say Trump getting in would be evidence of that working, but it's backfired since then. Usually extremism only gains more power if they're able to leverage violence or break the law and no one stops them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 19:44
|
|
|
Jesus III posted:Extremists always think, "if we get more extreme, we'll get more support!" Its definitely won some elections in countries where you just need a plurality government to get a mandate and things rolling. Its also demonstrably lost some very winnable elections too though where the incumbent was vulnerable yet scared people way less enough to still win over the extremist. It doesn't seem to win a lot of them re-election though. Trump and Bolsonaro being some really obvious recent examples. Meloni in Italy being the best example of extremists winjing in for that reason, but I mean you're basically talking about the birthplace of fascism there. Take your pick between Ancient Roman Empire dictators or Mussolini if you want something a little more modern. Kale fucked around with this message at 19:52 on Oct 18, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 19:49
|
|
|
haveblue posted:What is the difference between this person and a non-acting Speaker then? There isn't really much of one. As best as I can tell, the Acting Speaker position originally existed as a role that could be appointed/elected if the Speaker was busy or incapacitated or otherwise wasn't able to handle the whole workload. In that case, the Speaker could designate an Acting Speaker with restricted powers to do some of the work for him, and if the House approved of his choice they could remove those restrictions. It was basically an assistant or partner for the Speaker. The model of having an Acting Speaker without a Speaker was only added in 2003, in response to post-9/11 fears about terrorists conducting decapitation strikes on the government. Before that, the House clerk would just run the new Speaker election. I believe the thinking was that in the immediate aftermath of some big terrorist attack killing the Speaker, the House might need an Acting Speaker capable of taking whatever actions were needed to respond to the crisis. That also explains why the limitations on this version of the Acting Speaker are a bit vague: while it's clear that the powers of an appointed Acting Speaker are supposed to be limited, the specifics are left to the House's imagination, which leaves them room to adjust to the circumstances.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 19:51
|
|
|
haveblue posted:What is the difference between this person and a non-acting Speaker then? The other big difference between an Acting Speaker that the House votes to be able to act as a regular Speaker, and an actual Speaker of the House would be the rare succession issue - Speaker being in line for the Presidency if something happens to both the President and Vice-President. From what I understand, any Acting roles would be skipped in any question of succession. Not a likely scenario at all of course, but poo poo is crazy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 19:55
|
|
|
OddObserver posted:Presidential succession seems like one difference? This is an incredibly good point. Why risk president Jordan?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 20:03
|
|
|
Are they done for the day or are their more lols to be squeezed out of this Wednesday?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 20:20
|
|
|
In less politically charged news, Joran Van der Sloot finally admitted, as part of a plea deal, to murdering Natalie Holloway. I mean we all knew it, but now it's official. Unfortunately her body will never be found. He just dumped her in the ocean and obviously it's been way too long to recover/find her. But the crazy thing is that his please deal was about his extortion case and that pled 20 year sentence will be served concurrently with his Peruvian sentence. So after two murders and an extortion charge, it's likely he'll at some point get out a free man. https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/18/us/joran-van-der-sloot-natalee-holloway-plea-wednesday/index.html
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 20:37
|
|
|
So once we officially humiliate every possible Republican Speaker candidate, do we immediately jump back to McCarthy or do we see some Republicans talking to Jeffries?OddObserver posted:Presidential succession seems like one difference? If the succession actually came into play, one upside would be the mangled body of Matt Gaetz laying upon the floor of the House.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 21:04
|
|
|
So what is the end game here? The Freedom caucus having more power/the speakership?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 21:08
|
|
|
.
mannerup fucked around with this message at 18:54 on Nov 5, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 21:15
|
|
|
The end game is chaos.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 21:15
|
|
|
BigRed0427 posted:So what is the end game here? The Freedom caucus having more power/the speakership? "Government doesn't work, so I'll get re-elected to break the government and prove it doesn't work." Or at least that's what it has been for a few decades. There's a noticeable slide in to fascism going on so for some the end game involves a lot more murder and destruction.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 21:16
|
|
|
BigRed0427 posted:So what is the end game here? The Freedom caucus having more power/the speakership? Mat Gaetz got a lot of attention as a firebrand which elevates his reputation with the conservative bomb throwing base; he doesn't care about the house except insofar as it helps him move to higher office, a governorship or senate seat etc. Meanwhile, no proceedings to censure him in any way can proceed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 21:19
|
|
|
BigRed0427 posted:So what is the end game here? The Freedom caucus having more power/the speakership? Freedom Caucus would like (A) people in DC to treat them as important & powerful, and (B) performative grandstanding that helps them stay ahead of crazies in primaries and grift. They don't particularly care about accomplishing anything in particular in government, and a bunch of their brand is staked on "Government shouldn't do anything" so chaos is fine with them. It is possible they get the gridlock they want. It is also possible that some congresspeople in the business wing of the GOP (their goals: (A) feel important, (B) satisfy donors and set up for a post-congress lobbying career, (C) win elections, (D) ideological stuff) decide that this is hurting their (A) & (B) goals enough that they will sacrifice (C) & (D) and end up with a compromise Speaker/CR using Democratic votes. Anyone who does that will almost certainly lose their next primary election, but it could still be a reasonable self-interested move for their future lobbying career. "ex-Congressman who sacrificed their career to keep the government running and most of Congress doesn't personally hate them" isn't necessarily a worse resume for getting a lucrative Haliburton/Lockheed Martin lobbyist job than "Was in Congress longer, while nothing got done and economic damage piled up"
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 21:35
|
|
|
BigRed0427 posted:So what is the end game here? The Freedom caucus having more power/the speakership? There's no end game. It's a bunch of mid/long term consequences coming due from short term strategies that the Extra Lunatic Cabal have been running. Gaetz has his own insane motives, largely stemming from a combination of fame whoring and desperately trying to avoid long over due consequences. The rest of the loons who joined in with him are running their own moronic and unrelated plays. Of course it's all exasperated by the fact that most of the assholes involved don't actually care what happens. They're in safe districts and have enough wealth and power to weather the resulting storm of their disastrous actions. Which is most clearly seen in the group of people who have been begging to Thelma and Louise this car right over the debt ceiling cliff the last few times we've come up to the edge.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 21:44
|
|
|
You do get a distinct vibe from the house gop that it's been run like a dysfunctional family where the only real plan is to keep the the wheels on for as long as possible before it invariably falls apart. until the issue of trump is settled idk how they really move on, though at this point idk if even getting rid of trump is enough alone to get the house gop working together again. the path forward for the house gop probably is going to depend largely on what gop donors feel like supporting
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 21:50
|
|
|
BigRed0427 posted:So what is the end game here? The Freedom caucus having more power/the speakership? The Freedom Caucus's endgame is "more power". Their basic general stance is that any leverage they get should be milked for the maximum possible amount of power and political gain. They got elected on platforms of "Gingrich and Boehner are RINO wusses who fold too easily and aren't fighting hard enough for conservative policies", so now they see every must-pass bill as an opportunity to dig in their heels and demand that basically their entire list of social policies be added as a rider. Previously, they were highly annoying for GOP Speakers, but now that the GOP has such a thin majority, their support is essential to pass anything, and they're taking the opportunity to shop around a mile-long list of demands. Of course, that leads to a larger issue: the Freedom Caucus isn't the only GOP faction that has the numbers to block stuff in the current House. The Freedom Caucus are demanding all the power and all the political concessions, with no regard for what the other factions' power or political desires. On top of that, being this stubborn is pissing off the other factions in general. So now the House GOP as a whole has collapsed into infighting, with the other factions either maneuvering to preserve their own influence or just opposing the Freedom Caucus out of pure spite. So the endgame is for one side to back down, and it's not really clear which side that'll be (I'll usually bet against the moderates, though).
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 22:15
|
|
|
They have hosed off again for the day and will do the jordan looses votes show again tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 22:28
|
|
|
Emmer must have loved his job title when Nancy Peloci was Speaker
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 22:35
|
|
|
As long as nobody can get 217 Republican votes, we move closer to a very limited deal with the Democrats. As long as the relatively moderate Republicans can cut a deal with Jeffries for the price of just bills making it to the floor for a vote, it should be enough for them to avoid being killed in their primaries. Republicans retain power in all ways that are visible, it's just that the Freedom Caucus can no longer piss all over everyone else for must pass bills. The tricky part is finding someone to take the gavel, because nobody wants it and whoever does take it will be drinking Pepto by the gallon. It could be that McCarthy does it because he so desperately wants to be Speaker, but otherwise whoever it is will have to be someone from the less reactionary wing of the party who actually wants things like defense bills and the government staying open. There's a super majority of Representatives who will vote to keep the wheels of government turning, but in order to do it the new Speaker is going to have to jettison the Hastert rule. Things would still have to thread the needle though. Democrats have to both not ask for much and agree to look weak by allowing just enough of the Blue Dogs and Problem Solvers to "go rogue" and give the new Speaker enough votes. Meanwhile whoever is making the deal is going to have to keep it largely under wraps from the rest of the Republican caucus so they can minimize the number of lunatics voting against them in order to watch everything burn instead of letting the Democrats get any sort of win.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 22:45
|
|
|
Cimber posted:Emmer must have loved his job title when Nancy Peloci was Speaker 
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 22:48
|
|
|
I think they will play up specifics of a Dem deal whether real or not, that anti McCarthy stooges will hate so they settle on a McCarthy guy most likely McHenry. Then Gaetz can claim victory on getting rid of McCarthy and also stopping those dastardly Dems.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 23:03
|
|
|
Hand Row posted:I think they will play up specifics of a Dem deal whether real or not, that anti McCarthy stooges will hate so they settle on a McCarthy guy most likely McHenry. Then Gaetz can claim victory on getting rid of McCarthy and also stopping those dastardly Dems. Imagine McHenry having to live with the fact the footnote will forever exist of "He wasn't the rape-enabling insurrectionist the party wanted but he was good enough to get the job by default I guess."
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 23:08
|
|
|
I think Gaetz and co care more about sticking it to the RINO uniparty swamp than who actually becomes speaker. If someone actually made a deal with Democrats (unlikely) it would be great from that perspective.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 23:16
|
|
|
This could actually spilt the GOP and the longer it goes on the more likely that outcome is. The alternative outcome is the truly insane wing is the whole party from now on.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2023 23:49
|
|
|
.
mannerup fucked around with this message at 18:54 on Nov 5, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2023 00:09
|
|
|
mannerup posted:https://twitter.com/RepMMM/status/1714771568952226006 This isn't who we are as Republicans!
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2023 00:13
|
|
|
The death threats will continue until the vote count improves! (Jordan loses votes) No not that way
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2023 00:16
|
|
|
USCE 2023: Speaker votes will continue until morale improves
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2023 00:22
|
|
|
mannerup posted:https://twitter.com/RepMMM/status/1714771568952226006 Nothing of value to add but I enormously enjoyed that there is a sitting congressperson named "Marianette." Who's pulling her strings?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2023 00:26
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:The Freedom Caucus's endgame is "more power". Their basic general stance is that any leverage they get should be milked for the maximum possible amount of power and political gain. They got elected on platforms of "Gingrich and Boehner are RINO wusses who fold too easily and aren't fighting hard enough for conservative policies", so now they see every must-pass bill as an opportunity to dig in their heels and demand that basically their entire list of social policies be added as a rider. Previously, they were highly annoying for GOP Speakers, but now that the GOP has such a thin majority, their support is essential to pass anything, and they're taking the opportunity to shop around a mile-long list of demands. I liked this explainer but I'm pretty sure it's Boehner and Ryan, just based on timeline. The HFC didn't get founded until the mid-2010s and Gingrich left office in 1999.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2023 00:32
|
|
|
mannerup posted:https://twitter.com/RepMMM/status/1714771568952226006 Surprise he's not just egging it on and being like "Ha that's what you get!". That's what his hero would have done. There's seems to be at least some understanding that he actually needs the votes of some not completely insane craven Trump sycophants I guess.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2023 00:38
|
|
|
Gyges posted:There's a super majority of Representatives who will vote to keep the wheels of government turning, but in order to do it the new Speaker is going to have to jettison the Hastert rule. The Hastert rule is just that a majority of the majority must support legislation. Gaetz and crew took down McCarthy over him bringing to the floor a continuing resolution that they disapproved of, but had a majority of Republicans voting for it, satisfying the Hastert rule. A functional House doesn't need a Republican Speaker to jettison the Hastert rule. They just need to be free of the Gaetz rule that the eight craziest motherfuckers in the House get to control the agenda.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2023 00:41
|
|
|
Orthanc6 posted:I'd say Trump getting in would be evidence of that working, but it's backfired since then. Polls in 2016 showed that people clearly thought Trump was more moderate than Hillary
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2023 00:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 22:43 |
|
|
Kale posted:Surprise he's not just egging it on and being like "Ha that's what you get!". That's what his hero would have done. There's seems to be at least some understanding that he actually needs the votes of some not completely insane craven Trump sycophants I guess. It's not usually his M.O. to pay attention to crimes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2023 00:43
|
|
