Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy❤
No. of Recommendations: 3
So, this afternoon the House GOP convened again to try to come up with a nominee for Speaker. After several rounds of voting, they selected current Whip Tom Emmer - he didn't get 217, but he got considerably any more than any other candidate. So he then proceeded to try to shore up support from the two dozen or so folks who didn't say they'd vote for him.
Enter Trump. He had previously not taken much of a role in the Speaker fight, but there was a sense that Emmer had a Trump problem because he didn't vote against certifying the election. Emmer spoke to Trump to try to bridge that gap, but apparently it was unsuccessful. Trump posted on social media coming out against Emmer as Speaker, calling him a RINO and saying it would be a tragic mistake to choose him:
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4272938-trum...So I guess, on to find Number Four on the list of Speaker nominees? Maybe Mike Johnson, who just lost the vote to Emmer - but had more votes than the other candidates? Or does the GOP just give up on trying to find anyone within their caucus who could get 217 votes?
No. of Recommendations: 12
I'm trying to picture in my mind the Venn diagram that can accurately convey the overlap between GOP factions that adds up to 217 while satisfying all of their internal, transitive, mutually exclusive criteria.
* cannot have supported slate of elector challenge
* must have supported slate of electors challenges
* must support a deal to avoid a debt ceiling shutdown
* must be against any deal with Democrats to avoid a debt ceiling shutdown unless it guts X, Y and Z
* must support aid to Ukraine
* must want to drastically curtail or eliminate aid to Ukraine
I don't think current concepts of geometry and set theory provide for such a combination. It might require imaginary numbers, a fourth dimension and hyperspace.
WTH
No. of Recommendations: 1
So sick of this guy and his embrace of chaos.
No. of Recommendations: 2
I'm trying to picture in my mind the Venn diagram that can accurately convey the overlap between GOP factions that adds up to 217 while satisfying all of their internal, transitive, mutually exclusive criteria.
There might not be any.
Clearly, the caucus isn't willing (yet) to just vote for somebody - anybody - simply because they need somebody - anybody - to fill the chair. No, the person they pick still needs to be right, politically acceptable to them so that they can defend the vote on substance rather than the "eh, we had to pick someone."
It's an astounding collective action problem. There's no mechanism by which they can bind themselves to a collective vote within the caucus. No matter who wins the caucus vote, every member remains free to vote for whoever they want on the House floor. There's no institutional framework with the power to reward cooperation or punish defection from the will of the majority. So even though they all want a Speaker, there's no path for them to get 217 votes for any specific Speaker.
So this may go on for quite a while.
No. of Recommendations: 4
albaby1: Trump posted on social media coming out against Emmer...
Wasn't Trump in court when that Truth Social post was sent? Also, it doesn't 'read' like a Trump message.
Just wondering who actually wrote and posted it.
And isn't it interesting that Gaetz initially backed Emmer and then stabbed him in the back? What's the game plan? Is the plan to kill off all the "moderates" in order to force the House to elect a shut-down-the-government-to-hurt-Biden far right crazy to the speakership? Trump has told House republicans to shut down the government, that Biden will be blamed.
No. of Recommendations: 5
<"Former President Donald Trump took to his Truth Social platform shortly after to call him a "Rino" - Republican In Name Only - who "never respected the power of a Trump endorsement or the breadth and scope of Maga - Make America Great Again".>
Or does the GOP just give up on trying to find anyone within their caucus who could get 217 votes?
Astounding that the majority party is so despicable that they find their own members unpalatable.
Who was it who said "I'd never want to join a club that would have somebody like me as a member?"
Flush,
flush,
and a 3rd flush for a big one like Jordan.
No. of Recommendations: 1
And isn't it interesting that Gaetz initially backed Emmer and then stabbed him in the back? What's the game plan? Is the plan to kill off all the "moderates" in order to force the House to elect a shut-down-the-government-to-hurt-Biden far right crazy to the speakership?
I don't think you need to get that far into the weeds in trying to find motives. There are a lot of hard right conservatives in the caucus, and they'd prefer to see a hard right conservative be Speaker than someone who's more moderate. Whether they have a specific budget negotiation strategy or not, they just want to see the next Speaker be from their faction within the caucus than a more moderate one. It's not like Emmer was ever close to 217.
No. of Recommendations: 2
I heard a republican blaming this on the Democrats, because they withheld 210 votes, while the republicans much fewer. Perhaps another way to look at this is Jeffries only needs to flip 7 republicans to win the speaker vote, while a republican is going to need over a dozen democrats on their side.
How this ends, nobody knows.
Alan
No. of Recommendations: 1
I heard a republican blaming this on the Democrats, because they withheld 210 votes, while the republicans much fewer. Perhaps another way to look at this is Jeffries only needs to flip 7 republicans to win the speaker vote, while a republican is going to need over a dozen democrats on their side.
How this ends, nobody knows.
Alan
-------------
In other words, the democrats are closer to electing a speaker than are the Republicans. Now that's funny.
No. of Recommendations: 3
alan81: I heard a republican blaming this on the Democrats, because they withheld 210 votes...
McCarthy has said this a thousand times; other republicans too. I keep waiting for a reporter to ask McCarthy (and other republicans spinning this nonsense) to tell her/him how many republicans voted for Nancy Pelosi to be speaker.
ANSWER: ZERO.
No. of Recommendations: 1
I have a libertarian friend who is revelling in this. As far as he's concerned, if Congress is in session, they are making things worse. He sees gridlock as the best thing that can happen. It means they are not causing trouble, or other mischief.
He would prefer government that he never has to see or think about. IMHO, he's just short of an anarchist. Though he maintains he's libertarian.
No. of Recommendations: 3
IMHO, he's just short of an anarchist. Though he maintains he's libertarian.
Libertarianism is a bullshit political ideology that would never result in a functioning society. Might as well call them anarchists.
No. of Recommendations: 3
I keep waiting for a reporter to ask McCarthy (and other republicans spinning this nonsense) to tell her/him how many republicans voted for Nancy Pelosi to be speaker.
ANSWER: ZERO.
Yup, it's maddening! When was the last time that any member voted for the speaker of the other party?
No. of Recommendations: 1
Libertarianism is a bullshit political ideology that would never result in a functioning society. Might as well call them anarchists.
Pop libertarianism sure is BS. They've done surveys in which half of the people calling themselves libertarians couldn't identify basic libertarianism when asked. But I think the early liibertarians weren't so bad.
