What is the Democrats' strategy behind not supporting McCarthy?

Honestly, I’m not sure what more you can do at this point. If you have a group of people that artificially see each other as The Enemy, and you really goddamned need them to work together, having them attend events with their families in which they socialize and enjoy each others’ company seems like a pretty good start.

If you were on the lawn drinking a beer with Tabitha on Saturday evening, while your daughters ran around giggling and chasing fireflies, and you talked with Tabitha about your shared interest in fixing up old houses, it might be a little bit easier on Monday to talk with Tabitha about compromise on a budget bill.

Why can’t politicians just be coworkers all trying to do a good job?

Why do they have to be constantly at war with each other over everything?

It says something really bad about humans that we need a side to hate in order to be motivated to pay attention to politics.

I think there is something to lose. Here is one way I see it playing out:

  1. Candidate GOP Speaker promises a budget bill in exchange for Dems support.
  2. Speaker gets elected with help from the Dems.
  3. Speaker says “That’s not exactly what we discussed.”
  4. Dems move to vacate.
  5. No GOP join in; secretly relieved that their unforced error is now a Dem issue.
  6. GOP go back to their districts and brag “We owned the libs.”
  7. Dems go back to their districts and hear “You got played. Your judgement is off. We need a new rep.”
  8. GOP Speaker gets fundraising support and no primary challengers for being a team player.

The time for this type of agreement was when McCarthy was still Speaker and could deliver on his side of the bargin before expecting the Dems to.

As I understand it, lots of politicians from each side happily have drinks with each other pretty regularly. Heck, Ruth Bader Ginsburg regularly hung out with Antonin Scalia.

What has changed is the Freedumb and America First caucus who absolutely will not negotiate. There is only their way. There are no compromises to be had under any circumstances. There is no “what is good for the country.” There is only “what is good for me.”

I actually think the Dems can trust that the GOP isn’t able to unify like that at this point.

And at any rate even after that happens the GOP goes back to the same problem that led to this in the first place that they can’t pass a budget without Democratic votes.

The Democrats’ strategy could also be reduced to: you have presented me with an opportunity to choose a new speaker. Since I’m a Democrat, I prefer a Democrat, hence I oppose the Republican (and to be clear, this particular Republican has opposed my interests, so I have no problem opposing his). Given that reality, I oppose the people who have opposed my interests at every term, instead holding out a chance for someone who advances my interests.

To be clear, dealing with a McCarthy who was actually a Gaetz puppet was not sustainable. So the alternative is this crazy phenomenon where we vote for the outcomes we want.

There are a few structural issues. Newt Gingrich discouraged House members from bringing their families to DC: he wanted them to have closer ties to their districts. This led to members spending less time in Washington, socializing less in Washington, and cheating on their spouses more in Washington.

House members of both parties are also expected to spend hours on the telephone fundraising.

The high water mark of bipartisanship was the 1950s where one Republican House elder told a new member, “The Democrats are not the enemy. The Senate is the enemy.” Ezra Klein reminds us that such bon amie was girded by Jim Crow and southern Democrats who kept anti-lynching legislation - which had majority support - bottled up in committee.

Anyway, more political socializing would be a good thing. I’m a do-everything guy, and I’ll happily take any solution that addresses 2% of the problem.

I think the Republicans will be able to elect a speaker. McCarthy seemed to be hated by Gaetz et al.

The new speaker will have just as much trouble getting votes, though.

It’s not that uncommon to have problems with speakers. Sometimes they are improperly placed and can only make distorted noises. They might not be well grounded. In this case, I suspect the coño may have separated from the surrounding material, resulting in a loss of nuance.

The Speaker was basically elected after making humiliating concessions to allow individual to depose him and Gaetz did. I’m not American, but perhaps that could cause:

  • Gaetz to be further reviled by many in his party
  • A contentious, even obnoxious, campaign to agree on a new speaker, as before
  • Nothing much getting done until a new speaker is chosen
  • Government risking shutdown if agreement is not made in 45 days minus however long it was since they made it, almost a week?
  • Voters, and certainly foreign governments, likely blaming Republicans for this contretemps and dysfunction more than Democrats
  • Trump weighing in on possible candidates
  • Further Republican infighting and negativity

Or you could help, receive no credit for that, be blamed for everything and miss the chance to have someone who can actually trade horses

This seems to be true to some extent:

House Republicans are aiming their fire at Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) after the congressman staged a successful effort to oust Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) as Speaker, sharply criticizing the Florida Republican for teaming up with Democrats to boot the GOP leader and hurling personal insults his way.

Taking matters a step further, at least two GOP lawmakers have said Gaetz should be booted from the House Republican Conference, an unlikely outcome that, nonetheless, underscores the raw frustration — and anger — with Gaetz among members of his party. - SOURCE

This article raises some good points. Such as, is cream cheese really $7 in the US? It’s unusual for groceries to be twice the Canadian price there, and that’s before converting dollars to dollarettes.

Let’s not get too far afield on this, but I’m just now looking at what I’d pay for cream cheese today. Store brand is $1.48 for an 8-oz brick. Premium brand is $2.98. I don’t know who is paying $7.00.

$2.79 at Whole foods. And it is well known they aint no discount store.

Maybe if you’re buying your tubs of cream cheese from Panera Bread. In Lower Manhattan.

Our store brand is 50 cents higher at $1.98, but the name brand price is the same $2.98, a buck more per package.

Maybe if you include the price you have to pay to read the article, it starts approaching that cost.

Honestly, I’m surprised David Brooks wasn’t in the by line. Exaggerating the cost of goods that he assumes The Common Folk Of The Land view as essential, for the purpose of proving that his fellow cosmopolitan elites are out-of-touch with the middle class (yet doing so in a way that barely disguises his utter disdain for them) is right up his alley.

Here is a gift link to the article you can read for free:

Philadelphia cream cheese is often sold in a two-pack, 1 lb deal. It’s not crazy that that might be $7 somewhere.

It’s one cream cheese michael. What could it cost, 7 dollars?