19 people absent. Johnson about to speak to the press and is feeling confident. Floor vote tomorrow at noon
Let’s say I do not share your confidence, Mike.
I figure a hard right guy capable of cutting deals might squeak through. Mike Johnson fits the bill.
He is in the upper half of the effectiveness scale, which could placate the institutionalists. For the swing district reps, well they could do worse. Jordan’s scandals could have conceivably come back to bite them; Johnson’s insurrectionism in contrast isn’t too far from the median Republican, membership in Trump’s legal defense team notwithstanding.
Then again, I thought this crisis could have been disposed of days ago: my model is broken. Massie is an institutionalist and his skepticism quoted above doesn’t bode well.
In other words, “treason” is good when it’s done by Republicans, but bad when done by Democrats.
Are you really so short-sighted as to not understand that you’re part of the problem? You are displaying exactly the same attitudes as the Freedom Caucus.
Ann_Hedonia is hardly part of the problem. I’m guessing you misunderstood their posts if that is your conclusion.
Agreed
He’s also anti-Ukraine aid. A rather unpalatable fellow.
Daily Beast thinks Mike Johnson has a decent shot. Favorable quotes from Gaetz and Mace of the RINO/Wacko fringe. Institutionalist Don Bacon (R-NE) has kind words: “To his advantage, he doesn’t have a lot of baggage [like for example looking the other way as college kids were molested -ed]. He’s a nice, decent person. He’s a man of convictions but he treats people very respectfully.” Jordan opponent Ken Buck (R-CO) seems on board.
Johnson was head of the right-wing Republican Study Committee, so he has experience pulling together consensus on white papers at least. Most important for the majority of House Republicans, Mike Johnson does not possess excessive fealty to the US Constitution: he’s perfectly willing to make a mockery of his oath. I think the fundamentals favor a Mike Johnson speakership.
Be cool if the floor vote were to happen and those same 19 were absent again.
Congratulations, Speaker Jeffries. Here’s your gavel.
Why haven’t any Republican women put their names in the barrel to be Speaker? Healthy lack of ego or not wanting a terrible position? Or just plain knowing that few men would vote for them?
“Republican women in Congress” and “healthy lack of ego” do not go together.
To be fair, any person in Congress with a “healthy lack of ego” would be an extreme rarity.
Thinking that Biden and Trump will run in the 2024 election, is there any real meaning to be speaker of the house after the election? The electoral votes are counted in the Senate. if the process goes on to reject the election results, then it goes to the house (one vote per state). Is there any role for the speaker to affect the results of the election?
If not, then the speaker selection is more symbolic, and PR for Trump.
Johnson is just about as awful as Jordan. I hope Jeffries gets all the Democrats on the floor to make it as hard as possible for that anti-American asshole to become speaker.
Except that the one plus year between now and the next Congress isn’t symbolic. We all have to live through that year, and we won’t make it by doing symbolic business. Real business needs to get done to keep the country running.
Hey NBC: any time your headline is that Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert are “too smart” for something, you need to fire your editor. Julie Conway, the person quoted in the article: do you even hear yourself?
There’s a fine line between “smart” and “cunning.” They’ve both bamboozled their way into sweet gigs with little responsibility. Why upset that apple cart for a crappy job with no upside and fodder for late night comics?
1000% this. I cannot believe the number of Dopers on this board calling for the Democrats to bail out and help elect a Republican Speaker. For most of my teenage to very late 20’s I was a hardcore Rush Is Right Christian Republican* and the one absolute valid criticism I had of the Democratic Party was they had a loser mindset, they had no idea how to play to win. “Stealing defeat from the jaws of victory” seemed to be their modus operandi. Here we are 30 years later and it’s disappointing to see so many still in that mindset. My small bit of hope is posters like Ann and others stating it plainly and clearly.
*I got out of my bubble of Christian Church and School, met people who were (gasp) gay, who were African American, who were DEMOCRATS (pearls clutched!), and I also began traveling domestically and internationally. Amazing what exposure to a broader set of people and ideas can do.
That whole article is terrible and full of lazy, obnoxious gender stereotyping. “Call it, women’s intuition”? “Women are too smart to want the job!” like these seethingly ambitious women are the wife in a terrible Kevin James comedy where they tut-tut about the boys’ latest shenanigans.
Okay, then, so what is your plan for them not losing? Are they just going to sit back and watch the Republicans screw up? Well, then your plan is going to end up with the government shut down in a few weeks.
Right now, the only people “winning” are the FC. All they want is a government shutdown, and they’re going to get that by default if a new speaker isn’t elected. So they have absolutely no motivation to vote for anyone but one of their preferred candidates, who will almost assuredly shut down the government anyways. It’s win-win for the worst people in congress.
The rest of the Republicans are sniveling poltroons who will eventually cave to the FC. None of them will stick their necks out to work with the Democrats, so there’s no chance Jeffries will sneak in as Speaker (if he does, though, I will officially designate him as “Sneaker of the House” in honor of the achievement). Even Jeffries knows this to be true, because he’s been putting out feelers for weeks now to try to find some Republicans he can stomach working with.
So what does that leave you? What third option do you see that will result in anything better than a non-FC Republican Speaker backed by the Democrats? If you have a plan, or even a vague suggestion, I’m sure they’d love to hear it.
And that will be entirely the fault of the GOP. In fact there’s zero guarantee that won’t happen anyway, particularly if an FC-approved candidate wins.
Not only is it not the job of the Democrats to mitigate the dysfunction of the GOP, it goes against the best interest of both the party and the country for them to do so. It’s already been made clear that the Republicans wouldn’t negotiate in good faith and that any promises made will be immediately broken. All that would really happen if the Democrats help elect one of the current crop of candidates is that they’ll be actually at fault for the mess that ensues (rather than just getting blamed because Republicans are liars).