House Speaker Ongoing Melodrama

[*Nately120*]

(10-04-2023, 10:26 AM)hollodero Wrote: I'd say there is this one problem that they were effectively siding with people like Gaetz against the more reasonable Republicans.

They offered to side with McCarthy and he said he wouldn't compromise.  I don't see how that would have been a good look for the already criticized for being spineless and weak democrats.


DEMS - We will protect you from your own party if you agree to work with us.
McCarthy - No.
DEMS - Ok, well we'll protect you anyways.

Is a democrat who votes for a republican who refuses to work with democrats even really a democrat?  As long as entire political parties are crossing the aisle, why not expect reasonable republicans to vote for Hakeem Jefferies?  I don't know much about the guy outside of this McCarthy stuff, maybe Jefferies is totally nuts and ultra left wing.

[Goalpost]

(10-04-2023, 10:36 AM)Nately120 Wrote: They offered to side with McCarthy and he said he wouldn't compromise.  


 

 They wanted promises to side with him.  Conditional demands of which to stop investigating Biden was one of them.  

[Belsnickel]

(10-04-2023, 10:55 AM)Goalpost Wrote:  They wanted promises to side with him.  Conditional demands of which to stop investigating Biden was one of them.  

And? That's called politics.

[Luvnit2]

(10-04-2023, 01:46 AM)pally Wrote: Democrats didn’t bring the vote to vacate the Speakership.  McCarthy’s own party did.  He didn't have the votes within his own majority. Then once he was gone, Republicans had no idea what to do next so they adjourned for a week.  They didn’t have a slate of candidates ready to go for another Speaker’s vote.  The Democrats have a candidate.  Why don’t Republicans vote for Jeffries?  It is a 2 way street.

And yes if the govt shuts down in Nov it will remain the Republicans fault.  If the House wants to pass appropriations on party vote alone that means they have capitulated to the extreme right’s demand of 30% or more cuts to all discretionary spending.  Those bills will never pass the Senate.  So either the new Speaker flat out tells Gaetz and company to f*** off he’s working with the Democrats or we’ll be back in the same place next month.

Why is it the small Congress majority responsibility to bow down to the slightly majority Democratic senate? I say get ready as the house are not going to do it. This will force the senate to say no and shut down the government.

Or both sides could work together to reduce government spending, fund the border and stop funding for Ukraine which are two hot topics.

If the house controls the purse strings, then senate should either work with them or assume blame if they shut it down.

[Luvnit2]

(10-04-2023, 10:36 AM)Nately120 Wrote: They offered to side with McCarthy and he said he wouldn't compromise.  I don't see how that would have been a good look for the already criticized for being spineless and weak democrats.


DEMS - We will protect you from your own party if you agree to work with us.
McCarthy - No.
DEMS - Ok, well we'll protect you anyways.

Is a democrat who votes for a republican who refuses to work with democrats even really a democrat?  As long as entire political parties are crossing the aisle, why not expect reasonable republicans to vote for Hakeem Jefferies?  I don't know much about the guy outside of this McCarthy stuff, maybe Jefferies is totally nuts and ultra left wing.

So once again Democrats tried to bribe McCarthy to give them votes. I see they are following the Biden family's history.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-04-2023, 11:32 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: And? That's called politics.

How is asking for something they know he won't give them any different from a GOP budget "compromise" that they know Dems won't accept?

[*Nately120*]

(10-04-2023, 11:35 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: So once again Democrats tried to bribe McCarthy to give them votes. I see they are following the Biden family's history.

Can you blame them?  McCarthy had to engage in a lot of bribery, as you put it, to convince his own party that has the house majority make him speaker, I don't see why democrats should ask less of him for their support than republicans did.

Are you really saying that democrats should vote for a republican speaker who offers them nothing in return?  I don't want to unjustly assign a weak argument to you, but I almost feel like you are saying that everyone including democrats should just vote for a republican because no duh, he's a republican.

[Belsnickel]

(10-04-2023, 11:39 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: How is asking for something they know he won't give them any different from a GOP budget "compromise" that they know Dems won't accept?

Did they know he wouldn't go for it? As for the difference, it is where the starting point lies. In trying to pass a budget bill there is a long and storied history of bipartisanship, of give and take. On the vote for the Speaker is has a long and storied history of being party line. So instead of coming from a starting place of collaboration they are coming from a starting place of McCarthy needing a favor.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-04-2023, 11:45 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Did they know he wouldn't go for it? As for the difference, it is where the starting point lies. In trying to pass a budget bill there is a long and storied history of bipartisanship, of give and take. On the vote for the Speaker is has a long and storied history of being party line. So instead of coming from a starting place of collaboration they are coming from a starting place of McCarthy needing a favor.

Of course they did, that's politics.  Offer a compromise they know he won't accept so when he's ousted they can pretend they tried to offer him a bipartisan solution.  Most viewers will eat that kind of pablum up.  Offering to keep him Speaker while neutering his ability to actually be Speaker is not a compromise, it's theatre.

[*Nately120*]

(10-04-2023, 11:50 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Of course they did, that's politics.  Offer a compromise they know he won't accept so when he's ousted they can pretend they tried to offer him a bipartisan solution.  Most viewers will eat that kind of pablum up.  Offering to keep him Speaker while neutering his ability to actually be Speaker is not a compromise, it's theatre.

I think from day one, or vote #13 or so it was clear that McCarthy would need SOME support from the left to keep his seat.  Maybe he made an honest effort to earn it, maybe not.

I think the biggest political actor here is Gaetz who is priming himself for an "I took on all the RINOs" governor run.

[Belsnickel]

(10-04-2023, 11:50 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Of course they did, that's politics.  Offer a compromise they know he won't accept so when he's ousted they can pretend they tried to offer him a bipartisan solution.  Most viewers will eat that kind of pablum up.  Offering to keep him Speaker while neutering his ability to actually be Speaker is not a compromise, it's theatre.

You mean like how McCarthy became Speaker in the first place? He was neutered from the start and it was his own party that did it.

[*pally*]

(10-04-2023, 11:32 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Why is it the small Congress majority responsibility to bow down to the slightly majority Democratic senate? I say get ready as the house are not going to do it. This will force the senate to say no and shut down the government.

Or both sides could work together to reduce government spending, fund the border and stop funding for Ukraine which are two hot topics.

If the house controls the purse strings, then senate should either work with them or assume blame if they shut it down.

 
It is called GOVERNING. This is not a country of one party rule as much as you would like.  Democracy requires compromise not dictating. Working with the other party does not mean letting them do anything and everything they want.  Especially when the REPUBLICANS in the Senate have made it clear that 30% cuts are DOA with them too.
Only wanting things their way has been the problem with the Freedom Caucus for the past 20 years.  They don't want to govern, they want to dictate.  They've now run off their 3rd Speaker of the House.  Their goal is the chaos

[Belsnickel]

(10-04-2023, 11:58 AM)pally Wrote:  
It is called GOVERNING. This is not a country of one party rule as much as you would like.  Democracy requires compromise not dictating. Working with the other party does not mean letting them do anything and everything they want.  Especially when the REPUBLICANS in the Senate have made it clear that 30% cuts are DOA with them too.
Only wanting things their way has been the problem with the Freedom Caucus for the past 20 years.  They don't want to govern, they want to dictate.  They've now run off their 3rd Speaker of the House.  Their goal is the chaos

I mean, in order for the Senate to pass any legislation it has to be bipartisan thanks to the filibuster. Maybe, just maybe, the House should take a cue from that.

[*pally*]

Jim Jordan has thrown his hat into the ring for Speaker. God help us if that moron wins it

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-04-2023, 11:54 AM)Nately120 Wrote: I think from day one, or vote #13 or so it was clear that McCarthy would need SOME support from the left to keep his seat.  Maybe he made an honest effort to earn it, maybe not.

I think the biggest political actor here is Gaetz who is priming himself for an "I took on all the RINOs" governor run.

(10-04-2023, 11:54 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: You mean like how McCarthy became Speaker in the first place? He was neutered from the start and it was his own party that did it.

More neutered then?  It's odd that we'd criticize him for compromising to earn the spot in a thread in which he's being criticized for not compromising.

[hollodero]

(10-04-2023, 10:36 AM)Nately120 Wrote: They offered to side with McCarthy and he said he wouldn't compromise.  I don't see how that would have been a good look for the already criticized for being spineless and weak democrats.


DEMS - We will protect you from your own party if you agree to work with us.
McCarthy - No.
DEMS - Ok, well we'll protect you anyways.

Is a democrat who votes for a republican who refuses to work with democrats even really a democrat?  As long as entire political parties are crossing the aisle, why not expect reasonable republicans to vote for Hakeem Jefferies?

Well, they're not that reasonable probably, and giving speakership to the minority party is an even steeper move. But in general, I would not know how what comes next betters things for democrats. The extremes in the GOP can take this as a win and now carry considerable power; and this strengthening their position is not ideal. Any next speaker, should one emerge, probably will not be one of the reasonable ones.

On the other hand, being ostentatiously merciful and give McCarthy just the handful of votes to narrowly stay in, imho that would make him look weaker than the Democrats. But maybe that is not true, I don't know.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-04-2023, 12:01 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I mean, in order for the Senate to pass any legislation it has to be bipartisan thanks to the filibuster. Maybe, just maybe, the House should take a cue from that.

But the Dems are on record as largely wanting to eliminate the filibuster.  It's only Manchin and Sinema preventing them at this point.  Unless they are covering for some Dems who don't want to go on record as opposing this.  

[*Nately120*]

(10-04-2023, 12:04 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: More neutered then?  It's odd that we'd criticize him for compromising to earn the spot in a thread in which he's being criticized for not compromising.

Compromises vary in logic and authenticity depending on the parties involved in said compromise.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-04-2023, 12:06 PM)hollodero Wrote: Well, they're not that reasonable probably, and giving speakership to the minority party is an even steeper move. But in general, I would not know how what comes next betters things for democrats. The extremes in the GOP can take this as a win and now carry considerable power; and this strengthening their position is not ideal. Any next speaker, should one emerge, probably will not be one of the reasonable ones.

On the other hand, being ostentatiously merciful and give McCarthy just the handful of votes to narrowly stay in, imho that would make him look weaker than the Democrats. But maybe that is not true, I don't know.

You raise a good point that was on my mind as well.  You've effectively handed a win to the more extreme GOP members.  Whomever gets the chair next is going to have to cater to them more.  Maybe the Dems think that's a winning strategy for '24?  A lot of damage can be caused in the interim, and that's assuming the strategy is even successful.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-04-2023, 12:09 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Compromises vary in logic and authenticity depending on the parties involved in said compromise.

At the end of the day, an unacceptable and extreme compromise is no different than an unacceptable less extreme compromise.