|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:so how long before the next debt ceiling crisis forces Biden to Mint the Coin? It’ll be someone retired or someone who’s never worked on the hill, and it’ll be a while until the votes are there. The debt ceiling is one possible trigger - capital doesn’t want their bonds to be worth less so they’ll be able to force 5 GOP members to back an outside Republican that the Democrats deem better than the current options.
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 13:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 19:57 |
|
|
A GIANT PARSNIP posted:It’ll be someone retired or someone who’s never worked on the hill, and it’ll be a while until the votes are there. The debt ceiling is one possible trigger - capital doesn’t want their bonds to be worth less so they’ll be able to force 5 GOP members to back an outside Republican that the Democrats deem better than the current options. Everyone says a non-member as Speaker is technically possible, but has it ever happened? edit: according to google it has never happened The root issue is gonna be that the minute anybody is named as an alternative they'll get pilloried just for being an alternative. The chaos caucus wants to be in charge and they aren't going to accept any compromise that doesn't end with them being in charge, and nobody else wants to let them be in charge because they're all insane. So the republicans can't solve this. So it ends when some of them decide to stop being Republicans and go caucus with the democrats, and not before. Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 13:54 on Jan 4, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 13:51
|
|
|
So if the "current" rules (as in, what McCarthy put forward) would allow 5 representatives to call for an immediate vote for a new speaker, what's stopping the chaos caucus from just constantly calling for a new speaker every 5 seconds? Or 5 democrats from grinding the machine to a halt to minimize the Republicans damage? And lol that Boebert apparently wanted it to be 1 representative because she just wants to throw a brick onto the breaks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 14:05
|
|
|
Randalor posted:So if the "current" rules (as in, what McCarthy put forward) would allow 5 representatives to call for an immediate vote for a new speaker, what's stopping the chaos caucus from just constantly calling for a new speaker every 5 seconds? Or 5 democrats from grinding the machine to a halt to minimize the Republicans damage? Yeah, they basically want to be de facto Speaker themselves.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 14:18
|
|
|
This circus is always going to end with McCarthy getting the number he needs eventually. The GOP are always willing to pull stunts like this when "it doesn't matter". Embarrassing McCarthy, extracting a few more concessions than you actually needed, when there is nothing on the line is exactly what I'd express from the nutcase caucus. When it is time to get serious, and you really can't go on without a speaker of the house, they will fold without hesitation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 14:21
|
|
|
OddObserver posted:I am confused at to how that is constitutional, given that "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings", and this seems to give the Senate and the President veto on the House of Representatives' rules .
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 14:33
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:The root issue is gonna be that the minute anybody is named as an alternative they'll get pilloried just for being an alternative. The chaos caucus wants to be in charge and they aren't going to accept any compromise that doesn't end with them being in charge, and nobody else wants to let them be in charge because they're all insane. Precisely. It's not just about the leadership role itself, but about control of all of the processes of the House. Increased voice on committees for the kooks. The ability to insert batshit amendments onto any bill as long as the Freedom Kooks approve of that amendment. Ensuring that impeachment proceedings move forward on the regular. Defunding whatever specific targets the kooks disapprove of at a given moment. Those who understand how the legislative sausage is made understand just how destructive that is, which is why 90% of the party is telling the kooks to sit down and shut up. Their response is, of course, "then there should be no sausage."
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 14:48
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Everyone says a non-member as Speaker is technically possible, but has it ever happened? It would be a constitutional question but the Supreme Court has historically shied away from telling the other two branches how to organize themselves since meddling would violate the separation of powers But this court? Ehhhhhh,
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 15:05
|
|
|
I can't see how even this court could look at the Constitution and say "oh yeah it means only members" The literal wording is "the House shall chuse its speaker". Could be a ham sandwich or a three month old baby for all anyone's concerned. There's absolutely no qualifications for it whatsoever
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 15:07
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/meridithmcgraw/status/1610618981018124290
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 15:09
|
|
|
So why do the chaos caucus have so much pull anyways? Why would it be political suicide for an R representative from more purple or blue districts to threaten to cross the aisle and back Jefferies as a show of "I can be bipartisan and not just want to destroy civilization as we know it" if McCarthy keeps bending the knee more and more to the chaos caucus? Sure, people in deep red states may hate their guts, but they're not voting in the purple states anyways.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 15:10
|
|
|
Randalor posted:So why do the chaos caucus have so much pull anyways? Why would it be political suicide for an R representative from more purple or blue districts to threaten to cross the aisle and back Jefferies as a show of "I can be bipartisan and not just want to destroy civilization as we know it" if McCarthy keeps bending the knee more and more to the chaos caucus? Sure, people in deep red states may hate their guts, but they're not voting in the purple states anyways. Republicans voters don't want bipartisanship, even in purple states there is a solid core of chuds that you need to win in order to win your primary
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 15:12
|
|
Piell posted:Republicans voters don't want bipartisanship, even in purple states there is a solid core of chuds that you need to win in order to win your primary Yeah "the base" as defined as the hardest of the hardcore is at least ~30% of your Republican primary voters, and if they're activated against you it's very, very difficult to win
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 15:14
|
|
|
Randalor posted:So why do the chaos caucus have so much pull anyways? Why would it be political suicide for an R representative from more purple or blue districts to threaten to cross the aisle and back Jefferies as a show of "I can be bipartisan and not just want to destroy civilization as we know it" if McCarthy keeps bending the knee more and more to the chaos caucus? Sure, people in deep red states may hate their guts, but they're not voting in the purple states anyways. 1. There really aren't any purple district republicans left. Not enough for them to ever go united to make that threat. 2. Backing any Dem for Speaker may not be writing your own tombstone, but it is close. Of the 10 Republicans who voted to impeach Trump the 2nd time, only 2 are still in the House. It will guarantee a primary fight for the next election, and that will weaken your chances of winning re-election no matter what. 3. Infighting with Republicans is bad. Working with Democrats is worse. Unless you can convince everyone from something like The Tuesday Group to sign up (also of note alot of people in that wikipedia list are not coming back for 2023, or have significantly shifted views like Stefanik to stay relevant), and that would then make them all ranking Rep members in committees or something crazy like that...still no way it would happen.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 15:24
|
|
|
TyrantWD posted:This circus is always going to end with McCarthy getting the number he needs eventually. The GOP are always willing to pull stunts like this when "it doesn't matter". Embarrassing McCarthy, extracting a few more concessions than you actually needed, when there is nothing on the line is exactly what I'd express from the nutcase caucus. When it is time to get serious, and you really can't go on without a speaker of the house, they will fold without hesitation. This isn't impossible, but it sounded like McCarthy already folded on pretty much everything, so the HFC will have embarrassed their own speaker without getting anything good, and folded on their one point of "Not Kevin". This is why Trump is telling them to "Take the win", which is, what, that they aren't electing Pelosi? The whole loving republican party is caught up in the idea that they need to look strong that they would rather walk into a wall than use a door. Piell posted:Republicans voters don't want bipartisanship, even in purple states there is a solid core of chuds that you need to win in order to win your primary IIRC, polls have shown that most voters of both parties want bipartisanship, but they think their own representatives are doing fine and don't need to be more bipartisan
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 15:27
|
|
|
Randalor posted:So why do the chaos caucus have so much pull anyways? Why would it be political suicide for an R representative from more purple or blue districts to threaten to cross the aisle and back Jefferies as a show of "I can be bipartisan and not just want to destroy civilization as we know it" if McCarthy keeps bending the knee more and more to the chaos caucus? Sure, people in deep red states may hate their guts, but they're not voting in the purple states anyways. Because they know that the first rule of the modern Republican party is that Democrats are subhuman scum who are not worthy of being acknowledged, much less being allowed to hold any power whatsoever. Talk radio bellows that mantra 24/7/365 on every available frequency. To cede any ground to the Dems whatsoever is to be stamped with the RINO label, pilloried, targeted and primaried. Mitch McConnell, for instance, has done more to advance the conservative cause than anyone else over the last couple of decades. His efforts have ground Congress to a halt, prevented progressive or even moderate legislation from moving forward, reshaped the American court systems (including SCOTUS) dramatically, and given the Republicans a long list of major victories. His reward is that the rabble currently consider him a globalist, an archenemy of conservatism, an obstacle, a Democrat, a traitor and a willing tool of George Soros because he is insufficiently loyal and subservient to the Burn Everything Down cause, because things like the omnibus bill occasionally pass when they are necessary. The old saying from sci-fi is that the ability to destroy something bestows control over it. That's what's bedeviled the Biden administration for the last two years, for example -- the fact that 96%+ of the Democratic Senate could be in favor of something but if Joe Manchin and/or Kyrsten Sinema disapproved, it failed to move forward. If the Rs had a majority of thirty seats, twenty Freedom Cranks screaming about jailing Fauci and the WEF wouldn't be as much of a problem because they'd have enough other votes on hand. They don't, and they can't reach that majority without either Dems joining them or the kooks joining them -- and the kooks know that the Dems are completely off-limits.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 15:33
|
|
|
I feel like that doesn't help kdawg in the slightest and might actually make things worse for him.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 15:45
|
|
|
Out of curiosity, why would that hurt him? Doesn't it give some of the crazies cover to vote for him after some performative no votes early in the day?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 15:48
|
|
|
Funnier option: 200 Republicans and 20 Democrats backing Upton or 200 Democrats and 20 Republicans backing Upton? chaos mode: they back Kate Upton instead of Fred Upton
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 15:49
|
|
|
Lumpy posted:Out of curiosity, why would that hurt him? Doesn't it give some of the crazies cover to vote for him after some performative no votes early in the day? I could be completely wrong but Trump seems to be getting more and more toxic to the Republican party by the day and I think the more moderate flanks don't want their names in any way attached to voting for one of Trump's "guys".
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 15:51
|
|
cr0y posted:I could be completely wrong but Trump seems to be getting more and more toxic to the Republican party by the day and I think the more moderate flanks don't want their names in any way attached to voting for one of Trump's "guys". This is exactly correct. Even the MAGA crew is moving on because they realize they can find someone else to take up the mantle without being so toxic to suburbanites
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 15:52
|
|
|
Lumpy posted:Out of curiosity, why would that hurt him? Doesn't it give some of the crazies cover to vote for him after some performative no votes early in the day? They're not voting against him because he's anti-Trump or something, they're doing it to try to amass more power. These votes aren't performative, they want something out of it. Not to mention they all see the writing on the wall of what a loser Trump is now, and have no reason to pin their hopes on simply pleasing him. The actual politicians in the House are not memeing Facebook grandpas, they're power hungry grifters.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 15:54
|
|
|
Lumpy posted:Out of curiosity, why would that hurt him? Doesn't it give some of the crazies cover to vote for him after some performative no votes early in the day? Trump is old news and even worse he’s a loser (2018, 2020, 2022) so some might think their way forward is “Trump, but even more so”.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 15:54
|
|
|
Also given that McCarthy lied about calling Trump to ask him to resign, it also makes him look even more self-serving to call Trump to beg for endorsement.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 15:58
|
|
|
I think the BIG ANNOUNCEMENT NFT debacle may have been the final "the emperor has no clothes" moment for Trump. A lot can change in two years, but 1) right now his influence is waning rapidly and 2) he doesn't appear to be doing anything to change that and get ready for 2024.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 16:01
|
|
|
Lumpy posted:Out of curiosity, why would that hurt him? Doesn't it give some of the crazies cover to vote for him after some performative no votes early in the day? Even on the crazy side of the party, Trump isn't actual leadership these days so much as he is a lib-owning totem you can invoke. See him getting booed at his own rallies when he talks up his involvement in getting the vaccines out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 16:06
|
|
|
Also they don't even have plausible deniability anymore on how much Trump factored into their decision because they are on record as voting no three times until orange Hitler had an opinion on it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 16:09
|
|
|
Kevin absolutely made promises to Trump that he would shitcan the previous Congress's investigations into him snd that he wouldn't interfere with Trump's route to 2024; a lot of theorizing about the HFC was that they were Never Kevin because they were Always Trump, so best to pull off a stunt to give friendly media something new to say. I do not picture we will have a resolution until or just before the Senate begins business, because right now the only big influences the house will listen to will be peers during this peer conflict.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 16:18
|
|
|
So what time does the clownshow begin today? Edit: NM, it says noon eastern in the OP.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 16:24
|
|
|
12 eastern I think there is a small chance that McCarthy wins the first vote today, but if he doesn't I think we're probably here for weeks/months
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 16:25
|
|
|
Piell posted:12 eastern I don't see how he magically has new votes, especially with little news overnight.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 16:30
|
|
|
cr0y posted:I don't see how he magically has new votes, especially with little news overnight. Trump did re-endorse him this morning, but I'm not sure that's worth anything at all any more. If they don't have a decision today, I think they stay deadlocked until the debt ceiling starts looming.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 16:35
|
|
|
His endorsement wasn't worth poo poo in the first place, it's not suddenly worth anything now. e: Is he even actually lobbying for McCarthy? It seems like he's just posting on truth.social and McCarthy's having to do any actual leg work for it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 16:35
|
|
|
Matt Gaetz, etc. know Trump wants McCarthy. They're starting their own movement.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 16:40
|
|
Piell posted:12 eastern From Punchbowl News, they're saying that Republicans may try to adjourn until tomorrow but Dems are whipping against it: quote:“It seems possible that House Republican leadership may try to avoid a speaker vote today and adjourn until either later today or Thursday.”
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 16:44
|
|
|
I hope we're here talking about this ongoing no-Speaker shitshow next year this time. If we are I will post a video of myself laughing my rear end off over a bowl of Fruity Dino-bites while sticking pins in a voodoo doll of Kevin McCarthy.  A loving one person vote of no confidence lol just lol Please, please just let this raging loving stupidity go on forever and let's see all the hidden knives (you might say long knives) come out. It's time to show the world who the real conservatives are! No surrender! All those mindless calls for a civil war... >monkey's paw curls<
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 16:45
|
|
|
This can't go on past July or we risk a default, and I'm not sure even Republicans would let it go past another week or so. This is insanely embarrassing for them.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 16:49
|
|
|
I motion that we mandate that SA moderator The Saddest Rhino change their username, so they aren't mistaken for Kevin McCarthy, The Saddest RINO.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 16:56
|
|
|
Seth Pecksniff posted:This can't go on past July or we risk a default, and I'm not sure even Republicans would let it go past another week or so. This is insanely embarrassing for them. That's a feature, not a bug for the Freedom Caucus.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 17:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 19:57 |
|
|
Punchbowl News just confirmed they're gonna gavel in and then the Republicans are going to make a motion to adjourn Going to be interesting to see if they can carry it by themselves
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2023 17:15
|
|