Next Speaker of the House? (6 Viewers)

[MT15]

There’s a lot of doubt that Kevin McCarthy will be able to get enough votes to become Speaker. It certainly won’t happen on the first ballot. Already Boboert and MTG are publicly at odds over it.

Maybe this is worth it’s own thread to watch. One person mentioned is Scalise.

 

[Lapaz]

Ha. So the belief that there are moderate Republicans who will put country over party and work with the Dems is a myth after all.

I don't think you can conclude that there aren't moderate Republicans that would've worked with Dems. I just don't think they would go as far as to vote for a Democrat. I never heard a Democrat say that they would vote for a moderate Republican. It was always language such as lets find a compromise/unity candidate, but when pressed for who that should be, it was always Jeffries. If any Democrats had suggested that they would vote for a moderate Republican, then I missed it. Now, unless Johnson changes his ways, Democratic interests will suffer.

 

[DaveXA]

Ha. So the belief that there are moderate Republicans who will put country over party and work with the Dems is a myth after all.

Party over country, ultimately.

 

[UriUT]

I don't think you can conclude that there aren't moderate Republicans that would've worked with Dems. I just don't think they would go as far as to vote for a Democrat. I never heard a Democrat say that they would vote for a moderate Republican. It was always language such as lets find a compromise/unity candidate, but when pressed for who that should be, it was always Jeffries. If any Democrats had suggested that they would vote for a moderate Republican, then I missed it. Now, unless Johnson changes his ways, Democratic interests will suffer.

Democrats play cards carefully amid GOP’s Speaker chaos

The GOP’s 16-day battle over the Speakership has left Democrats patiently waiting, sitting on the sidelines to see if there’s a deal to be had. Republicans began Thursday with plans to vote for a t…

thehill.com

Democrats were tight-lipped Thursday about the extent of any outreach from Republicans, with many saying they had not been approached or describing any discussions as informal.

“They’re the majority. This is their civil war. This is a Speaker they need to choose. We have offered our hand to come and develop a bipartisan path forward with us as soon as they can.”

While Democrats say they haven’t kicked off any negotiations, they have aired their priorities, including ensuring the government doesn’t careen toward another shutdown when the funding lapses Nov. 17.

[House Minority Leader] Hakeem [Jeffries] and Katherine [Clark] are pretty consistent in saying, we’re not asking for shared power, we’re not asking for equal representation on committees or anything. All we want is to keep the government open, let’s give money to Ukraine, along with Israel.

Edit:
One other demand was not pick an election denier...but that's hard to come by anyway.

 

[coldseat]

I don't think you can conclude that there aren't moderate Republicans that would've worked with Dems. I just don't think they would go as far as to vote for a Democrat. I never heard a Democrat say that they would vote for a moderate Republican. It was always language such as lets find a compromise/unity candidate, but when pressed for who that should be, it was always Jeffries. If any Democrats had suggested that they would vote for a moderate Republican, then I missed it. Now, unless Johnson changes his ways, Democratic interests will suffer.

You missed it.

Democrats are in no worse position than they were with McCarthy. Just because Republicans elected a Speaker, that doesn't mean that they're united. They're still as fractured as ever. If the Republicans are even able to pass funding or appropriation bills, Johnson will still have to compromise/negotiate with the Senate and Biden. That hasn't changed. It's not like Democrats were getting their priorities passed in the House with McCarthy. I think your hyperventilating too much.

Also, continuing to blame Democrats ...

 

[coldseat]

Just listening to Johnson's speech, he doesn't sound like a horrible person. He's definitely a religious fundamentalist, which I'm quite used to. But his speech is free of the usual right wing rage rhetoric.

I'm not saying he isn't problematic, but maybe he isn't much worse. We'll see.

 

[DaveXA]

Just listening to Johnson's speech, he doesn't sound like a horrible person. He's definitely a religious fanatic, which I'm quite used to. But his speech is free of the usual right wing rage rhetoric.

I'm not saying he isn't problematic, but maybe he isn't much worse. We'll see.

The question will be whether he can build consensus in a still divided caucus. And he'll have to come up with coalitions that can get legislation passed that the Senate will agree to. Easier said than done.

 

[Lapaz]

The question will be whether he can build consensus in a still divided caucus. And he'll have to come up with coalitions that can get legislation passed that the Senate will agree to. Easier said than done.

That assumes he wants to pass legislation. He voted to overturn the election. He led that effort by writing the amicus briefing. He essentially voted to shut down the government by voting against the CR. McCarthy was bad, but this guy isn’t an institutionalist. The only thing he may improve upon is maybe he’ll keep his promises. I’m sure he is an improvement in Jordan, but I think he’s worse than McCarthy in many ways.

 

[Lapaz]

You missed it.

Democrats are in no worse position than they were with McCarthy. Just because Republicans elected a Speaker, that doesn't mean that they're united. They're still as fractured as ever. If the Republicans are even able to pass funding or appropriation bills, Johnson will still have to compromise/negotiate with the Senate and Biden. That hasn't changed. It's not like Democrats were getting their priorities passed in the House with McCarthy. I think your hyperventilating too much.

Also, continuing to blame Democrats ...

The Democrats are at fault for not maneuvering to get a better speaker, and possibly negotiating terms that would allow their legislation. It indicates that we have 2 lousy parties. Republicans are deplorable, but Democrats are witless.

 

[Lapaz]

Democrats play cards carefully amid GOP’s Speaker chaos

The GOP’s 16-day battle over the Speakership has left Democrats patiently waiting, sitting on the sidelines to see if there’s a deal to be had. Republicans began Thursday with plans to vote for a t…

thehill.com

Edit:
One other demand was not pick an election denier...but that's hard to come by anyway.

The only bi-partisan path I heard Democrats offer included Hakeem Jeffries as the speaker. In other words, they didn’t make a sincere offer, because that was never a viable option.

 

[coldseat]

The only bi-partisan path I heard Democrats offer included Hakeem Jeffries as the speaker. In other words, they didn’t make a sincere offer, because that was never a viable option.

The Democrats publicly stated multiple times, from Jefferies own mouth, that they would be willing to work to elect a moderate Republican for Speaker with minimal agreements. Mainly to change the rules and to fund the governments. That's it! Your information is wrong. We've provided proof of this several times in this thread. For whatever reason, you refuse to accept it so that you can continue with this erroneous belief.

 

[DaveXA]

The only bi-partisan path I heard Democrats offer included Hakeem Jeffries as the speaker. In other words, they didn’t make a sincere offer, because that was never a viable option.

I really don't think all that much changes in terms of the back and forth. What I do think may happen is you'll have some moderates break off and vote for a CR. The calculus in that respect doesn't change all that much. The numbers are the same.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

We've got a MAGA a couple of heartbeats away from the Presidency. Yuck.

White House may want to beef up protection of POTUS and VPOTUS.

 

[superchuck500]

Just listening to Johnson's speech, he doesn't sound like a horrible person. He's definitely a religious fundamentalist, which I'm quite used to. But his speech is free of the usual right wing rage rhetoric.

I'm not saying he isn't problematic, but maybe he isn't much worse. We'll see.

He’s a total theocrat - and he’s terrible. He has a long history of defending laws and policies that are patently discriminatory against gays, women, and Muslims - often in the basis of religion. He thinks abortion is bad for the economy because lowers the workforce. He not only wants to make gay marriage illegal, he supports sodomy laws. And his position on the 2020 election was based on wild (and false) claims of rigged voting machines and Venezuela.

How on earth can a man who not only believes these things but believes he should work in Congress on this agenda be trusted to be pragmatic in any way?

He’s Speaker now and I guess we’ll just have to see how he handles it. November 17 is rapidly approaching.

 

[superchuck500]

 

[coldseat]

He’s a total theocrat - and he’s terrible. He has a long history of defending laws and policies that are patently discriminatory against gays, women, and Muslims - often in the basis of religion. He thinks abortion is bad for the economy because lowers the workforce. He not only wants to make gay marriage illegal, he supports sodomy laws. And his position on the 2020 election was based on wild (and false) claims of rigged voting machines and Venezuela.

How on earth can a man who not only believes these things but believes he should work in Congress on this agenda be trusted to be pragmatic in any way?

He’s Speaker now and I guess we’ll just have to see how he handles it. November 17 is rapidly approaching.

Yeah, I honestly didn't know anything about this guy. Which is part of the reason, I assume, he got elected. But after just doing some cursory reading up on him my opinion has changed quickly. Still, I'm no really worried about him passing anti-gay laws. That will quickly backfire and not go nowhere. Same with anything rolling back abortion on the federal level.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/10/25/dangerous-mike-johnson-house-speaker/

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

He's Speaker in name only and this is just going to lead to even more chaos. His true colors will show, not that he's trying to hide them, and that will have a negative effect leading up to the '24 elections for the GOP as a whole.

 

[MT15]

Interesting word he used here - compelled. The mask isn’t really hiding anything.

 

[zztop]

You missed it.

Democrats are in no worse position than they were with McCarthy. Just because Republicans elected a Speaker, that doesn't mean that they're united. They're still as fractured as ever. If the Republicans are even able to pass funding or appropriation bills, Johnson will still have to compromise/negotiate with the Senate and Biden. That hasn't changed. It's not like Democrats were getting their priorities passed in the House with McCarthy. I think your hyperventilating too much.

Also, continuing to blame Democrats ...

both sides!!

lol