This is not true. This is the express, existential basis for abstaining the vote. You don’t have to go to the other side, you just don’t support your own side.
We all should be using it more often - not just Congresspeople.
That’s a very idealistic way of looking at it.
In reality, if all 20 had done so from the beginning, it would, in effect, have resulted in the election of Hakeem Jeffries. And they all know that and nobody would have allowed a single one of them to forget it. Ever.
It wasn’t going to happen in any realistic universe, so might as well posit that of the 202, a significant number should have accepted that maybe the Republican party needs to do some soul searching and lose some elections for a while.
Or posit sentient dolphins really would rise from the ocean to take over. That still sounds a lot more plausible than any of that.
Now this is silliness. We know they will not bother and just thank us for the fish.
Meanwhile we’ll see is he can buy off the last two or not.
If he does then keep your popcorn maker on stand by because we’ll be back here in the not distant future.
I would hold out, if I were one of the ones who turned to McCarthy today, I wouldn’t vote for him until I had everything he has promised in writing and read on the floor of Congress. No one know what all he has been promising and he has given false information to the republicans.
Considering out political situation world-wide, the environmental damage and climate change, I think the fictional dolphins of So Long and Thanks For all The Fish were verifiably the only native sentient species on the planet, and made sense for them to nope out of old Sol III while they could. Even more so now!
Note to self - make friends with a dolphin stat to get out while the gettings good. Or does anyone know of a friendly alien with a ride? Can I chip in for gas?
If McCarthy will be elected Speaker eventually, would it have not been strategically better for the Democrats to vote for him before he gave the 20 Magas more power through promises and committee assignments? That is, a world in which those 20 have less power is better than one in which they have more power, if the end result (McCarthy is Speaker) is the same.
Yes, except that kind of politics is not the kind that most Democratic voters in 2023 would support.
Some Republicans (and others) have the goal of subverting government and making crazy concessions like a single vote needed to challenge leadership will make problems worse instead of better. The saboteurs have already won - whether they elect McCarthy (why don’t they hold off on voting for a week?) or a Speak-n-Spell.
I’m not sure. More power to the crazies means more disfunction in the Majority. That could be a good thing.
For a few reasons.
Such as, they can’t trust much of what he says. He hasn’t shown himself to be all that trustworthy after all.
Also because his majority is so slim, once he got the position, he’d have to make the same sorts of concessions anyway to keep the job. He’d have the proverbial tiger by the tail. He needs all 20 to pass legislation. And they’d make his life a living hell any time he needed a vote. They’d still have the power.
Why should the Democrats help that process along to end up at the same place without getting some substantial concessions of their own?
ETA: This is one reason why the midterm results were so disappointing for the Republicans. With a larger majority, they wouldn’t be at such an impasse. The narrower the majority, the more power any single dissenter has. in the Senate, this is what the Democrats faced with Manchin and Sinema.
“More power to the crazies […] could be a good thing.”
(checks calendar nervously)
IMO it’s more important that McCarthy lose credibility with Republicans who may be willing to break ranks to either vote for budgets, appropriations, and debt ceiling bills or to force a floor vote in defiance of McCarthy.
The committees and power structures only have as much power as the majority leadership has credibility. Creating the veneer that the house is running, and/or that McCarthy is a legitimately mainstream option makes it easier for the GOP reps that are more moderate than him to fall in line. This way, they have less of an excuse for following the party’s wishes in a debt ceiling fight or similar.
At least for things Democrats are opposed to. A debt ceiling bill would probably pass easily without the insane caucus, notwithstanding it triggering a vote for removal from said caucus.
The potential issue would be that McCarthy is now agreeing to hold up the debt ceiling so he may try to whip the entire GOP caucus against it.
No.
If, and it is still a significant if, he does get the Speaker position, his getting it like this is a third best option, with the best ones generally considered highly highly improbable (but still could happen).
Best would have been a few R defections to Jeffries in return for something.
Second a unity bipartisan candidate.
Third this: a GOP House that will consistently embarrass itself for the next two years doing no more harm than a well led GOP House would do. IF he gets the votes it is for a position of impotence. Voters who decide elections may forget this circus by next elections, but the constant dysfunction sure to come they will have in front of them constantly.
A strong Speaker McCarthy is not in the Democratic, the country’s, or the world’s best interest.
ETA holding up the debt ceiling is suicide with the general public.
If he could “whip the entire GOP caucus into” doing something, would he be in this fix to begin with?
Yes, and that’s why I think it’s better to let him embarrass himself to make it even tougher on him.
It does get a bit complicated because he could just block the vote and dare the GOP to vote to override him, but him daring the GOP to something is especially weak now.
Yeah, but once he’s speaker it’ll be different! You’ll see! You’ll all see!
In either case (bringing the debt ceiling to a vote or passing it), my understanding is that only a simple majority is needed. If this is correct, it strikes me as a whole hell of a lot easier to do than what McCarthy is doing now, inter party and future primary concerns notwithstanding.