US Politics: Speaking to Insanity

[ThinkerX]

Now there is some nonsense (?) circulating that when the House Speaker vote blows up, the House Clerk - a black gal appointed by Pelosi - could fill in until the matter is resolved.

[DMC]

17 minutes ago, ThinkerX said:

Now there is some nonsense (?) circulating that when the House Speaker vote blows up, the House Clerk - a black gal appointed by Pelosi - could fill in until the matter is resolved.

Yeah, sure, if a Speaker isn't elected on the first ballot, the House Clerk will technically be in charge of holding all the subsequent ballots.  So?  

Another thing to remember - while it appears at this point McCarthy does not have 218 votes, members can vote present.  Which in turn lowers the threshold to achieve a majority.

[ThinkerX]

2 hours ago, DMC said:

Yeah, sure, if a Speaker isn't elected on the first ballot, the House Clerk will technically be in charge of holding all the subsequent ballots.  So?  

Another thing to remember - while it appears at this point McCarthy does not have 218 votes, members can vote present.  Which in turn lowers the threshold to achieve a majority.

That part seems fairly obvious. The part of the claim I regarded as absurd was that the House Clerk would be able to do more than that - calling the House to order, taking roll, and similar stuff. 

Given the rather narrow R House majority and that all of the D's are sure to vote against McCarthy, it seems to me that if more than a couple of R's vote 'present,' then McCarthy is screwed anyhow.

 

Even if McCarthy does win the speakership, I figure he will still be subjected to monthly (?) challenges from the right. That happens often enough, the D's might be able to cut a deal with a relatively sane R.

 

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

Here's to comedy and chaos today 

[Maithanet]

I think McCarthy is hoping that some of the Republican No votes get turned into present votes today and he can barely squeak by into office.  But even in that good scenario (for him) his hold on power is extremely tenuous.

[Mindwalker]

Does anyone have a TPM membership? This article could be interesting...

Is George Santos a US Citizen?

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/is-george-santos-a-us-citizen

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

23 minutes ago, Mindwalker said:

Does anyone have a TPM membership? This article could be interesting...

Is George Santos a US Citizen?

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/is-george-santos-a-us-citizen

Given the whoppers Santos (assuming that is actually his name) has offered… it would surprise me, not at all, if he isn’t a US Citizen.

[Maithanet]

Another possibility for where the House voting goes is McCarthy could attempt to wear down the Democrats by forcing them to show up over and over again.  If we have multiple days of inconclusive voting, it is quite possible that some of the Democratic congresspeople will want to go back to their constituencies (or will just have other business to attend).  If for example, only 200 Democrats showed up instead of all 212, then McCarthy could survive a great deal more No votes from Republicans.  He might be able to take power with say, 208 Nos (200 Dems, 8 Republicans), 210 Yes Republicans and 4 Present Republicans.  

But if that is where this goes then McCarthy would be working in a position of almost unprecedented weakness.  Which seems fitting somehow. 

[Fez]

Sounds like there's maybe around 20 GOP 'No' votes actually. Which hilariously means there's a good chance Jeffries will get more votes for Speaker on the first ballot than McCarthy will.

No idea what happens past that. But I suspect the answer is that Steve Scalise eventually ends up Speaker, as opposed to Jim Jordan (too insane for the GOP mods) or a compromise candidate like Fred Upton (too much of a death knell for any Republican who votes with Dems) or McCarthy winning on a later ballot (too much of his support is relatively soft and will crumble in search of an alternative if the lunatics holds fast).

ETA:

https://politicalwire.com/2023/01/03/conservatives-would-let-hakeem-jeffries-become-speaker/

Quote

In a private meeting yesterday, Reps. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), Lauren Boebert (R-CO) and Scott Perry (R-PA) told Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) that they don’t mind if the speaker vote goes to plurality and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) is elected because they will fight him, Punchbowl News reports.

I suspect they're bluffing, but it would hilarious if enough Republicans voted 'present' instead of 'no' so that Jeffries won. Although that would make the House even more dysfunctional since Jeffries wouldn't have a majority for anything, not even to pass a rules package.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

11 minutes ago, Fez said:

No idea what happens past that. But I suspect the answer is that Steve Scalise eventually ends up Speaker, as opposed to Jim Jordan (too insane for the GOP mods) or a compromise candidate like Fred Upton (too much of a death knell for any Republican who votes with Dems) or McCarthy winning on a later ballot (too much of his support is relatively soft and will crumble in search of an alternative if the lunatics holds fast).

Is there a circumstance where Republican Moderates ally with Democrats to pick a non-insane candidate?

[Kalbear]

3 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Is there a circumstance where Republican Moderates ally with Democrats to pick a non-insane candidate?

No, because there are only like 3 moderates left. 

[Fez]

2 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Is there a circumstance where Republican Moderates ally with Democrats to pick a non-insane candidate?

That's the Fred Upton option. I wouldn't rule it out entirely, but it seems very unlikely. This was much more likely if Dems had gotten to 216 or 217 seats, since then they'd only need 2 Republicans; who could be Speaker and Deputy Speaker (a new position) and that'd take the sting out of certainly losing re-election in 2024.

Although if the vote goes enough ballots who knows what might happen?

[Maithanet]

1 minute ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Is there a circumstance where Republican Moderates ally with Democrats to pick a non-insane candidate?

It isn't impossible, but it is very, very unlikely. 

I'd say the Speaker is most likely going to be someone who is trying to appeal to both the GOP crazy and GOP mainstream wings (like McCarthy, Scalise or Stefanik).  But it's possible that the GOP is indeed completely beholden to the crazy wing, in which case we could get Jim Jordan. 

Best case of the realistic scenarios would be that the Freedom Caucus overplays its hand and the rest of the GOP get disgusted with them, and the "compromise" candidate comes from a relatively low profile but well liked member of the GOP mainstream.  Like Tom Cole or Patrick McHenry (got those names from this WaPo article about McCarthy alternatives).  Those are not by any means "moderates", but they're probably more normal than McCarthy or Scalise would be.  This would probably require some Democrats to either not show up or vote "present" rather than No. 

[DMC]

20 minutes ago, Fez said:

I suspect they're bluffing,

Well, I guess the three of them could vote no or present, but yeah I'd say this is a safe suspicion.

[IheartIheartTesla]

McCarthy has already moved his stuff into the Speaker's office, will be hilarious if he has to sneak it back out while Upton/Jeffries/Scalise patiently waits.

[Maithanet]

1 minute ago, DMC said:

Well, I guess the three of them could vote no or present, but yeah I'd say this is a safe suspicion.

Yes.  None of the investigations the Republicans are dying to get started with can begin until the Speaker is settled.  So basically if Boebert et al hold things up for months and months, it is like the Republican House is in extended recess. 

[Paladin of Ice]

Is it possible to die from schadenfreude? Asking for a friend.

[Mlle. Zabzie]

2 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Yes.  None of the investigations the Republicans are dying to get started with can begin until the Speaker is settled.  So basically if Boebert et al hold things up for months and months, it is like the Republican House is in extended recess. 

That is offensive to recess, the best subject in school.

[DMC]

6 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Like Tom Cole or Patrick McHenry (got those names from this WaPo article about McCarthy alternatives).

These are plausible alternatives for the Republican Conference but no Dem should vote for either.  Cole is just as bad as McCarthy and McHenry is worse.

[Maithanet]

2 minutes ago, DMC said:

These are plausible alternatives for the Republican Conference but no Dem should vote for either.  Cole is just as bad as McCarthy and McHenry is worse.

They won't get any Democratic votes.  But I do think that if this thing drags on long enough that Democratic attendance will drop from 212, which might allow someone to sneak in with a lower threshold of votes.