All it takes is 5 or 6 Republicans, out of the dozen or so Republican-held districts that voted for Biden, to decide to become independent and caucus with the Democrats on the Speaker. Then, you get Jeffries, take away all the power from the FC, and have a functioning government again – aid to Israel and Ukraine, no shutdown, etc.
Oh, but where is the Fun (R) in that?
House Republicans as a whole. Although Speaker pro tem is the power to make the call. Likely listening to some major players.
Funny. I had started the first thread on this just after the election asking is some of the Reds would effectively hold their breath until leadership turned Blue. Few then thought there was any chance of that.
It’s still improbable but …
The team that knows normal process is only know seeing that giving in to toddler tantrums with more candy is a bad tactic. And waiting out a tantrum when you have to get to work sucks.
I feel like the “why don’t moderate Republicans join with Democrats to elect a Speaker” conversation has been done to death, but probably the biggest reason this doesn’t happen is because those Republican members would be toast in their next primary (i.e. less than a year from now) regardless of whether they ran as a Republican or Democrat. Republicans would obviously shiv them for betraying the party. And they wouldn’t find any more welcome in a Democratic primary, because these “moderates” have espoused and voted for deeply conservative policy positions.
Yeah. 'Zactly.
Funny how the team that was always full of “never negotiate with terrorists” forgot that mantra as soon as the terrorists where nominally on their own team.
Good point. Plus …
Nobody ever fully trusts a defector / traitor. They did it once, they can do it again. Evidently their only true allegiance is to their personal interests du jour.
In districts that went for Biden? I’m not so sure. Anyway, it happens. NJ Republican Jeff Van Drew switched from Democrat to Republican after getting elected as a Dem. How did it go for the next primary? From Wiki:
Van Drew ran for reelection in the 2022 elections.[46] He won the primary with 82% of the vote, defeating two challengers for the Republican nomination.[47] He won the general election with 59.3% of the vote to Democratic nominee Tim Alexander’s 39.6%.
I really disagree with this – in this case, those Republicans would have taken a huge career risk for the good of the country.
I assume that part of the deal would be assurances from the Dems that the establishment would wholly support them in their next primary, as long as they faithfully caucused with the Dems.
Because working with the Dems worked out so well for McCarthy?
The main reason I left the Republican Party was their attack on elected Democrats in state legislature. We saw what they did to Liz Cheney. Any Pub that works with the Dems will be labeled a traitor and won’t be a Rep on January 4, 2025.
If they are going to be smarter about afffrming votes before holding a vote, it could be less than 5 ballots but more than 5 months.
That’s my take on it. The big problem here is that they’re already worrying more about their personal stake in staying in office, than in doing what’s right for the United States. If these hypothetical 5 or 6 republicans do exist, right now they’re thinking, “Okay, I can see the government is entirely dysfunction in the middle of multiple crises, and I could fix that by working with the Democrats, but gosh darn it, if I do that, I might have to pay a price come the next election!”
These people jumping ship in the full knowledge that it will likely cost them their seat would be the most selfless thing they could do right now. The problem is that ‘selfless’ is something they just aren’t.
Although I’d love to be proven wrong on that.
I don’t think this is tenable. These “moderates” are on record now as having voted for ultra-conservative legislation that would slash spending for government assistance programs, enforce draconian new immigration restrictions, reverse Pentagon policies on abortion access and medical care for transgender troops, etc. Democratic primary voters would revolt over these candidates, and progressive interest groups would organize to oppose them. Particularly in New York, where most of these theoretical “moderates” are from, Democratic primary voters have rejected establishment-backed candidates in primaries. That’s how we’ve ended up with AOC and Jamaal Bowman.
Exactly what I’m thinking.
This is all true. On the opposite side, caucusing with Dems would mean Dems controlling both chambers and the presidency, and could enable some remarkable progressive gains for which those turncoats could take responsibility. It might be their best bet for staying in power.
My bold.
Cf. Lucy and football.
Why does anyone think it might be different this time?? 
Even for politicians, going from supporting hard-right legislation to “remarkable progressive gains” in the span of one session of Congress would be too mercenary. This assumes that these guys don’t have any fixed beliefs at all – maybe true for Santos, but most politicians would have a hard time refuting every position that they’ve built their careers on. At the very least they’ll have a hard time explaining their remarkable about face to Democratic primary voters.
I obviously don’t have a crystal ball, and successful party switches do happen. But a fundamental axiom of politics is, “dance with the one that brung ya.” It’s almost always better to stick with the coalition that showed they can help get you elected than to chase after a shiny new suitor. The ones you betray will hate you to the end of days and your new dance partner may prove fickle. The Democratic “establishment” can make all the promises it wants to help party switchers, but if the polling looks bad and those resources are needed elsewhere, it’ll be a business decision. Because they don’t owe these party switchers any personal loyalty and the switchers don’t have any base within the party that leadership needs to worry about.
May I introduce you to Tricia Cotham, who royally screwed over North Carolinians earlier this year? There’s nothing too mercenary for politicians.
Oh, no introductions necessary – I started the thread about her in P&E. Rumor is that she was sleeping with the Republican Speaker and there’s a lot of speculation that her switch was planned even before she got elected. Good political junkie stuff.
Fair enough. But I think the reason why her switch was so shocking is because it’s so rare for a politician to completely reorient their political positions (as opposed to a conservative Democrat or liberal Republican moving to the other camp). If Democrats can find five Republicans with the same flexibility, more power to 'em.
Of course all ifs are big ifs at this point.
Anyone want take some WAGs at how long until the next public ballot and how long until a Speaker is actually selected, given current facts on the ground?
I feel like this is Clue.
I’ll take no ballot until next week. Selection within a few votes. Requiring some D support selecting a more Main Street style member who has some trust and immediate votes on Israel and Ukraine with good faith benchmarks on budget.
Or Mr Mustard …
Call me slow, but what would keep such a person from being McCarthied?