Home » GOP discord in the House

Comments

GOP discord in the House — 74 Comments

  1. What a self-destructive mess. They want the HFC to be able to sue whoever they want in the name of the full House?That’s ridiculous.

    Whether we like it or not, politics is a team sport. 15% of a very narrow majority just does not have the power to dictate terms.

    The lame duck omnibus was bad, but just imagine how much worse it would have been if McCarthy, or Jordan for that matter, had to go to Jeffries hat-in-hand and get 20 or so Democrat votes to fund the government or prevent a default. I guarantee those 20 votes would not come cheap. (If they came at all. I suspect Democrats would be happy to have a government shutdown or even default as a political issue for 2024.) These clowns are vindicating McConnell.

  2. I agree with self-destructive, but I think Boebert and others are simply holding a mirror to McCarthy. What I heard about McCarthy’s actions prior to the election, the concept of dealing with a progressive over a “populist” was a preference of his and other DC Republicans, like McConnell. Boebert was one of a few that got poor treatment from McCarthy and owe him nothing.

    That said, I’d prefer McCarthy got slapped around and told how little confidence he holds, but still would take McCarthy over Jeffries as Speaker of the House. The GOP on both sides needs to heed the Reagan’s 11th Commandment or rather the corollary that you can have at it in the primaries, but then you fully back the primary winner. If that had happened, we might have had a larger majority, and McCarthy wouldn’t be having problems now.

  3. This is so stupid. We can’t afford to be squabbling over the few scraps we have at this stage. We can worry about those sorts of things once we have both houses and the presidency (assuming that ever happens again at all). Nancy Pelosi is a truly awful person, but she did maintain unity in her party.

  4. The insistence that “regular order” return to House proceedings is reasonable, but demanding a separate entity for the Freedom Caucus to launch separate lawsuits is over the top.

    This reporter is at NBC/MSNBC, which puts his reporting into question.

  5. Kate said- “The insistence that “regular order” return to House proceedings is reasonable”

    100% right.

    “We don’t have the tools yet to battle the swamp. I’m nominating Jim Jordan” – Rep. Chip Roy

    Had McCarthy agree to return to regular order?

  6. I thought that was one of the concessions McCarthy had made. If not, he should. But the Freedom Caucus seem to be moving the goal posts. Failing to elect a Republican Speaker, even a squishy one, would be a betrayal of Republican voters across the nation who elected a small majority.

    MCDS (McCarthy Derangement Syndrome) is not a smart political move. Elect him, and keep the pressure up. Nineteen voted for Jim Jordan. He doesn’t want the job.

  7. I like regular order too. It’s overdue. But we’re talking about 19 votes out of 435. If there are really only 19 votes for regular order, it isn’t going to happen. If a majority of the GOP caucus is for regular order, then what, exactly, are these 19 trying to accomplish?

    The only silver lining here is that 2024 is going to be about the respective nominees and this stunt is likely to be forgotten.

  8. How much of this is a reaction to the backstabbing by McConnell?

    This is war between the Globalist/Wall St wing and the Nationalist/Populist wing.

  9. Brian E – If this is populism v. globalist/Wall St., the globalist/Wall St. wing has it, 203 – 19.

    I’m afraid this is more about ego and playing to the base.

  10. Brian E:

    Not really. It is a war between the globalist/WallSt wing, the in-between wing, and a small fraction of the Nationalist/Populist wing. Many of the most stalwart members of that latter wing recognize the destructive nature of what’s happening and are refusing to go along.

  11. How much of this is a reaction to the backstabbing by McConnell?

    The miasma emanating from McConnell and about 45% of the Senate Republican caucus is sufficient to generate a critical mass of resentment. As for McCarthy, he stripped Steve King of all his committee assignments for no good reason. Make him squirm and get some concessions out of him (e.g. no one can be placed under a disciplinary interdict except by a vote of the whole caucus and open seats on committees are distributed by lot).

  12. There are 435 Representatives in the House so the Speaker has to get 218 votes to win a majority, correct?

    There are 212 Democrats and 222 Republicans. No matter how foolish or politically absurd this posturing is; is there any likelihood 6 Republicans will vote for Jeffries or another Democrat?

    This is McCarthy’s first test. He has to flip 15 of the 19, so it’s OK if Biggs, Gaetz and 2 others do not vote for him. Or the Republicans have to find a different candidate all but 4 of them can agree on.

    I agree it’s a bad look, but it seems even the stupid party can’t botch this one.

  13. Rufus, if I were Jeffries, I’d find 15 Democrats who aren’t going to be primaried and have them vote for McCarthy. That would more or less cripple the GOP caucus.

  14. Neo, I agree that a majority of the Freedom Caucus is voting for McCarthy.

    I’m not sure how destructive this is. I doubt anyone in 2024 will remember this squabble.
    The House has been denied the power of the purse (all spending bills have traditionally originated from the House) by the Senate.
    Biden administration has made it clear they’re going to ignore/stonewall any investigations by the House. Anything they do uncover/prove will be ignored by the MSM.

    Some of this may indeed be just a grudge match/settling scores,

    But let’s not kid ourselves. No significant legislation that the House might possibly pass will go anywhere.

    Domestic energy production? Nope
    Immigration? Not a chance
    Spending restraint? Isn’t the 2023 deficit estimated at $1 trillion?

  15. Art Deco, Ryan is discredited because he had to go buy Democrats’ votes to keep the government open. What do you think will happen if McCarthy is the Republican who needed Democrats’ votes to become Speaker? There would be huge pressure on the Freedom Caucus in particular to buck him at every opportunity. And the GOP caucus is going to have to swallow a bunch of really bad bills this Congress with the Senate and WH held by progressives.

    If you want to see failure theater, wait until a Republican who owes the Speaker’s gavel to Democrats has to go buy Democratic votes to, say, raise the debt ceiling. The lame duck omnibus will look like a deal in comparison.

  16. Bauxite, I didn’t believe it then and I don’t buy it now– that any spending bill would likely be worse in the future than now. That’s just trying to rationalize stabbing the House in the back.
    And that includes debt ceiling.

    It’s time for McCarthy to consider a compromise candidate.

  17. Seems a little asymmetrical to have a Speaker of the House that is willing to make concessions for Democrat votes on spending bills, but unwilling to make concessions for Republican votes for his leadership position. Isn’t he supposed to be a consensus builder? A unifier? A leader?

  18. A little context is important here:

    Back in October of 2015, John Boehner rather abruptly retired. There was a bit of a scramble as to the selection of his replacement. McCarthy, already majority leader at that point, was initially the favorite but withdrew for consideration when it was clear the Freedom Caucus would not support him. At the time, the GOP had a large majority and the establishment had much firmer control of the Republican Conference.

    Fast forward to today. The GOP’s majority is tiny and the populist element is larger, more vocal and more emboldened. What has McCarthy done in the last seven years to make himself more palatable to this faction? It doesn’t seem like much of anything.

    So, I’m more than a little weary of anyone who is surprised by what is happening. While I wish the dissidents were a little better organized, I support their efforts. To the anticipated objection, ‘but the Democrats are so vile, we must be united against them’, I reply: Yes, they are vile. And dangerous. And contemptible. They must be resisted strenuously and uncompromisingly. McCarthy has shown little inclination to do this consistently. Either the dissidents will force him to ultimately stand aside, or accede to their demands, thus making such resistance more likely. Either outcome is welcome.

  19. That said, I’d prefer McCarthy got slapped around and told how little confidence he holds, but still would take McCarthy over Jeffries as Speaker of the House.

    Yes and the GOP are unlikely to agree on an alternative.

    By the way, Trump was correct to blame the anti-abortion wing for the mid term failure. He was not “shifting left” but pointing out reality. The states will eventually end up with a 15 week law but the mid terms were a price they didn’t have to pay.

  20. So Ackler, a minority faction of the party gets to veto leaders elected by the majority? I’d take that deal.

  21. Well lindsey did put his loafer in his mouth but the rampant and extensive fraud cannot be ignored through the census ranked choice et al the macabre fraud that was the j6 committee

  22. I am beyond disgusted.
    As I said earlier, why was McCarthy acceptable when they were wandering in the wilderness; but suddenly is not?

    Some of us used to laugh at the Italians and their inability to form a lasting government. The Israelis, and now even the Brits, have demonstrated the problems of Parliamentary systems. We are learning that our system is a (bad) joke when it is in the hands of clowns.

  23. Then we saw his stalwart leadership sarc we see how he thinks his constituency seems to be kiev not which ever southern california town he comes from how he went along with the j6 fraud

  24. One thing people are going to have to get over is a desire for everything to be as neat and orderly and “civil” as it has been for the last several decades. Democracy in its proper and normal state is VERY messy and often unpleasant. That is how it is supposed to work. The pressures of the Cold War restrained democratic behavior and that was followed by unanimous elite consensus that history was over, all the big questions were answered, and everyone just needed to shut up and follow the script.

    I saw someone online point out that AOC and “The Squad” always backed down and did whatever Nancy Pelosi wanted. I’m very glad at least part of the Freedom Caucus isn’t following that example. All meaningful change starts with one word, “No.”

    Mike

  25. Trump better tread a bit more carefully than usual regarding abortion and what caused the red ripple.

  26. Bauxite,

    Your analogy is flawed. There’s no ‘veto’ here in the conventional sense. A majority of votes is required to become Speaker. McCarthy doesn’t have it. He’s not ‘entitled’ to their votes just because he won in the Conference vote for leader any more than Pelosi was entitled to the dissident Blue Dogs who voted for Heath Shuler over her twelve years ago.

    We are not talking about one person or a group of people refusing to accede to a majority’s will. We’re talking about a candidate who doesn’t have a majority.

  27. Akler @ 5:54 has the right of it.

    If McCarthy isn’t willing to forcefully fight the dems and in as cunning a manner as possible, he has no business being elected to the speakership. That he reflects the majority of the House Republicans is the real problem.

  28. Miguel:

    He represents Bakersfield, CA IIRC. Which is southern CA, although not the same as Los Angeles. But then FL is all the same, right?

  29. Geoffrey:

    It seems to me that the real, bigger problem, is the Democrat Congress critters and the Brandon junta.

    Silly me, inside baseball and circular firing squads are the real threat?

    The perfect is the enemy of the good.

  30. People mix up miami with hialeah with coconuf grove(where they filmed burn notice) until the norridge city council extorted too much.

  31. Does the house gop conference think that or do they seem less agita about that then icky deplorables

  32. Remember scalise wanted to keep the murders of ashley babbit and co by the keystone cops on thd down low they went along with the fraudulent five cops who were ‘killed’ they wanted to silence matt gaetz for that.

  33. The dems by contrast pushed the green new deal with only four votes and a tie in the senate of course they had the warm embrace

  34. Bauxite implied it was greedy congressmen seeking committee assignments, implied in the NY Post article he linked.

    Here’s the money quote by Rep. Greene: “During the conference meeting, Greene said, she learned that three members “were demanding positions for themselves, demanding gavel positions, demanding subcommittees, demanding for people to be taken off committees and people to be put on committees. Three, three Republicans out of our 222.””

    McCarthy needs 218 out of 222, so there must be more to it than that.

  35. “It seems to me that the real, bigger problem, is the Democrat Congress critters and the Brandon junta.”

    Mitch McConnell just GAVE AWAY most of the power the Republican House could have over federal spending for the next nine months. Biden didn’t do it. Pelosi didn’t do it. McConnell did it. And that’s after McConnell and Paul Ryan spent the first two years of Trump’s first term being just SLIGHTLY less obstructionist than the Democrats.

    I’m not a big fan of Erick Erickson but I agree with this Tweet of his:

    “Cannot stress this enough — it is worth defeating Kevin McCarthy regardless of who gets the Speaker’s Chair. It is a goal in and of itself to defeat the most opportunistic member of the entire Congress from becoming Speaker.”

    Mike

  36. MBunge:

    Are you joking? You agree with this insane comment of Erickson’s: “regardless of who gets the Speaker’s Chair. It is a goal in and of itself to defeat the most opportunistic member of the entire Congress from becoming Speaker.”

    He prefers Hakeem Jeffries as speaker? Does he – or you – know anything about Jeffries? If you do and still would prefer him, you are hoping for something many orders of magnitude worse than McCarthy. Should we call you the NeverMcCarthys, very much parallel to the supposed “conservative” NeverTrumpers who preferred Hillary to Trump and Biden to Trump?

    What’s more, when did “opportunistic” become a sin? I’m not a McCarthy fan, but I fail to see why anyone would consider him the MOST opportunistic member of a Congress filled with opportunists, or consider opportunism their worst crime.

  37. “Are you joking?”

    Neo, Jeffries CANNOT become the Speaker unless Republicans allow it. Period. Stop letting yourself be panicked and manipulated. Again, just to make it clear, JEFFRIES CANNOT BECOME SPEAKER UNLESS REPUBLICANS ALLOW IT.

    I don’t believe any of the people opposing McCarthy have threatened to vote for Jeffries. No other Republicans are either, as far as I know. Jeffries could only become Speaker if the House votes to change the rules to allow his election by a plurality instead of a majority. Which means some Republicans would have to vote for that. All the talk of Jeffries somehow becoming Speaker is 99.9999999% bovine excrement being thrown in your face.

    If McCarthy doesn’t become Speaker, another Republican will. It could be somebody worse. Who knows? But the next Speaker ain’t going to be Jeffries…unless a bunch of McCarthy-supporting moderate GOPers vote it.

    But your response illustrates probably our biggest problem. You are an intelligent and educated person who has spent a lot of time thinking and talking about politics. AND YOU ARE UTTERLY INCAPABLE OF EXERCISING EVEN THE SLIGHTEST BRAINPOWER TO QUESTION THE NARRATIVE WHICH YOU ARE BEING SPOONFED.

    That is why it takes a wrecking ball like Trump or “unreasonable” folks like the anti-McCarthy group to actually change anything about our status quo. Because people like you let yourselves be manipulated into lining up behind whatever they want you to support.

    Mike

  38. MBunge:

    What are your shrieking caps about?

    What makes you think I don’t know that Jeffries would need GOP votes to get elected speaker in the ordinary manner? I can do simple math, I assure you. But did you do due diligence and actually read my post? Specifically, did you read the tweet I embedded in the post, from Jake Sherman? Go back and read it. In it, he says the GOP members of the House (the ones who apparently have said that they will never vote for McCarthy for speaker) have reportedly done this: “The group also told McCarthy that they don’t mind if the speaker vote goes to plurality and @RepJeffries is elected bc they’ll fight him.” That means that Jeffries can be elected if the vote “goes to plurality” and they don’t mind because they are saying they wouldn’t vote for the bills he introduces once he becomes speaker.

    Do you know what they mean by “goes to plurality”? If you don’t know what it means, here’s the explanation:

    Current House practice dictates that the Speaker must be elected by a majority of those voting for a specific Speaker candidate by surname. Vacancies, absences and “present” votes lower that threshold.

    Unexpected absences due to illness, weather or other circumstances, then, could affect McCarthy’s math.

    Theoretically, some McCarthy opponents could vote “present” rather than for an alternative candidate in order to express opposition…

    The article goes on to say that the GOP anti-McCarthyites probably wouldn’t do it to the extent that they would stop McCarthy from getting elected speaker. But my point is that they could if they wanted to, and they could even do it to the degree that the 212 Democrats voting for Jeffries could end up giving Jeffries a plurality of the votes and therefore the speakership. Even though that Hill article I just linked indicates the author thinks they wouldn’t go so far as to elect Jeffries though their “present” votes, the tweet from Jake Sherman I put in the body of my post indicates that someone is supposedly saying that they are willing to do it and to let Jeffries become speaker with a plurality of the votes.

    In the post, I went on to add that I don’t know whether that report is true and that ” I can only hope that’s either an inaccurate report or an idle threat they won’t carry through…” But I certainly don’t know what their actual plans are, and neither do you. The point is that there is a mechanism by which it could certainly be done, and they wouldn’t even have to actually vote for Jeffries to do it. And they are reported as saying they are willing to use that mechanism.

    So let me uncharacteristically scream back at you, and paraphrase what you screamed at me: YOU ARE UTTERLY INCAPABLE OF EXERCISING EVEN THE SLIGHTEST BRAINPOWER TO QUESTION THE NARRATIVE TO WHICH YOU SEEM DEVOTED.

    I’ve been very very patient with you on this blog. Do this again and you will be banned here. It is not a problem if and when you or anyone else question me or disagree with me or even criticize something I said. But these mindless insults need to stop.

  39. “Merely” brinksmanship to get McCarthy to withdraw.
    What McCarthy will do—as a result of such uncharacteristic-for-Republicans behavior—is open to question.
    My hunch (FWIW!!) is that he’ll withdraw “in the interests of the party and/or the country”…
    (Republicans sure are good at withdrawing “in the interests of the country”—that’s one of the reasons why Trump was/is(?) so successful)—but then to be fair to Republicans, the Democrats (that “REBEL WITH A CAUSE” criminal entity) are REALLY GOOD at playing chicken “in the interests of…” well, who really knows? (for the love of the “game”?), but they certainly seem to have their own peculiar interests—whatever they are at any particular moment—don’t they?….)

    …Nonetheless I certainly wouldn’t want to have to rely on a hunch of mine when the chips fall…and so…Jokers wild!!

  40. I read through the comments on both of today’s Powerline posts about the voting for Speaker.
    There was a lot of repetition, but most of the positions staked there have a representative here as well.

    One commenter linked a post by Daniel Horowitz that should be considered when evaluating McCarthy’s qualifications for the position, and it goes some way toward explaining the intransigence of his opposition.
    It may also explain some of his support.

    https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz-mccarthy-passed-budget-bills-with-dem-support-during-trump-years#toggle-gdpr

    If you don’t support Kevin McCarthy for speaker, you are somehow helping the Democrats because of a phantom concern that for the first time ever, RINOs will get together and elect a Democrat speaker. This is the propaganda being disseminated by McCarthy and his allies in the broken Conservative Inc. media. Aside from the fact that this concern is completely unfounded, they are forgetting the irony that McCarthy himself, on the most important pieces of legislation – budgets and debt ceiling – worked with Democrats as floor leader to squander the golden years of Trump’s presidency with budget bills that Democrats often supported unanimously.

    It’s getting old. Republicans work with Democrats on every policy that matters, especially at the time the ball is actually in play, yet every time we seek to do surgery – either through elections, policy fights, or leadership battles – we are told that if we don’t help the Republicans, who work with Democrats … we are helping the Democrats!

    There seems to be an epidemic of political amnesia afflicting some in the legacy Conservative Inc. circles, allowing them to propagate a message that McCarthy, unlike McConnell, is somehow a new kid on the block intrepidly representing the interests of conservatives in 2022. In reality, he is a rusted-out fossil from the Boehner-Cantor-Ryan gang that perfidiously betrayed us on every issue, leverage point, and strategy that could have precluded the terrible morass we find ourselves in today. While McCarthy was never speaker, he was the majority leader from 2014 (and whip since 2010), including those critical years – 2017-2018 – when Republicans held all three branches.

    The advantage to my long-standing column is that I have now fought every single budget battle since 2010 and have a column from that time period to show the receipts. Hence, I’m grounded in reality and not afflicted by the same political amnesia that others are.

    Here’s that reality. Every single major budget bill that passed under McCarthy’s leadership as floor leader of the last GOP House, which was when the GOP controlled the trifecta and commanded full stewardship over the policies, was passed with more Democrat support than Republican support. It was simply unprecedented in modern history. Imagine the Biden-Schumer-Pelosi Congress passing budget bills nearly unanimously pleasing to Republicans but detested by their core base. Never going to happen, because they don’t have Kevin McCarthy equivalents.

    The entire sole leverage point and entire purpose of the GOP controlling the House now is to use the must-pass budget bills to fight the most destructive and unpopular policies of the administration. McCarthy not only failed on every single budget bill as floor leader during the era of trifecta control, but he literally passed bills that were so palatable to the Left that nearly every radical Democrat support them, while any semi-conservative Republican opposed them. How can anyone suggest with a straight face that he McCarthy will somehow fight for us now? What about him shows that he is a changed man, and how are conservatives who raise these valid concerns somehow helping Democrats?

    If you want to discuss helping Democrats, here is a synopsis of McCarthy’s budget record as majority leader during the Trump golden years.

    [long, detailed list]
    ….
    Thus, who is the one who works with Democrats to pass the most critical bills? McCarthy was part of the leadership team that turned Trump’s critical years into the most Democrat-friendly bipartisan lovefest of any majority-control era ever.

    McCarthy’s cheerleaders are trying to make the case that somehow he is a changed man and that somehow because of his oleaginous charm offensive with gullible conservative influencers, he is vastly better than McConnell. However, on the issues that matter, in the way they matter, and at the time they matter, he has not demonstrated even a little bit of a foxhole conversion.
    ..
    At some point, Republicans need to earn our votes, not demand them through scaremongering about the Democrats when they are the ones who agree with the Democrats on every issue that matters at the time it actually matters. “But the Democrats” has gotten old, given that echoing every important talking point of the left when the ball is actually in play is the GOP’s favorite pastime.

    Horowitz gives a VERY long list of the battles that McCarthy won on behalf of the Democrats, some of which I remembered, but most of which were not part of the news cycles devoted to Russia! Russia! Russia! and Impeachment.

    A topic of some PL comments, which I haven’t seen here (might have just missed them), is that the claims, counter-claims, and threats (by both factions) are what is generally known as “negotiation” — some asks by the Freedom Caucus are bottom-line for any deal and some are throw-aways so McCarthy can save some face when accepting the others; and the Jeffries Ploy is just click-bait.

    My two cents.

  41. Several posts at Red State are worth looking at.

    https://redstate.com/bonchie/2023/01/03/tucker-carlson-addresses-the-battle-over-kevin-mccarthy-n682947

    Tucker begins by addressing those who have described the spectacle of Republicans debating over who will be the Speaker as “embarrassing.” He just takes off from there.

    CARLSON: It is embarrassing if you prefer the Soviet-style consensus of the Democratic Party’s internal elections, where votes are merely a formality, and all the really big decisions, the meaningful ones, are made years in advance by donors. “Oh, of course, everyone’s on board.”

    That’s what they do. But if you prefer democracy to oligarchy, if you prefer real debates about issues that actually matter, it’s pretty refreshing to see it. Yes, it’s a little chaotic, but this is what it’s supposed to be.

    Carlson then goes on to slam McCarthy personally, accusing him of being a political “agnostic,” beholden to lobbyists and not any particular ideology. That’s fair. After all, we are talking about the guy who roomed with notorious squish Frank Luntz, who was part of the Boehner bros, and who has a liberty score somewhere around the grades I got in business calculus.

    Still, Carlson goes on to concede some of the arguments for McCarthy. Namely, the fact that the congressman is willing to do the job. That seems silly to have to mention, but unless something changes tomorrow, no one else really wants the position, and that includes Jim Jordan (who all 20 holdouts voted for). Carlson notes that the job of the Speaker in a divided government is just as much about living in hotel rooms and raising cash for the next election as it is about pushing conservative policies. Does Steve Scalise want to do that? It doesn’t seem so. And to be fair, for whatever political flaws McCarthy has, he’s a very effective fundraiser and party advocate.

    That led Carlson to his last point, which was to consider how badly McCarthy really wants to be Speaker. In other words, what concessions will he make to ensure he has the votes? Carlson suggests releasing all the January 6th files and appointing Thomas Massie as chair of a new Church Committee to investigate the FBI and intel agencies for interfering in our elections. If McCarthy wants the job badly enough, simply give conservatives what they want. It’s not complicated.

    What’s important here is that Carlson isn’t just blindly supporting McCarthy (I haven’t checked on Sean Hannity, but I’d guess he took the opposite path). The congressman may still end up becoming Speaker of the House, but if that happens, a pound of flesh needs to be extracted in exchange because Republicans can’t waste the next two years. There is a limited amount of time to expose all manner of government corruption prior to the 2024 election.

    https://redstate.com/bonchie/2023/01/03/kevin-mccarthy-goes-down-in-flames-house-adjourns-without-a-leader-n682889

    Incredibly, McCarthy actually lost another vote by the time the third round came around. Certainly, he’s not building momentum if that was his goal, and there are real questions about where he goes from here. What can he promise the 20 holdouts at this point, especially to peel off 16 of them? I’d assume the answer is that he has to capitulate to their demands (click here to see them).

    But would Lauren Boebert, Chip Roy, and the other 18 Republicans even want to take that deal at this point? They’ve won the day and have to feel pretty good about their position.

    So where do things go from here? I’m not sure anyone knows. The anti-McCarthy group wants Jim Jordan to be the Speaker, but importantly, he does not want the job. He would probably lose enough votes on the other end of the party to also be stalemated.

    McCarthy’s rants about deserving the speakership after the first vote failed likely didn’t earn him any new fans. The right thing to do would be to step aside gracefully, promote his friend Scalise, and get down to business. But McCarthy sees this as his birthright, and I have a feeling the embarrassment will have to get much more severe before he thinks about pulling out.

    Because the anti-McCarthy group has many more votes than expected (initial expectations were only five hard-no votes), they have actual leverage to play with. As long as Republicans don’t get any bright ideas about a unity candidate and don’t vote to allow a plurality vote, I don’t see any harm in letting this play out. With that said, all GOP members need to make sure this stays an internal fight. There’s too much to be lost by letting things go sideways.

    Here’s the demands from the “(click here to see them)” link.
    https://redstate.com/bonchie/2023/01/03/anti-kevin-mccarthy-republicans-makes-their-demands-and-reveals-how-far-they-are-willing-to-go-n682739

    The first demand was understandably a non-starter. No Speaker is going to let five members out of over 200 Republicans dictate specific committee assignments because that would effectively neuter the rest of the caucus. The other members would revolt and never accept that.

    On the other hand, I’ve got no problem at all with the new Church Committee, which will investigate corruption within the government (i.e. FBI, CIA, etc.) getting a larger budget than the January 6th committee. Why wouldn’t it? The depth of misconduct involved is far more extensive and complicated than a three-hour riot. As to who should control it, it is the Freedom Caucus that has fought tooth and nail to get us this far on the issue. Why not let them lead the way?

    Another sticking point is McCarthy’s unwillingness to promise votes on conservative policies like the Fair Tax Act and term limits. I don’t see the issue there either. Yeah, they’d fail, but so what? The idea that it’s somehow bad for a party to vote on things is dumb. Voters would rather see their representatives go on record than continue to have leadership gatekeep the way the Pelosi-led House did. McCarthy would do well to not fight on points that aren’t worth fighting over.

    With that said, those fighting against McCarthy aren’t doing so without risks, and per a meeting that took place with McCarthy on Monday, they are apparently willing to take them.

    Allowing Hakeem Jeffries to become the Speaker with the idea that they could oppose him (from the position of the minority) is quite the threat from Lauren Boebert, Matt Gaetz, and Steve Perry. I’m not sure it’s one they’d actually be willing to back up, as it would undoubtedly mean the end of their political careers and complete ostracization from the party. Of course, they are likely making the threat knowing it’s an idle one.

    Still, it is possible that Jeffries could benefit if Republicans botch the process. Multiple times in US history, the House has voted to allow a plurality to select the Speaker of the House. If a few Republicans get frustrated and vote with Democrats to change the rules, there’s a scenario where Jeffries would be selected if the anti-McCarthy group holds the line. But again, that would take the GOP completely losing track of the process and members on both sides of the debate going outrageously rogue. Let’s hope that doesn’t happen.

  42. Ackler – What is happening is absolutely a minority veto. The precedent is that any group of Republicans greater than the GOP margin can hold the rest of the party hostage. If a group of 5+ RINOs decide that they don’t want to investigate Biden corruption or a group of 5+ Republicans with Silicon Valley ties decide they want to go easy on big tech, what stops them from doing exactly what these folks are doing? One of the demands of these 19 (that I believe McCarthy agreed to) is that any group of 5 Republicans will be able to present a motion to vacate the chair.

    These 19 are sowing the wind. It’s very much like Democrats spending 20+ years undermining the legitimacy of elections and denying Republican victories. They were shocked (shocked!) when Trump ran their playbook in 2020. I guarantee that the MAGA team is going to be just as shocked when other factions of the GOP start using their own tactics against them.

    Remember too that this is after the MAGA crowd has spent the last six years telling the rest of us conservatives that we must support their awful candidates or else we’re no better than Democrats. The hypocrisy is unbelievable.

    The MAGA crowd needs to ask themselves if they want to be in a coalition or not. You can’t dump on your coalition partners and empower the most extreme elements of the opposition indefinately, and MAGA can’t win elections by itself. The next time you insist that Republicans vote for Trump, or Hershel Walker, or Doug Mastriano . . . after this . . . why should we? Principle for me, but not for thee? How many non-MAGA Republicans do you really expect to take that deal?

  43. I’m a bit cornfused here.
    Who actually has been rejecting WHOM?
    (AKA, Don’t these sorts of things work in BOTH directions?)

    BTW, you forgot to mention Kari Lake…
    (Any particular reason?)

  44. The Great Orange Whale attacks the good ship GOPe.

    OMB, the problem behind every situation. Attention seeking behavior amongst Congressmen writ large? Nope, it’s Trump.(farce)

  45. Kari Lake, she who disclaimed the support of McCain Republicans, in the state that elected John McCain to the Senate six times and as recently as 2016?!

    What a perfect example of dumping on your coalition partners and still expecting them to turn out and vote for you. Kari Lake wouldn’t have needed very many of those McCain Republicans at all to win comfortably despite the shenanigans in Maricopa County.

  46. we must support their awful candidates

    I’m afraid our awful candidates are better than your normal candidates. The emblematic GOPe character is Addison Mitchell McConnell, whose 50 years in public sector positions are bereft of accomplishment (other than collecting oodles of cash from business lobbies).

  47. They have been stealing arizona since 2017 when they forced sheriff arpiao out then they put synema in, who was an improvemenf over fidel o flake

  48. Bauxite meet Mr. Counterfactual. BTW, The Great Orange Whale is reportedly said to vote for McCarthy. Oopsie.

  49. “…this collapsing republic.”

    Not sure that the republic is “collapsing” so much as the Democratic Party and its perverse—or deluded—henchman are treating it as a demolition derby. (Transformation Stakes?)

    (OTOH, I guess the results, if the Democrats et al. manage to succeed, will be pretty similar…)

  50. McCarthy makes me think of something I heard a long time ago – Those who want and seek power are the ones who least deserve it.

  51. This is actually a strategy that the Dems in Illinois used to oust former IL House Speaker Mike Madigan. Not surprising that Congresswoman Mary Miller, whose husband is IL legislator Chris Miller, is one of the dissenters.

    In Illinois after the 2020 election, Madigan needed 60 votes for speaker. 19 members of his caucus held firm for “anyone but him.” There were some legislators in their caucus who came forward, but none got any meaningful votes. It wasn’t until Madigan realized the 19 would never cave, and stepped back from running. A new Speaker candidate emerged, Chris Welch, who holds the gavel today. I’m sure McCarthy has helped the careers of many these last 7 years, and many votes for him are probably weak votes that could flip, but won’t flip, unless McCarthy were to step aside.

    Relatedly, Pelosi was the perfect Speaker for the Dems because she is an ideologue and a killer fundraiser. For the Dem big dollar donor and campaign worker base, hard left is what attracts the dollars. So she can happily drive forward a hard left legislative agenda.

    The problem that R’s have in Washington DC is that with a few exceptions, their current large-dollar donor class is middle-stability at best. Hard right does NOT donate in large numbers. Hard right doesn’t do the campaign infrastructure work for the most part (sorry, you may think they do, but they really don’t). There also is, whether you like it or not, an institutional advantage the left has for third party organizing and messaging purposes from labor, teachers, academia, media, etc. who are also hard left captured.

    As an R speaker, pushing a hard right legislative agenda will, from an institutional swamp R perspective, leave you with neither campaign infrastructure nor dollars. That’s a hard pill to swallow if your goal is to win seats, and I’m sure that a lot of the current hold-their-nose-for-McCarthy votes are wondering where the dollars come from for their next close race if he isn’t the known known who can fundraise.

    That doesn’t mean the reformers can get the job done either. But they have to show a plan too for bringing money and organization to the table, and frankly they haven’t been able to move election outcomes in anywhere but hard right districts.

    The swing districts in the suburbs is where the longer-term seat fight is, and the Dems crushed it this last time with abortion messaging and ballot harvesting.

    Now, I think McCarthy would be a horrible Speaker, mainly because he has positioned himself as a power broker, but hasn’t really done the true infrastructure building work that would build a better majority, hasn’t had a legislative vision he can create and communicate, etc. He had the time to do it these last 7 years, and failed on message.

    These guys in DC also really don’t see/believe and target the vote fraud/ballot harvesting at the ground level. We lost massive seat opportunities because of this in Illinois. There were several Congressional seats that should have been vulnerable for a flip this cycle-Casten, Foster, Underwood. Their R opponents got smoked on vote by mail, so the election was over before election day. Dems are hugely organized on this at the national level, but there is no apparatus in DC equipped to meaningfully fight it back, and no apparent desire to start creating an infrastructure to do it, and hesitancy to accept voter integrity is a real issue, because Trump. But there again, that is an infrastructure disadvantage/failure that has to be dealt with.

    McCarthy also did not get $$ for campaign organizations early where it could have counted to build the majority, because he didn’t want more MAGA-ites running in those competitive seats– precisely because he wanted to avoid this kind of fight for Speaker after the election.

    So if you weren’t able to win voter converts with your messaging; and aren’t building political infrastructure to secure ballots during campaigns; and are investing in campaigns not because they will add seats but because you want votes for you to stay in power, then you should step aside and let someone else do it.

    It doesn’t surprise me that the 19 are looking for committee positions — you can drive a lot of messaging based on being in that role. I likewise get why Gaetz wants the ability to go litigate without Speaker approval – the dems use lawfare and their staff as a tool to pummel R’s, Gaetz wants the comparable ability to fight back. Yet the McCarthy types HATE having that happen, wouldn’t be prudent, you’ll say something embarrassing, etc. It is a desire to control messaging, when the fighters want to use as many tactics as the left as they can to win.

    Not an easy situation by a long shot.

    But these are early days. A lot can happen. The question is whether McCarthy’s ego is too big to empower the fighters.

  52. “…and the Dems crushed it this last time with abortion messaging and ballot harvesting….”

    What’s this?? No mention of either Soros or SBF (for starters).
    Sir, you write excellent posts; but you do those two a DISTINCT DISSERVICE!

  53. I’ve avoided commenting as I am, and still are, very conflicted on this whole situation. I view McCarthy as a Boehner clone who is the one that drove me from the GOP to register as an independent. I have no belief that he will do anything other than advance any uniparty agenda.

    I also understand the argument of GOP party unity. However, the GOP will NEVER be a hivemind like the Democrats; which is a good thing.

    Maybe this is the best time for a GOP civil war to try and remove, or lessen, the uniparty/RINO/GOPe side. No matter what happens what can a narrow majority House really do?? It’s impotent from the get go. The Senate and the Prez will block all legislative endeavors. House hearings, while nice for the base, will be ignored by the MSM no matter what the revelations are. The House in GOP hands really amounts to not much more than a hill of beans. And I blame McCarthy and McConnell for a good portion of that situation.

  54. Credibility and clowns, not that there are things that might be important to focus on.

    Look squirrel!

  55. I view McCarthy as a Boehner clone

    Not quite. McCarthy is a pure career politician. He landed a job as a legislative aide in 1987 (at age 22) and has been employed by legislative bodies ever since. Boehner actually ran a small business for 14 years. The trouble is, he was a man of careerist disposition who didn’t much care about the interests and passions of Republican voters (as seen in his recent gush over hag Pelosi – contrast with what he has to say about Ted Cruz). Boehner and his wife couldn’t teach their daughters principles of civic life or what to look for in a husband. (To be sure, Boehner’s alcoholism likely impaired his effectiveness as a parent).

  56. Oh for the good old days when Nancy was still the speaker?

    Sometimes a hill of beans is worth more than a pile of manure.

  57. In 1856 it took 133 votes and two months to elect a Speaker.

    The country was divided and on the verge of war. The country is nearly as divided today. Take a deep breath.

    I find it instructive that squishy Republicans/GOPe types are so outraged. How long will it take for McCarthy forgo his personal ambition and make a decision for the good of the party.

    I just heard a specious argument from a Congressman on Newsmax. “We can’t control the border,etc. until we elect a speaker.” Let’s take a week or two to elect a speaker and take fewer Fridays off during the year. This is the silliest argument for electing McCarthy I’ve heard.

  58. The Democrats are organized and united. That has been their “secret sauce” for many years.

    The GOP has a small majority in the house. In order to make any gains they must be organized and united too. This spectacle is a temper tantrum by a few people who don’t understand political strategy and tactics. They want what they want, and they want it regardless of the costs to the party.

    It’s why the Republicans are called the stupid party. Individuality is a good thing, but in team sports and politics, teamwork pays off. McCarthy may not be the perfect speaker, but no one else in the Republican caucus is either. Do not let the desire for “perfection” override the practicality of the “good enough.”

    Based on this display of inability to work together, which will continue to plague the caucus for the future, I’m now expecting that this year is going to be devoid of any major wins for the House. Sad, very sad.

  59. “This spectacle is a temper tantrum by a few people who don’t understand political strategy and tactics.”

    “Political strategy and tactics” is the excuse used every single time the GOP fails, sells out, or otherwise screws over the people who vote for them. “Political strategy and tactics” is what brought us John McCain and Mitt Romney as GOP Presidential candidates and was going to bring us Jeb Bush until Trump came down that golden escalator. “Political strategy and tactics” is why the GOP can’t do ANYTHING to cut the budget, secure the southern border, stop groomers from exposing children to drag shows, and on and on and on and on.

    What’s sad about this affair is it exposes that the House GOP is largely comprised of eunuchs. The greatest political opportunity of their lives is staring them in the face and all they care about is maintaining their place at the GOP money trough.

    Mike

  60. I’m confused.

    JJ on January 4, 2023 at 9:52 am said:
    McCarthy makes me think of something I heard a long time ago – Those who want and seek power are the ones who least deserve it.

    JJ on January 4, 2023 at 2:22 pm said:
    McCarthy may not be the perfect speaker, but no one else in the Republican caucus is either. Do not let the desire for “perfection” override the practicality of the “good enough.”

    Which is it?

  61. The point a lot of people are trying to make, here and elsewhere, is that McCarthy is NOT “good enough” — rather, that he is not good at all for the purposes of the conservative movement, those being to retake the GOP and move the party away from being Democrat-lite.

  62. A commenter on a recent Powerline post (which I can’t link directly) noted this in relation to the Speaker election.
    https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/01/the-good-and-the-bad-and-ugly.php

    Benjamin Franklin about President Washington: “The first man put at the helm will be a good one. Nobody knows what sort may come afterwards. The executive will be always increasing here, as elsewhere, till it ends in a monarchy.”

    The implication is that the observation applies to leadership in the Congress as well. Queen Pelosi may be the best example, but King Mitch is a close second.
    Prince McCarthy appears desirous of joining those exalted ranks.

    The peasants are revolting.
    https://www.politisink.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/wizard-of-id-peasants-revolting.jpg

    For more on the Peasants cartoon –
    https://quoteinvestigator.com/2017/06/03/revolt/

    For more on the President quote –
    https://www.cdh2a.com/ben-franklin-republic-if-you-can-keep-it/

    Trivia: of the search results on Franklin’s (attributed) remark, all but this one refer to Trump as the nascent monarch; none of them is a scholarly source for the quote.

  63. “JJ on January 4, 2023 at 9:52 am said:
    McCarthy makes me think of something I heard a long time ago – Those who want and seek power are the ones who least deserve it.”

    There is apparently another JJ commenting here. That was not my comment. Mine was about the inability of the GOP to work together. Which Mike Bunge finds so repellent.

    To which I ask, why has this country moved farther and farther left over the last fifty years? Has it been because the Democrats were disorganized and in disarray? No, they have been willing to move in increments. Their policies are not very good, so they have to stay organized and united to make their gains. They have used not only politics, but journalism, academia, and social media to continue to further their aims.

    The GOP, on the other hand, has seldom been united, valuing individuality over teamwork. Also, most Republicans are not obsessed with politics and have not realized how difficult it is to actually implement the polices we value.

    In football, if every member of the team carries out his assignment, you will make gains and score touchdowns. But if one/two players don’t make their blocks, the gains are elusive as are the scores. The Democrats know this. They get all their members to stick together, even when some are reluctant to. Note: Joe Manchin and Kristin Sinema bucked the trend for a while, but she’s left the party and he’s been brought to heel.

    We don’t like those facts. We believe that everyone should recognize how much better our policies are and no compromise should be necessary. We want a great shift to conservative values, and we want it now. Realistically, it’s not going to happen.

    When we get a small majority in one house, the only way to move our policies forward is to stick together and be willing to move in increments toward the goal.

    For instance, if the House can just restore regular order to the budgeting process in this term, that would be something worthwhile. Just that one thing. Myu guess is that it’s not going to happen. I hope they prove me wrong.

  64. JJ:

    Well put.

    One of the strange things I’ve noticed is that, although the right believes the left is motivated by emotion and the right by reason, the right is also often very much motivated by emotion and a kind of entrenched impatience, as well as a demand for ideological and uncompromising purity of purpose and act (I don’t necessarily mean moral purity; I mean politically conservative purity). They’re ready to bolt if a candidate doesn’t display that sort of righteousness as they define it.

    I wrote a post in 2014 that touched on this issue, and also this post from 2015.

  65. . . . why has this country moved farther and farther left over the last fifty years?

    As it happens there are possibly resonant answers in this conversation between Caroline Glick and Yoram Hazony released today. [ https://youtu.be/xzroVVoFckI ]
    Check it out.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>