• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

[W:#690]McCarthy falls short in first vote for House speaker

Chomsky said:
MSNBC Capitol Hill reporter claims no one of substance besides McCarty wants the Speaker's job anymore!

Never know, could be. We've surmised as much here in this thread, recently.
Click to expand...

As I mused yesterday, the job is there for Scalise if he wants it.

Does he even want it?

If I'm McCarthy and his loyalists, I would run a trick play. A bluff. Get about 10-15 moderates to threaten going Indy and voting for Jeffries.
 
multivita-man said:
What's telling/interesting/fascinating/cringe...is that, under normal circumstances, one would think that the party would huddle and tell Kevin to give it up. But apparently no such conversations have taken place, or if they have, they've not really been serious enough or involved enough of the right people to be taken seriously. So that begs the question: why hasn't the party establishment (and even not-so-establishment) told McCarthy to give it up?

I'm guessing b/c those supporting McCarthy realize that the MAGA 20's demands and their influence is so toxic that McCarthy getting voted down 10, 20, 100 times...is worth it.
Click to expand...

I suspect no one wants to step-up, so they're happy to have McCarthy throw himself & his career down in their proxy!
 
Chomsky said:
MSNBC Capitol Hill reporter claims no one of substance besides McCarty wants the Speaker's job anymore!

Never know, could be. We've surmised as much here in this thread, recently.
Click to expand...
Actually ^^^^ is the only thing that makes sense
 
multivita-man said:
As I mused yesterday, the job is there for Scalise if he wants it.

Does he even want it?
Click to expand...

Key words are, "if he (still) wants it?"

multivita-man said:
If I'm McCarthy and his loyalists, I would run a trick play. A bluff. Get about 10-15 moderates to threaten going Indy and voting for Jeffries.
Click to expand...

I've been saying this for two days, now! At the least, it should be leaked there's private back-door discussion taking place.

But even still, that may not work against MAGAs that are in solid & safe MAGA Red districts back home. These reps are secure, and would likely relish a Trump-Dem deal! It would further rally their base and cause even more money to flow to the reps!

This is what happens when you have a radicalized electorate . . .
 
Chomsky said:
Key words are, "if he (still) wants it?"



I've been saying this for two days, now! At the least, it should be leaked there's private back-door discussion taking place.

But even still, that may not work against MAGAs that are in solid & safe MAGA Red districts back home. These reps are secure, and would likely relish a Trump-Dem deal! It would further rally their base and cause even more money to flow to the reps!

This is what happens when you have a radicalized electorate . . .
Click to expand...
You misspelled ignorant.
 
jpn said:
Watching the proceedings, it appears that normal parliamentary rules apply, in which any person can rise to be heard. Then they can propose a course of action, which they are doing before every vote for Speaker.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I can't accurately respond to this. My familiarity is with regular rules of order and an ongoing Congress.

There could be exceptions - such as those you describe above. Though it's possible what we're seeing is the normal prescription for the start of a new Congress.

But if so, what does it mean? Is the Parliamentarian presiding over the proceedings? Does s/he act as a Speaker Pro Temp?

I really have no idea.
 
McCarthy's support is going down gradually as the votes continue.

I think this last round finished at 200?

Not a good sign for the GOP at all...


Should we start placing bets as to how many rounds this is going to take at this point? Record is 133. Do we think this House can manage to figure it out before they hit that number?
 
multivita-man said:
As I mused yesterday, the job is there for Scalise if he wants it.

Does he even want it?

If I'm McCarthy and his loyalists, I would run a trick play. A bluff. Get about 10-15 moderates to threaten going Indy and voting for Jeffries.
Click to expand...
He absolutely should have been playing this game. He should also flash a willingness to cut a deal with Jefferies, like having his staff be seen with Jefferies staff. You don't have to do the deal, just convince others you are willing to do the deal.

BirdinHand said:
McCarthy's support is going down gradually as the votes continue.

I think this last round finished at 200?

Not a good sign for the GOP at all...


Should we start placing bets as to how many rounds this is going to take at this point? Record is 133. Do we think this House can manage to figure it out before they hit that number?
Click to expand...
At some point the stock market begins to slide over lack of stability in the government.... That will certainly put pressure on the Cons to figure this out.
 
multivita-man said:
As I mused yesterday, the job is there for Scalise if he wants it.

Does he even want it?

If I'm McCarthy and his loyalists, I would run a trick play. A bluff. Get about 10-15 moderates to threaten going Indy and voting for Jeffries.
Click to expand...
I suspect some are studying how 1923 came about. Back then, Bull Moose progressives opposed Gillett after Republicans lost 75 house seats and 6 senate seats in the 1922 mid-terms. That House didn’t meet until late 1923.

That House was criticized for refusing to accept the census results of 1920 in both 1921 and 1922. That census documented how immigration had exploded, and, for the first time, more Americans lived in urban areas than rural. Sound familiar?
 
Damn, on the announcement of Jefferie's 212 the Dems jump up, cheer, dance, and high-five like they won the Lotto!

The other tally announcements pale in comparison by far.
 
jpn said:
Seriously, though, wouldn't that work? Certainly the Democrats would vote for a plurality vote for Speaker. All of McCarthy's supporters should. It would really put the 21 dissenters in the fire.
Click to expand...
Nope need a Speaker to call a vote except for speaker or to ajorne.
 
Linc said:
I suspect some are studying how 1923 came about. Back then, Bull Moose progressives opposed Gillett after Republicans lost 75 house seats and 6 senate seats in the 1922 mid-terms. That House didn’t meet until late 1923.

That House was criticized for refusing to accept the census results of 1920 in both 1921 and 1922. That census documented how immigration had exploded, and, for the first time, more Americans lived in urban areas than rural. Sound familiar?
Click to expand...

Excellent insight, Linc. Thank you for this. I had no idea what the reference was to.
 
jpevans said:
Nope need a Speaker to call a vote except for speaker or to ajorne.
Click to expand...

That's my thought. In fact, until they're sworn-in - those present in the Chamber are not Congressmen or Congresswomen; they're Congress-elect.
 
multivita-man said:
As I mused yesterday, the job is there for Scalise if he wants it.

Does he even want it?

If I'm McCarthy and his loyalists, I would run a trick play. A bluff. Get about 10-15 moderates to threaten going Indy and voting for Jeffries.
Click to expand...

I do not even understand why McCarthy wants the job. Scalise endorsed McCarthy last I checked. He clearly isn't in the running.
 
multivita-man said:
What's telling/interesting/fascinating/cringe...is that, under normal circumstances, one would think that the party would huddle and tell Kevin to give it up. But apparently no such conversations have taken place, or if they have, they've not really been serious enough or involved enough of the right people to be taken seriously. So that begs the question: why hasn't the party establishment (and even not-so-establishment) told McCarthy to give it up?

I'm guessing b/c those supporting McCarthy realize that the MAGA 20's demands and their influence is so toxic that McCarthy getting voted down 10, 20, 100 times...is worth it.
Click to expand...
Well there’s no one else wanting the gig. Maybe the can get Gingras (sp) to come back.
 
THANK YOU JOE BIDEN AND DEMOCRATS FOR GETTING SO MUCH ACCOMPLISHED IN THE FIRST TWO YEARS.

ALL PROGRESS NOW COMES TO A SCREECHING HALT.


And let's all pray there isn't another major event for at least two years. This House isn't equipped to handle anything major (or minor).
 
I just got back from the gym, turned on CSPAN, and want to make sure I haven't lost my mind. Is there a 5th vote happening right now?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom