Republican Rep. Jim Jordan failed again Wednesday on a crucial second ballot to become House speaker, but the hard-fighting ally of Donald Trump showed no signs of dropping out despite losing support from even more of his GOP colleagues.
Next steps were highly uncertain as angry, frustrated Republicans looked at other options. A bipartisan group of lawmakers floated an extraordinary plan — to give the interim speaker pro tempore, Rep. Patrick McHenry, R-N.C., more power to reopen the immobilized House and temporarily conduct routine business. But that seems doubtful, for now.
What was clear was that Jordan’s path to become House speaker was almost certainly lost. He was opposed by 22 Republicans, two more than he lost in first-round voting the day before. Many view the Ohio congressman as too extreme for a central seat of U.S. power and resented the harassing hardball tactics from Jordan’s allies for their votes. One lawmaker said they had received death threats.
“Why won’t anyone vote for these crazy people that everyone hates? We can’t think of single other candidate to nominate!”
The entire party is crazy. They dont have anyone sane to put up to bat.
And if they did, there would be 8-10 holdouts the other direction for not being extreme enough.
Which is exactly what happened with Kevin. He was their idea of a moderate, which is terrifying enough, but they insisted on cutting off his balls for even considering a compromise.
We can’t think of single other candidate to nominate!”
Meanwhile there are a number of reasonable people sitting on the other side of the aisle tapping their foot and staring at their watches.
Next steps were highly uncertain as angry, frustrated Republicans looked at other options.
Anger about their own stupidity to cut down their own speaker? Or about their inability to sell a radical nut as a reasonable choice for an important office?
One lawmaker said they had received death threats.
From the kind of person that voted her party in power. Don’t you like your supporters anymore?
Why do they keep embarrassing themselves by failing vote, after vote, after vote? Don’t they have a majority whip or someone who can go around and count the votes? Do they not understand how disorganized and stupid it makes them look?
Because they are this disorganized and stupid. Their platform has been “get 15 seconds on TV to scream about it” for years.
The greatest example of this was McCain’s thumbs down vote on them killing Obamacare. There’s an old saying among lawyers that you don’t ask a witness a question that you don’t already know the answer to, and the congressional equivalent should be that you don’t hold a vote you don’t know you’re going to win. The whip and party leadership should have figured out how everyone is planning to vote before even calling the question. Instead, they have to vote 15 times to get the last guy in, and now he’s out again because he had to capitulate to the party’s extremists who are simply lobbing bombs at this point.
Honestly, like most representatives, they’re probably just out to keep their seats more than make the party look good. If they got elected by Trump Republicans, they’ll keep getting elected as long as they act like Trump Republicans.
A member of the Republican party should be selected at random and ejected from the house each and every day they fail to elect a speaker.
Would take 5 days max before Dems could vote in Jeffries LOL. Obviously it doesn’t work that way, but it’s a nice thought to start the day.
Alternate title: “GOP’s Jim Jordan fails again on vote for House speaker as Democrats watch with amusement”
No one reasonable is watching with amusement as it is bad for the entire country. Unless you hate the US. Do you hate the US?
I’m getting major “why do you hate freedom?” vibes from this comment.
That’s your fault. I openly acknowledge the numerous atrocities the US has fomented around the world in the last 100 years. But when the alternatives are Russia and China you have to be reasonable about your choices. Having no leadership in the largest economic government in the world only benefits those who deal in chaos. Trust me, you don’t want chaos.
I didn’t realize it was my fault personally. I’ve got a LOT of apologies to make!
Oh, and thanks for the reminder that government chaos is a bad thing. I always forget that.
I might? What’s it to you?
Removed by mod
Yes
Unless you hate the US. Do you hate the US?
Given how they’re acting, it is pretty clear the Republicans do.
You’re getting downvoted by people who don’t understand what this means for the US right now, or by people who aren’t fans of the US and think your last comment is indicative of US imperialist thinking. Some see this petty in-fighting as the downfall of the horrible GOP, which could be good in the long term. But for today it means that no legislative work can be done, which includes a long term budget agreement. We are currently plodding along under a temporary budget agreement that expires Nov 17. If a speaker doesn’t get elected, then a vote on a budget can’t be held; which means there will be a government shutdown. Millions of federal employees will be furloughed without pay until the GOP decides to actually fucking work at their fucking job.
This looser does not understand why not even his own people vote for him.
Forgive my lack of knowledge. Is it possible for another party to come in and replace the Republicans? I realize that’s likely not feasible assuming that both parties are well stapled by their voters, but I am curious about what the next steps are if they cease to function.
Yes, theoretically. This happened when the Republicans replaced the Whigs in the mid-1800s, largely due to the Whigs refusing to take a stance on slavery.
It’s a bit unlikely at current, though. However, if the MAGA Republicans at some point declare themselves their own party, there could be a shakeup.
It pretty much is unofficially three parties right now. MAGA probably won’t make it official though because losing that magic ® might make it difficult for them to get elected again.
As a European I do not fully understand the implications of all this, but the image it gives is that you are leading the country to chaos. You have half a country made up of MAGA crazy people and well, if you were all like that, then total madness but the country would remain functional, but it is only half, so paralysis and chaos. I wish you luck and that at some point you can redirect the most basic consensus
The Speaker of the House leads the House of Representatives. Think of it as the Prime Minister of a parliament with much less power. So while the Senate can technically still function, and the executive branch can still function, no one has enough support to “form a government” in the House, so no laws are able to pass, even if the Senate passes a bill. The situations are obviously very different, but the current issues with the Spanish government are a good way of understanding the Speaker drama. Maybe things will improve after the 2024 elections, but i have zero confidence with the iron grip the Republican party has over the majority of state governments.
Technically it’s more like a fourth. There is about 50% of eligible voters who consistently don’t vote. And out of those who do vote some(~25%) them are more independent and tend to switch between parties based upon the candidate or the mood of the ‘economy’.
Hopefully that helps to make some sense of it.
Two of our the branches of government have been captured by foreign interests in an active effort to destroy Western hegemony. The third branch WAS captured, ala Donald Trump, but democracy FINALLY did it’s job in 2020. These idiots are trying to destroy the US and it’s working.
The Dem’s should all vote for Mike Garcia (R-CA) next round. Fairly liberal, California Republican… watch the GOP freak out as they realize only a few of them need to peel off and he’s the speaker.
As someone that doesn’t understand US politics because I’m not American, I have a question.
Is it possible that the defecting republicans and the Democrats could band together and elect a democrat as the speaker?
Possible, but highly unlikely. The holdouts are holdouts because they’re further right than the rest of the party, not because they in any way align with Democrats. The two worked together because it looked good to their bases; far right Republicans look like they’re making good on their promise of getting rid of “RINOs” and more moderate Republicans, and the Democrats look good next to an apparently fractured and unstable party.
From here, though, the two differ greatly in what they want out of the speaker. Obviously Democrats want a Democrat speaker, and it would look bad to their base if they compromised to bring in a Republican. Plus, it doesn’t really hurt them to wait it out because they can’t do anything without the majority, anyway. The Freedom Caucus want a Republican who is further right and would likewise also look bad if they got rid of one moderate Republican just to bring in another one. They look better to their base if they remain obstinate and don’t give in (at least not without some major concessions).
It is possible, though improbable given the divisive political climate. To do so would be throwing away one of the primary advantages of holding a majority of the House. It would require a contingent of Republicans to essentially turn their backs on their party, likely forgoing any sort of financial aid for their reelection campaigns, and becoming persona non grata among their peers. If any group were to do so, they’d almost assuredly be frozen out of any committees they were on, and any legislation they proposed would be DOA. In short, it would almost certainly be political suicide.
So yes, it is possible, but I don’t think it very likely.
Yes, but in about 5-6 months, Republicans will have to run against other Republicans in a primary to get their party’s nomination to run as an incumbent in the general election next November, and none of them want to go into that vote with their opponent able to say that they gave Democrats the Speaker seat because the Republican base that votes in the primary cares oodles more about tribalism than a functional government
