Will Kevin McCarthy become Speaker?

[shadow puppet]

This is hand-wringing.

No, it is not. But if it woofles your tooters to think so, go for it.

 

[Cmaier]

Dems should work on getting his ass booted from the House for treason. Especially since they can't boot him for being an accessory to rape/sexual assault years ago.

Funny thing is, if he became speaker, he‘d be the SECOND republican speaker midwestern wrestling coach tied to such a controversy

 

[fooferdoggie]

This is hand-wringing. So we don't have a speaker yet. BFD! The Texas Legislature only meets for 140 days EVERY OTHER YEAR. And you know what, they are doing just fine. And they have plenty of time to pass a bunch of stuff most here don't like. So thinking Congress needs to be in session immediately is BS. We as a country will be fine if they lose a few days.

because republicans have the majority so it's no sweat to pas anything?

 

[Cmaier]

Yes. There is no requirement the Speaker be a member of the House. But aside from being Speaker, they would be an unelected person being 2nd in line to the Presidency. So it would probably need to be a respected former House member. There has been at least one person elevated to President who was not elected so it is not out of the question.

Although that is the general understanding, the Supreme Court may disagree. There is historical precedent to suggest that it might not be true.

The line of succession was amended to put the speaker ahead of the cabinet members because of preference for an elected person to take precedence. It took a constitutional amendment to put a non-elected person in the line of succession. (VP in the event of vacancy). There are various other parts of the constitution that delegate to congress what happens after the VP (in terms of succession). So you end up with a conflict between the intent of the law that moved the cabinet down in the order, and the idea that the speaker can be unelected.

At the very least, it would be a mess - any action taken by the speaker in his/her role as speaker could result in a stream of lawsuits until the Supreme Court gets around to deciding the issue once and for all. Or maybe it only turns up as an issue if succession becomes an issue.

In any event, it’s another mess we don’t need.

 

[Herdfan]

The line of succession was amended to put the speaker ahead of the cabinet members because of preference for an elected person to take precedence. It took a constitutional amendment to put a non-elected person in the line of succession. (VP in the event of vacancy).

But keep in mind that Gerald Ford became President without ever having been elected as either President or Vice President. He was nominated to replace Agnew after he resigned. He was approved by both the House and Senate as opposed to Cabinet Members who are only approved by the Senate. When Nixon resigned, Ford became the President.

So there is some precedent to someone being in the line without ever having been elected.

But I agree, probably not somewhere we want to go.

At this point, I think the 20 holdouts start voting Present increasing by 2 votes each ballot. At some point McCarthy may realize he will be handing the Speakership over to Jeffries. When we get there, we will know if he actually cares about his caucus or just wants the power.

 

[rdrr]

But keep in mind that Gerald Ford became President without ever having been elected as either President or Vice President. He was nominated to replace Agnew after he resigned. He was approved by both the House and Senate as opposed to Cabinet Members who are only approved by the Senate. When Nixon resigned, Ford became the President.

So there is some precedent to someone being in the line without ever having been elected.

But I agree, probably not somewhere we want to go.

At this point, I think the 20 holdouts start voting Present increasing by 2 votes each ballot. At some point McCarthy may realize he will be handing the Speakership over to Jeffries. When we get there, we will know if he actually cares about his caucus or just wants the power.

I thought about this tactic as well in reverse. Having McCarthy get some of his staunch supporters to vote present and see if the 20 No votes blink. But it would be political suicide if it doesn't work. Also who would the MAGAs blame? The person(s) that used this tactic to allow Jeffries to gain the Speakership, or the holdouts that didn't budge from their position?

It would be interesting to see who got the blame, but I think it will happen. It's been reported that McCarthy has gained a few votes with his latest concession. I think he is desperate enough to give the gavel of a committee to Gaetz, and allow the 1 member vote of no confidence to go through.

 

[GermanSuplex]

This is hand-wringing. So we don't have a speaker yet. BFD! The Texas Legislature only meets for 140 days EVERY OTHER YEAR. And you know what, they are doing just fine. And they have plenty of time to pass a bunch of stuff most here don't like. So thinking Congress needs to be in session immediately is BS. We as a country will be fine if they lose a few days.

What happens if a crisis suddenly hits? Do you trust this upcoming congress to get their shit together and handle it? I don’t. This is supposed to be the easy part. Problems in the Republican caucus should have been hashed out before now.

Also who would the MAGAs blame? The person(s) that used this tactic to allow Jeffries to gain the Speakership, or the holdouts that didn't budge from their position?

I can see it now…

Trump would say “Kevin was wrong about January 6, and that hurt him greatly with MAGA. The Republican Party cannot survive with RINOs like Mitch McConnell! I alone can fix it!”

I see the MAGA crowd blaming McCarthy, the moderates blaming the far-right, nothing changes, the Republican Party is a little worse off, and we’ll be in a worse situation in another two years.

I don’t see how McCarthy successfully leads even if he wins.

*I was just wondering to myself, would it be ok for Jeffries to go ahead and start pressuring the clerk to throw out votes she thinks are invalid, and to declare him the winner? Maybe Jeffries should start tweeting about a rally tomorrow, around noon, accuse the republicans of trying to install a speaker and rigging the entire vote, and tell democrats the only way to win is to fight like hell, then urge them to march "peacefully" to the Capitol? Maybe Biden could do some work behind the scenes - fire a few people, maybe bring Hunter Biden on as a White House employee, put some unqualified democrat janitors into high-ranking positions and let the magic unfold? I mean, according to our republican friends, those are all nothingburgers and it would be insane if the law were to come after him just for trying to install himself as speaker against the will of voting members of congress?

 

[Roller]

This is hand-wringing. So we don't have a speaker yet. BFD! The Texas Legislature only meets for 140 days EVERY OTHER YEAR. And you know what, they are doing just fine. And they have plenty of time to pass a bunch of stuff most here don't like. So thinking Congress needs to be in session immediately is BS. We as a country will be fine if they lose a few days.

The gross incompetence displayed by McCarthy and his Republican colleagues should concern every American. These people were elected to govern, and all they've done is cause chaos in the eyes of the United States and the world. And I'm afraid they won't be any better after a speaker has been elected, given their stated agenda. If you truly think the country will be fine, as you put it, well…

 

[lizkat]

The Rs look like fools agreeing to meet again this evening, but getting nowhere over the extended dinner hour.... and then having to go through a rollcall just to adjourn for the night. Mission accomplished again for the clown train caboose, I guess. Meanwhile McCarthy concedes the most recent vote went nowhere for him but "the next one will." Sure. Just not tonight ? What a crock. Even if he wins he'll be ousted unless he reneges on his promise to allow any five members to challenge the Speaker at any time. He'll be lucky to get past swearing in the new House before his troublesome-twenty rise as one to challenge him. Boehner and Ryan must be enjoying their own special brand of former-R-speaker popcorn the last couple days. Who'd even want the job with this rump sub-caucus trying to burn it all down?

Dan Balz has a pretty good column in the Washington Post (paywall removed).

To me, he has it here in a nutshell:

An Achilles’ heel of today’s Republican Party has been its inability to govern when in power. Anti-government antagonism, which has grown steadily over the past decade, has often rendered the party incapable of separating bold political claims and aspirations — repealing the Affordable Care Act, for example — from the grittier but less satisfying work of finding compromise. Many of the new members have come to Washington not to legislate but to stop legislation, to “drain the swamp,” as former president Donald Trump has put it. Performative politics have become more appealing (and often more rewarding, in terms of fame and campaign contributions) than working in the trenches to produce results.

Yes representative government is alive and well in the USA. No, having a congress critter doesn't mean your guy gets to dictate to the rest of America how the government will work. What is the matter with the ultra-"conservatives" anyway? The Republicans have managed to move the spectrum in the Beltway steadily rightward and still the far right continue to whine.

Now they are to the point where their nominal peers in the GOP are exasperated by all the acting out and attempted power grabs, and so is the electorate back home, which shifted bluer again even in red states during a midterm that would normally have gotten the Rs far more House Seats. It's not a good sign for the GOP when it's not just indies but Republicans voting for Democrats.

The more traditional conservative Republicans (in and outside of government) are not happy with this whole gig of a small subset of the HFC trying to wag the whole damn House.

Charlie Sykes, a never-Trump conservative, put what has been happening in blunt terms with this tweet: “The MAGA crackup accelerated as crackpots fought with nihilists, wing nuts pointed fingers at extremists, and grifters started slap-fights with one another.”

Karl Rove, the Republican strategist who guided former president George W. Bush to a pair of victories in 2000 and 2004, expressed his exasperation at the effort by the anti-McCarthy rebels when on Wednesday they nominated Republican Byron Donalds, a second-term member from Florida, as their alternative to McCarthy.

“The fact they are driven to nominate Byron Donalds, an unremarkable sophomore, is a sign of incompetence, stupidity and absurdness of all this,” he said. “This is not a serious exercise. It is an infantile temper tantrum.”

 

[Macky-Mac]

The Rs look like fools....

...."Karl Rove, the Republican strategist who guided former president George W. Bush to a pair of victories in 2000 and 2004, expressed his exasperation at the effort by the anti-McCarthy rebels when on Wednesday they nominated Republican Byron Donalds, a second-term member from Florida, as their alternative to McCarthy.

“The fact they are driven to nominate Byron Donalds, an unremarkable sophomore, is a sign of incompetence, stupidity and absurdness of all this,” he said. “This is not a serious exercise. It is an infantile temper tantrum.”"....

it's rare that I agree with Rove, but he's right.

And the democrats are glad to let the republicans look the way Rove describes

 

[lizkat]

It would be interesting to see who got the blame, but I think it will happen. It's been reported that McCarthy has gained a few votes with his latest concession. I think he is desperate enough to give the gavel of a committee to Gaetz, and allow the 1 member vote of no confidence to go through.

McCarthy must be desperate just to get the Speaker's notch in his belt, if he agrees to a rules change to let any one member challenge the speaker. He'd not last a month. Maybe not even a week. They don't want him. They want the power to destroy the federal government. He's trading away democracy for a party "leadership" post.

 

[lizkat]

But keep in mind that Gerald Ford became President without ever having been elected as either President or Vice President. He was nominated to replace Agnew after he resigned. He was approved by both the House and Senate as opposed to Cabinet Members who are only approved by the Senate. When Nixon resigned, Ford became the President.

So there is some precedent to someone being in the line without ever having been elected.

But I agree, probably not somewhere we want to go.

At this point, I think the 20 holdouts start voting Present increasing by 2 votes each ballot. At some point McCarthy may realize he will be handing the Speakership over to Jeffries. When we get there, we will know if he actually cares about his caucus or just wants the power.

Well it's a tossup who cares less about the republican conference at this point. The holdouts don't care. McCarthy is fixated on getting the post. Apparently a few colleagues and advisors close to him have been saying stuff like "ya know at some point if we can't get this done we have to think about someone else" and so far Kevin's not hearing it.

My bet would be Scalise. The 20 on the far right might take him "for now" -- even if they later challenge him, just for the immediate gratification of their desire to defeat McCarthy, The problem there is that they can't be sure Scalise would honor all the promises McCarthy made related to rules changes and possible committee gavels. So it could drag on awhile. And there's always the threat that a miscalculation could install Jeffries.

 

[Macky-Mac]

This also another problem for Trump.

Not only has he endorsed McCarthy, but many of the Gang of 20 are his loyal stooges.

 

[lizkat]

This also another problem for Trump.

Not only has he endorsed McCarthy, but many of the Gang of 20 are his loyal stooges.

To think that the GOP once figured they could manage Trump. They never thought about having to try to manage his zealous followers. And now things are turning upside down altogether, when the zealots won't even listen to Trump because they realize he never really meant to drain the swamp. He talked the Bannon talk but on policy he let the Beltway play his hand. It's hard for me to understand why conservatives are letting this bunch of wack jobs derail the people's business.

 

[GermanSuplex]

McCarthy must be desperate just to get the Speaker's notch in his belt, if he agrees to a rules change to let any one member challenge the speaker. He'd not last a month. Maybe not even a week. They don't want him. They want the power to destroy the federal government. He's trading away democracy for a party "leadership" post.

TLDR: I agree. I truly wonder if they just don't want constitutional crisis, as they've proven they're willing to carry out, without any repercussions from the party, and hell to pay if you speak out.

Chip Roy is a really good talker. Unfortunately, we all know that it was a masquerade. Actually, a lot of the Freedom Caucus members have made good points, and up to a certain point, you have to admire their determination and conviction. The problem is, I don't know their motives. And then there's basic history... things they've said and done up to this point. It's easy to forgive individual instances, but when they form a pattern... long story short, I like some of what they're doing, and the fundamental point of government needing to change is a sentiment that is definitely not limited to a party, or class or type of person. But I also don't believe in tearing it all down. Maybe these folks want a constitutional crisis. They've already shown us that they're capable of doing it and nobody around them will tell them to knock it off, or else about a fifth or so of America is coming for their proverbial throat.

It's a tough spot to be in and I wouldn't want the job, but these people signed up for it, and live well off of it. So I expect some sort of decorum and good-faith adherence to traditions - and changing them RESPONSIBLY when needed.

What do Gaetz and co. want? Committee seats? This seems like a really extreme way of just getting a job. Is it for fame, attention and wealth? MTG raises a lot of money off of her antics. Is it for money in campaigns? That seems like pay-to-play, something one of the 20 accused McCarthy of this morning because he threatened to withhold aide. That kind of works both ways there, rep. Or are they truly believing in what they say, with no ulterior motives, and they just accept the fame and attention along the way? It could be any or all of those. But it's a goofy reality show that has gone on far too long. Both sides have issues, but the GOP has for a long time - and definitely the last 15 years (since Obama) been willing to turn a blind eye to anything and everything. Remember Todd Akin? He seems like Mr. Rogers compared to the current circus freaks. How did they go from reluctantly chastising that guy, and choosing men like Romney and McCain to lead them, to this mess? It's been a never-ending tail wagging the dog situation, an inability to control a sizable but minority part of their party. It may indeed be time for a third party. Hell, maybe this an intended plan for that. When you're dealing with lots of conspiracy theorists and rife corruption, your own gears start turning.

 

[lizkat]

It's been a never-ending tail wagging the dog situation, an inability to control a sizable but minority part of their party. It may indeed be time for a third party. Hell, maybe this an intended plan for that

Well there are definitely two "Republican" parties under one roof in the House now, and the smaller one is into hostage-taking. That won't change regardless of whose hand holds the Speaker's gavel. This is what they'll be like all during the term unless the rules changes McCarthy promised don't come to pass, and even then who knows what it will be like. It was bad enough when they were in the minority, they were still capable of making a circus out of --for example-- Trump's first impeachment.

Now with the ability to head up committees and some of the plum assignments promised to people who switched to support McCarthy, the House may take on the look and feel of local school boards when the populace has been asleep at the switch and suddenly 3 out of 5 board members are right wingers screaming about religious freedom and the right to censor library books and academic curricula.

McConnell and Schumer are both going to have a hard time with this House.

The weird thing is that if you took that whole group and called them the Freedom Party or whatever, and ran a presidential candidate on that ticket, the support would not be there in the general electorate. He wouldn't even score what third party "success" stories like Wallace or Perot managed. That whole bunch is just loud... and they don't realize their erstwhile mentor Trump is fading from the picture. Further, the mini-Trumps like DeSantis are a little more savvy about trying to get their agenda passed because they can work with regular conservatives, even though being way to the right in the GOP.

In a way it's sad because the rump sub-caucus of the HFC haven't done anything constructive for their constituents, who put a lot of money and energy into supporting the whole "drain the swamp" initiative. How long do you vote for people you send to Washington with a mandate to burn the place down? About as long as it takes to realize that burning down the federal government doesn't solve day to day problems of living in a red state with not enough jobs, education or support for families living in poverty. Another couple years?

The GOP right now are looking to be stupid in 2024. In theory that should be a good year for them, what with the Dems having to defend 26 Senate seats. But the Rs are "doin' it wrong" up front if you ask me. They're drawing attention all over again to the fact that they don't know how to govern when they do have power. They have it now, but can't even begin to exercise it. Not for lack of policy aims (which is also a problem since "burning it all down" is not actually what Americans want, as it happens), but because they can't even agree on who should hold the Speaker's gavel.

It's not a constitutional crisis. It's just bubble-wrapped tunnel vision about what governance in our democracy means. It doesn't mean what that gang of 20 thinks it means. Yet there they are, a distinct "third party" in a House unused to coalition government.

 

[GermanSuplex]

Boebert is on The 11th Hour on MSNBC tonight… this should be interesting.

 

[bwinter88]

This is hand-wringing. So we don't have a speaker yet. BFD! The Texas Legislature only meets for 140 days EVERY OTHER YEAR. And you know what, they are doing just fine. And they have plenty of time to pass a bunch of stuff most here don't like. So thinking Congress needs to be in session immediately is BS. We as a country will be fine if they lose a few days.

I don't know where you get the idea that Texas is doing just fine, just because they haven't slipped into the ocean. They are ambling along with their idea that the government that works less, works better, but that's not always true. Plenty of people pointed out that if the Texas deep freeze had happened a year later or earlier it would have had to face a 2nd winter without any legislative fixes to the infrastructure. And I think we can both agree the House has a whole lot more responsibilities than Texas' legislature.

McCarthy actually had the gall to say this past election was "a referendum on embarrassment abroad." I wonder how this Republican circus looks from the outside?

 

[rdrr]

Boebert is on The 11th Hour on MSNBC tonight… this should be interesting.

It was nothing but word salad. People like Boebert do one thing, they keep talking and talk over the interviewer to get their babble out. Often it doesn't make sense and repeat the same stupid points. I wish the interviewer had a mute button for these types, or just end the interview. It drives me nuts. Why don't they know the basic principles of conversation, you talk.. I talk... you talk... I talk...

 

[lizkat]

5I don't know where you get the idea that Texas is doing just fine, just because they haven't slipped into the ocean. They are ambling along with their idea that the government that works less, works better, but that's not always true. Plenty of people pointed out that if the Texas deep freeze had happened a year later or earlier it would have had to face a 2nd winter without any legislative fixes to the infrastructure. And I think we can both agree the House has a whole lot more responsibilities than Texas' legislature.

McCarthy actually had the gall to say this past election was "a referendum on embarrassment abroad." I wonder how this Republican circus looks from the outside?

On Texas: that state has the 8th highest maternal mortality rate in the USA, at 34.5 per 100k (2018). US average is 17.5, which is the highest in the developed world, and is rising. It is predicted that the draconian abortion laws in some red states will exacerbate maternal mortality rates further. So I agree that not everything in Texas is just fine and that some of that is because of its legislature.

On McCarthy's remarks about embarrassment abroad: every head of state amongst our allies breathed a sigh of relief when Trump was defeated in 2020, and was surely also encouraged by the diminution of the expected "red wave" at the midterm. If McCarthy ends up as Speaker then he'll need to hire an aide who keeps up with real news from across the pond(s) if he wants to avoid becoming even more of an ambarrassment himself than he already is,