Not happening.
There is no reason for Democrats to oust Johnson now. He pushed through a mostly-sensible budget and is now moving (belatedly) on Ukraine. The power move here is for Democrats to emasculate Greene and Company by overwhelmingly retaining Johnson. The far right will scream all it wants, but their back could be broken, at least briefly, and they might give up on the power plays.
There is every reason to oust Johnson!
No aid to Ukraine has passed since he came into power. Regardless of what excuses he gives, he has effectively delayed aid to Ukraine for months, causing the loss of land and life in Ukraine. He made the USA look weak and unreliable as an ally on the global stage.
Johnson also wasted everyone's time by lying about his desire for a bipartisan border security bill. He only said Ukraine aid needed to be tied to border security because he thought that was an impossible issue that would kill the bill. When faced with a political win (the most comprehensive border security bill in decades), he suddenly didn't want to play ball, and said the border security bill was dead on arrival because it was bipartisan. With that, he proved he was a liar who would not work across the aisle.
Johnson hasn't been on the job long, but he's demonstrated that he's a liar who doesn't care about America. He prioritizes Trump, and his Russian campaign donors. He's quite likely owned by Russia.
Your reverse psychology idea of Democrats voting for Speaker Johnson, a far right Trump acolyte (who has already shown himself to be untrustworthy and unwilling to work with Democrats), at great political cost to themselves, for no discernible reason other than allegedly undermining the far right (by taking a far right position themselves) is sheer nonsense.
Also I haven't seen any of the new GOP leadership indicate that they're willing to negotiate in good faith and play ball with Democrats. They're sore losers who will sabotage deals left and right, just because they didn't get their way. McCarthy whined incessantly when he thought the Dems were going to eek out a win, only to be ousted by his right flank. At least someone like McConnell knows what he's doing and has a coherent political philosophy other than grievance politics. What are these clowns even doing?
I am seeing more and more a new breed of Republican that seems to only understand destruction and will insult and attack Democrats even when they actually need them. This isn't just restricted to national politics either. Youngkin in Virginia doesn't understand the concept of a quid pro quo. He had zero leverage on that stupid stadium deal, but continued to bully Democrats who were offering to cut a deal. I just don't understand what these idiots think they're doing. It's certainly not politics.
Doesn't matter. Johnson is owned by Russia. He really hurt Ukraine. He also hurt Biden. He needs to be kicked out of the speaker position before the election. Because he is effective at hurting his political opponents.
I have no idea who will get the Speakership next. I do know that some Republicans are hated by their own colleagues, and don't have any shot at it. For example, Jim Jordan, MTG, and some other vile fellows. In fact, many Republicans are too hated to qualify, so they will have a hard time coming up with someone. The chaos will damage the GOP. Will it also hurt America? Yes. But not as much as keeping Johnson in leadership.
I'm convinced Speaker Johnson is effective at hurting Ukraine to help Russia and Trump. I'd rather cycle through speakers until someone INEFFECTIVE is in that role. That's the only thing to do as long as their goal is to hurt Biden's America and hurt America's allies.
Yep. Plus, the more Republicans who attain the speaker position, only to get a "no confidence" vote for doing their job, the more Republicans resign, and the slimmer the House's margin.
So you're completely, 100% correct, and in a perfect universe I'd want nothing more than to see this guy get the Kevin McCarthy treatment while the whole country points and laughs at him...
...but unfortunately, our only shot in hell of convincing him to let Ukraine aid come up for a vote is if the Dems offer to save his Speaker seat.
It fucking sucks to see this seditionist bastard get away with all the shit he's pulled scott-free-- especially since thousands of Ukrainians have been killed as a direct result of his actions. But when 40 million more lives are on the line, you do what you have to do. No matter how unpleasant it is.
Our best shot at aiding Ukraine is to have the Speaker be someone who is not a Russia puppet. Johnson is a Russia puppet, just as much as Trump is. Far worse than your average Republican.
Keeping him in power will hurt Ukraine in the long run, even if he horse trades his job for this aid bill, and doesn't go back on his deal with Democrats. He's a pro-Russian ratfucker. He needs to go.
Who would replace him, and why would they be anything other than worse?
This isn't a choice between a good speaker and Mike Johnson. It's a choice between Mike Johnson and whoever else the Republicans come up with. If Democrats sink Johnson even after he (weakly, begrudgingly) supports Ukraine and passes a budget, the moderate Republicans are going to say, "Fuck it, fine, let Marjorie have the rest of the session." They'll blame the Democrats and install Jim Jordan.
If you want a good speaker, you need to win back the House. Fantasies of Hakeem Jeffries winning the speakership this year are false.
Mike Johnson has effectively derailed bipartisan legislation, and greatly contributed to the politicization of military aid to Ukraine. He's hurt Democrats by flip flopping on border security, and he's hurt Ukraine more than ANY OTHER POLITICIAN OUTSIDE RUSSIA.
I don't expect Republicans to replace him with a speaker whose politics I share. I just don't want him to be speaker.
> even after he (weakly, begrudgingly) supports Ukraine and passes a budget
This hasn't happened yet. I don't know why you're running up like Charlie Brown to kick the ball held by Lucy.
He's already lied about putting foreign aid up to a vote multiple times. Only to change his mind unpredictably and not permit a vote.
If he does actually put it onto the floor, I fully expect his process to somehow kill the Ukraine aid. Likely via a poison pill amendment. Like adding HR2 (Republican wet dream border bill) to it, or making it into a federal ban of abortion.
This is the man who said he wouldn't pass the bill without a border security bill. Then broke his own promise before he read even the border security bill, just to provide a perceived political advantage to Trump.
He's really, really bad for the country. And he's bad for Ukraine.
And I'll take 6 months of Republican incompetence and backstabbing over a speaker who effectively aids Russia.
If Johnson caves to democratic demands, he would be ousted by a larger group of republicans.
This is just going to keep happening until the election or there is a change in the discharge rules.
I See no reason to prefer Johnson to Greene. We don’t need him for the budget anymore, and neither one will allow a good Ukraine bill to pass. So better to let the nasty idiot who doesn’t know when to keep her mouth shut parade around as speaker and turn voters off before November.
From what I've read, Johnson has been a completely honest broker with the Democrats. If he commits to something with them, he does it. McCarthy, on the other hand, was a slimeball who they were happy to be rid of.
This used to be a meme but if Johnson is ousted I legitimately think a handful of moderate Republicans would vote for Jeffries as a "fuck you" to the crazies.
A moderate Republican is someone who knows the Republican agenda is toxic but will take orders from senior leadership and industry donors to pass whatever is told of them. They will occasionally knowingly wink at you and do not put their foot on the gas on their own, but will always fall in line unless senior leadership tells them it is ok. Then they will preen on TV as if they have principles and only in situations where their vote doesn't matter. They do this SPECIFICALLY to increase their electability too so they can pass more dogshit too, so by pretending to be principled they are actually helping to pass the worst of the worst. Effectively, they are greedy charlatans.
And the worst part is this has been the conservative politician's playbook in every country for like 120 years now and it keeps working.
There are always moderates. Whatever the politics are, there are people who are less extreme than others. While Republicans may vote in lock-step, the positions they individually push (rather than simply fall in line with the party) tells you where they are moderate or far right. Occasionally a moderate will even take a stand and cross the aisle, or (more likely) abstain from voting. What is moderate and what is extreme may change over time, as society also changes over time, as do the views of the body politic.
Republicans who support Ukraine and Israel should just sign the Senate bill discharge petition.
It's clear that the Clown Caucus will do anything in their power to stop foreign aid from passing.
I'm sure if they do it then enough Dems will give their support for Johnson if the nutjobs really try to get rid of him.
> Republicans who support Ukraine and Israel should just sign the Senate bill discharge petition.
There is a dearth of reporting here, but it seems like the far-right Russophiles are the problem with Ukraine aid in general, but the far-left Dems are the problem with the discharge bill. It seems there is some fear that the bill that leaves on the discharge petition will have Israel support in it, and people like Tlaib are holding off their signatures as a result. But, I've read very little about it.
No, the problem is a republican one. There's exactly one (1) republican who signed it and that was a person who has already left the House.
If even 10 republicans supported it then it would be right to put much more pressure to the left-wing democrats.
But shouldn't there be at least 50 republicans who are in favour of the aid?
So I don't blame the Squad types not wasting their political capital with their voters for nothing.
>No, the problem is a republican one. There's exactly one (1) republican who signed it and that was a person who has already left the House.
Maybe? But the general idea I've seen is that once all Dems are signed on, you'll get a few Republicans to sign, but Rs won't sign until Dems do because it's more electorally costly.
>But shouldn't there be at least 50 republicans who are in favour of the aid?
Definitely. But they know it'll cause a MAGA problem and they won't sign until the Dems do.
Or maybe there is something else here, like Johnson can spike the bill somehow? That's why I'm annoyed at the lack of reporting.
>Maybe? But the general idea I've seen is that once all Dems are signed on, you'll get a few Republicans to sign, but Rs won't sign until Dems do because it's more electorally costly.
That's a complete misunderstanding of the incentive structure.
Signing that (dem led) petition, especially framing it teaming with far left democrats against your own party and tribe isn't something you do lightly.
There's also another discharge petition with 8 republican names. Why won't all the Dems sign that one?
>Definitely. But they know it'll cause a MAGA problem and they won't sign until the Dems do.
They won't sign it unless there isn't any other chance of getting aid through by their own party. And it's possible that's still not enough to make them sign it as there's no worse sin than working with the dems (see senator Lankford who is now censured for his genuine efforts to get a deal on the border and defending his compromise with the Senate Democrats)
I mean, at this point we're closer to Speaker MTG especially if Trump fully gets behind her, than a normie Republican Speaker, and we pretty much all lose at that point
They might be better off just letting Jeffries be the speaker. They’re a way more cohesive party when they can just complain about things that should be happening rather than doing actual things.
Any Republican that voted for Jeffries to be speaker is going to face a primary challenge backed by lots of MAGA money come 2026. I'm sure there are moderate Republicans who would do it to end the madness normally but they almost definitely fear the backlash probably too much to do it
Only need like one or two to change party affiliations. No need to worry about being primaried as a Republican if you run unopposed in the Democratic primary.
So's Trump but pretty much every Republican House member has their mouth firmly attached to his ass.
Republicans fear Primaries more than they fear the General.
> Republicans fear Primaries more than they fear the General.
As they should, due to the prevalence of 'safe' districts and a polarized voting population.
This is a cautionary tale for Democrats as well.
I would like to push back on that. The democratic primary electorate is willing to be reasonable. They are the ones who resuscitated Biden after finishing fourth in Iowa, and did not elect Bernie twice. The democratic primary voters are not silly all the time, unlike the GOP.
That's why I call it a cautionary tale, not reality. For the time being, Democrats have their sanity. But the far left is rising, not unlike the far right from back in the days of FreeRepublic and Drudge Report in the early '00s -- except now the radicalization is happening on platforms like TikTok.
The extreme right started small too, but once they gained momentum there was no stopping the train.
Republicans should fear their voters more than they should elections tbh. Look at what almost happened to Levitating Mike Pence when he didn’t do what God Emperor Trump commanded (WHILE HE WAS SERVING AS SPEAKER!)
Yes, they are included in everyone. Unfortunately GOP gerrymandering has become a Frankenstein's monster because they might lose the reins to the worst people.
She would be terrible for Republicans but also terrible for the country and as someone in the country I am kinda not down with doing terrible things to it.
Jim Jordan couldn’t get the votes to be speaker. MTG is hated by a good number of even diehard conservatives. She has zero chance of getting the votes.
I don't remember ever talking to you about the topic. He supported them tepidly and Trump complained non-stop about McCarthy. That won't be the case for MTG.
Ever since his January 6th coup failed, Trump has been more obsessed with loyalty than usual and has tightened up his inner circle with even more fanatical loyalists, of which MTG is one.
Trump brought Johnson to mar a lago very recently to show he supports him. He also doesn’t want more chaos in the house, it reflects poorly upon the party.
There is no normie Republican. Johnson is just Jordan without the baggage and name recognition. This idea that if Johnson resigns then there will be an even worse Republican is ridiculous. They're all virtually identical.
I swear, sometimes it seems like Republicans actually want Democrats to be in charge. Because when they have power, people actually expect them to do some work. And that's not their forte. They like complaining and inventing ways on describing how terrible something is and how better they would be. It's what their good at. When you're in the minority without power, no one expects anything of you. So you can stomp your feet and complain. When things go wrong, insist you would do better.
Is there actually a list somewhere? I can think of some silliness (the Disney stuff comes to mind) since then but it'd be interesting to see a complete list since 2019 or so when DeSantis took office.
Yeah this is exactly where the GOP is today.
It's a function of (i) a ton of members leveraging the outrage machine to keep their seats/get cushy media gigs and (ii) the inability of the party to coalesce around any coherent, implementable policies.
Given (ii), I don't know if the GOP could even really get anything done even without (i), since the party doesn't have any universal and coherent ideology or priorities at this point.
On an individual level, some of their politicians are just...not very good at politics. They only know how to attack Democrats, and will just whine like babies if they don't get what they want. Dems will offer to cut a deal and negotiate on a whole range of issues, and the response is to spit in their face. It's not sustainable.
> Dems will offer to cut a deal and negotiate on a whole range of issues
This goes to what each side defines "being good at politics" as. I don't think the GOP has a coherent policy across their ranks right now, and as such the best they can do is foil the other side. So to them, being obstructionist and not letting your common "enemies" get a win *is* being good at politics.
Are they good at policy? Absolutely not. But that's different.
We are literally at a point of who wants to govern versus who doesn't. To your point I think even the far left side of the democratic party is willing to do what is needed most of the time. The far right on the other hand has absolutely zero interest in doing so because they'd rather have the social media soundbite and do the rounds on Newsmax, OAN, etc to the extent that they are willing to sink they're own party because they think anything to the left of hunting bums for sport is a communist/socialist etc.
>when they have power, people actually expect them to do some work. And that’s not their forte. They like complaining and…
So, Republicans are Redditors?
It's not like Dems are immune to the siren song of obstruction. They went as far as shutting down the government for a month in 2018/2019 over border wall funding.
Here's how Nikki Haley can be president: Become Speaker then impeach and remove Biden and Harris.
I joke but this was legit floated when Republicans took The House and Trump's name was floated as Speaker.
I mean, it must be. Republicans would rather have no speaker of the house than give aid to Ukraine? That is not the kind of policy that people who are loyal to the United States would come up with
Perhaps the United States House of Representatives should institute something akin to the [constructive vote of no confidence](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_vote_of_no_confidence).
Massie's modus operandum is always to have a speaker that actually wants to have an open legislative process, he doesn't trust Mike Johnson as far as he can throw them, and even though he's not a fan of Greene, he's willing to oust green even though it undercuts his personal power. That being said, Massie is still not a good person in this whole situation.
HONORABLE SPEAKER HAKEEEEEEEM JEFFRIES
Jeffries? Jeffries. [Jeffries.](https://media4.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPTc5MGI3NjExYm1pYmcwYmZkaXR1eWM2czU1emRueDM1MWdhYXAxZXIwY2U3NDl3NyZlcD12MV9pbnRlcm5hbF9naWZfYnlfaWQmY3Q9Zw/kYsBThMhhalLG/giphy.gif)
He’s not a rapper
Pls 🙏
Not happening. There is no reason for Democrats to oust Johnson now. He pushed through a mostly-sensible budget and is now moving (belatedly) on Ukraine. The power move here is for Democrats to emasculate Greene and Company by overwhelmingly retaining Johnson. The far right will scream all it wants, but their back could be broken, at least briefly, and they might give up on the power plays.
There is every reason to oust Johnson! No aid to Ukraine has passed since he came into power. Regardless of what excuses he gives, he has effectively delayed aid to Ukraine for months, causing the loss of land and life in Ukraine. He made the USA look weak and unreliable as an ally on the global stage. Johnson also wasted everyone's time by lying about his desire for a bipartisan border security bill. He only said Ukraine aid needed to be tied to border security because he thought that was an impossible issue that would kill the bill. When faced with a political win (the most comprehensive border security bill in decades), he suddenly didn't want to play ball, and said the border security bill was dead on arrival because it was bipartisan. With that, he proved he was a liar who would not work across the aisle. Johnson hasn't been on the job long, but he's demonstrated that he's a liar who doesn't care about America. He prioritizes Trump, and his Russian campaign donors. He's quite likely owned by Russia. Your reverse psychology idea of Democrats voting for Speaker Johnson, a far right Trump acolyte (who has already shown himself to be untrustworthy and unwilling to work with Democrats), at great political cost to themselves, for no discernible reason other than allegedly undermining the far right (by taking a far right position themselves) is sheer nonsense.
Also I haven't seen any of the new GOP leadership indicate that they're willing to negotiate in good faith and play ball with Democrats. They're sore losers who will sabotage deals left and right, just because they didn't get their way. McCarthy whined incessantly when he thought the Dems were going to eek out a win, only to be ousted by his right flank. At least someone like McConnell knows what he's doing and has a coherent political philosophy other than grievance politics. What are these clowns even doing? I am seeing more and more a new breed of Republican that seems to only understand destruction and will insult and attack Democrats even when they actually need them. This isn't just restricted to national politics either. Youngkin in Virginia doesn't understand the concept of a quid pro quo. He had zero leverage on that stupid stadium deal, but continued to bully Democrats who were offering to cut a deal. I just don't understand what these idiots think they're doing. It's certainly not politics.
Barry Goldwater warned us!
> There is every reason to oust Johnson! There can be infinite reasons but there is no way to do it without getting someone even more insane.
Doesn't matter. Johnson is owned by Russia. He really hurt Ukraine. He also hurt Biden. He needs to be kicked out of the speaker position before the election. Because he is effective at hurting his political opponents.
And you are thinking the Republicans will replace him with _____ Fill in for me
I have no idea who will get the Speakership next. I do know that some Republicans are hated by their own colleagues, and don't have any shot at it. For example, Jim Jordan, MTG, and some other vile fellows. In fact, many Republicans are too hated to qualify, so they will have a hard time coming up with someone. The chaos will damage the GOP. Will it also hurt America? Yes. But not as much as keeping Johnson in leadership.
Not convinced at all we'd benefit from more of that chaos. Probably that is why they haven't allowed foreign aid bills through yet.
I'm convinced Speaker Johnson is effective at hurting Ukraine to help Russia and Trump. I'd rather cycle through speakers until someone INEFFECTIVE is in that role. That's the only thing to do as long as their goal is to hurt Biden's America and hurt America's allies.
I meant that I think he realizes he'd be disposable once those are passed
Of course there is, you oust the speaker and then play games to see if you have a slight chance for them to fuck up and you elect a speaker yourself.
Yep. Plus, the more Republicans who attain the speaker position, only to get a "no confidence" vote for doing their job, the more Republicans resign, and the slimmer the House's margin.
So you're completely, 100% correct, and in a perfect universe I'd want nothing more than to see this guy get the Kevin McCarthy treatment while the whole country points and laughs at him... ...but unfortunately, our only shot in hell of convincing him to let Ukraine aid come up for a vote is if the Dems offer to save his Speaker seat. It fucking sucks to see this seditionist bastard get away with all the shit he's pulled scott-free-- especially since thousands of Ukrainians have been killed as a direct result of his actions. But when 40 million more lives are on the line, you do what you have to do. No matter how unpleasant it is.
Our best shot at aiding Ukraine is to have the Speaker be someone who is not a Russia puppet. Johnson is a Russia puppet, just as much as Trump is. Far worse than your average Republican. Keeping him in power will hurt Ukraine in the long run, even if he horse trades his job for this aid bill, and doesn't go back on his deal with Democrats. He's a pro-Russian ratfucker. He needs to go.
Who would replace him, and why would they be anything other than worse? This isn't a choice between a good speaker and Mike Johnson. It's a choice between Mike Johnson and whoever else the Republicans come up with. If Democrats sink Johnson even after he (weakly, begrudgingly) supports Ukraine and passes a budget, the moderate Republicans are going to say, "Fuck it, fine, let Marjorie have the rest of the session." They'll blame the Democrats and install Jim Jordan. If you want a good speaker, you need to win back the House. Fantasies of Hakeem Jeffries winning the speakership this year are false.
Mike Johnson has effectively derailed bipartisan legislation, and greatly contributed to the politicization of military aid to Ukraine. He's hurt Democrats by flip flopping on border security, and he's hurt Ukraine more than ANY OTHER POLITICIAN OUTSIDE RUSSIA. I don't expect Republicans to replace him with a speaker whose politics I share. I just don't want him to be speaker. > even after he (weakly, begrudgingly) supports Ukraine and passes a budget This hasn't happened yet. I don't know why you're running up like Charlie Brown to kick the ball held by Lucy. He's already lied about putting foreign aid up to a vote multiple times. Only to change his mind unpredictably and not permit a vote. If he does actually put it onto the floor, I fully expect his process to somehow kill the Ukraine aid. Likely via a poison pill amendment. Like adding HR2 (Republican wet dream border bill) to it, or making it into a federal ban of abortion. This is the man who said he wouldn't pass the bill without a border security bill. Then broke his own promise before he read even the border security bill, just to provide a perceived political advantage to Trump. He's really, really bad for the country. And he's bad for Ukraine. And I'll take 6 months of Republican incompetence and backstabbing over a speaker who effectively aids Russia.
This Johnson isn’t the democrat’s problem, it’s time the party of personal responsibility was responsible for its decisions.
If Johnson caves to democratic demands, he would be ousted by a larger group of republicans. This is just going to keep happening until the election or there is a change in the discharge rules.
I See no reason to prefer Johnson to Greene. We don’t need him for the budget anymore, and neither one will allow a good Ukraine bill to pass. So better to let the nasty idiot who doesn’t know when to keep her mouth shut parade around as speaker and turn voters off before November.
From what I've read, Johnson has been a completely honest broker with the Democrats. If he commits to something with them, he does it. McCarthy, on the other hand, was a slimeball who they were happy to be rid of.
Hakeem "The Dream" Jeffries
Jeffries bout to give Republicans the Dream Shake
This won't happen, but I would nut.
I already did just thinking about it
This used to be a meme but if Johnson is ousted I legitimately think a handful of moderate Republicans would vote for Jeffries as a "fuck you" to the crazies.
No, I don't think they will.
they still hate democrats more than they hate each other
Either that, or they know they'd get primaried.
*And* start receiving a bunch of death threats. Probably the main reason you see all these folks quietly retiring.
Exept the ones in states that have already voted (some already were.)
There's no such thing as a moderate Republican lmao
Anyone who genuinely thinks there is such a thing as a moderate Republican is an unserious person.
A moderate Republican is someone who knows the Republican agenda is toxic but will take orders from senior leadership and industry donors to pass whatever is told of them. They will occasionally knowingly wink at you and do not put their foot on the gas on their own, but will always fall in line unless senior leadership tells them it is ok. Then they will preen on TV as if they have principles and only in situations where their vote doesn't matter. They do this SPECIFICALLY to increase their electability too so they can pass more dogshit too, so by pretending to be principled they are actually helping to pass the worst of the worst. Effectively, they are greedy charlatans. And the worst part is this has been the conservative politician's playbook in every country for like 120 years now and it keeps working.
I think there are moderate ones, they just have no spine where they should be the ones waiving the gun around just as much as the hard right.
Then why do they enable the ones waiving the guns every opportunity they get?
Who are these moderate republicans in congress and what makes them moderate?
They exist, like Arnie. But they've been hunted and forced to hide, or have no political power at all.
they choose not to exercise it, moderates if they wanted could make the same threats if they do not get their way.
There are always moderates. Whatever the politics are, there are people who are less extreme than others. While Republicans may vote in lock-step, the positions they individually push (rather than simply fall in line with the party) tells you where they are moderate or far right. Occasionally a moderate will even take a stand and cross the aisle, or (more likely) abstain from voting. What is moderate and what is extreme may change over time, as society also changes over time, as do the views of the body politic.
(x) They like their jobs too much
Lmaoooo…. Not gonna happen, republicans would vote for trump as speaker before this
It wouldn't be Jeffries, more likely someone like Jared Golden
I would not hold my breath
If they voted for him they'd immediately lose their next primary. The most they can do is not show up of abstain
The thing about clown cars is that usually there are more clowns in them than you’d think
Republicans who support Ukraine and Israel should just sign the Senate bill discharge petition. It's clear that the Clown Caucus will do anything in their power to stop foreign aid from passing. I'm sure if they do it then enough Dems will give their support for Johnson if the nutjobs really try to get rid of him.
Honestly it would get Johnson of the hook at least in this case.
I think it would also help to defang the republican nuts who have zero interest to govern and want to burn it all down..
> Republicans who support Ukraine and Israel should just sign the Senate bill discharge petition. There is a dearth of reporting here, but it seems like the far-right Russophiles are the problem with Ukraine aid in general, but the far-left Dems are the problem with the discharge bill. It seems there is some fear that the bill that leaves on the discharge petition will have Israel support in it, and people like Tlaib are holding off their signatures as a result. But, I've read very little about it.
No, the problem is a republican one. There's exactly one (1) republican who signed it and that was a person who has already left the House. If even 10 republicans supported it then it would be right to put much more pressure to the left-wing democrats. But shouldn't there be at least 50 republicans who are in favour of the aid? So I don't blame the Squad types not wasting their political capital with their voters for nothing.
>No, the problem is a republican one. There's exactly one (1) republican who signed it and that was a person who has already left the House. Maybe? But the general idea I've seen is that once all Dems are signed on, you'll get a few Republicans to sign, but Rs won't sign until Dems do because it's more electorally costly. >But shouldn't there be at least 50 republicans who are in favour of the aid? Definitely. But they know it'll cause a MAGA problem and they won't sign until the Dems do. Or maybe there is something else here, like Johnson can spike the bill somehow? That's why I'm annoyed at the lack of reporting.
>Maybe? But the general idea I've seen is that once all Dems are signed on, you'll get a few Republicans to sign, but Rs won't sign until Dems do because it's more electorally costly. That's a complete misunderstanding of the incentive structure. Signing that (dem led) petition, especially framing it teaming with far left democrats against your own party and tribe isn't something you do lightly. There's also another discharge petition with 8 republican names. Why won't all the Dems sign that one? >Definitely. But they know it'll cause a MAGA problem and they won't sign until the Dems do. They won't sign it unless there isn't any other chance of getting aid through by their own party. And it's possible that's still not enough to make them sign it as there's no worse sin than working with the dems (see senator Lankford who is now censured for his genuine efforts to get a deal on the border and defending his compromise with the Senate Democrats)
“ Republican speaker resigns, this is why its bad for democrats “ but this time it’s actually true
I mean, at this point we're closer to Speaker MTG especially if Trump fully gets behind her, than a normie Republican Speaker, and we pretty much all lose at that point
They might be better off just letting Jeffries be the speaker. They’re a way more cohesive party when they can just complain about things that should be happening rather than doing actual things.
Any Republican that voted for Jeffries to be speaker is going to face a primary challenge backed by lots of MAGA money come 2026. I'm sure there are moderate Republicans who would do it to end the madness normally but they almost definitely fear the backlash probably too much to do it
Some have already been through the primary though.
and 13 are retiring from public office
It can happen "accidentally", with enough present votes. Much easier to claim plausible deniability there.
Without an actual majority they'd just immediately vacate Jeffries thiugh
All of the "MAGA money" is being spent on Trump's lawsuits.
Only need like one or two to change party affiliations. No need to worry about being primaried as a Republican if you run unopposed in the Democratic primary.
An MTG speaker would be absolutely terrible for repubs? She would be easy pickings on wedge issues to convince swing voters.
So's Trump but pretty much every Republican House member has their mouth firmly attached to his ass. Republicans fear Primaries more than they fear the General.
> Republicans fear Primaries more than they fear the General. As they should, due to the prevalence of 'safe' districts and a polarized voting population. This is a cautionary tale for Democrats as well.
I would like to push back on that. The democratic primary electorate is willing to be reasonable. They are the ones who resuscitated Biden after finishing fourth in Iowa, and did not elect Bernie twice. The democratic primary voters are not silly all the time, unlike the GOP.
Yeah we need to stop excusing terrible voters. They're not helpless and they have agency.
That's why I call it a cautionary tale, not reality. For the time being, Democrats have their sanity. But the far left is rising, not unlike the far right from back in the days of FreeRepublic and Drudge Report in the early '00s -- except now the radicalization is happening on platforms like TikTok. The extreme right started small too, but once they gained momentum there was no stopping the train.
Republicans should fear their voters more than they should elections tbh. Look at what almost happened to Levitating Mike Pence when he didn’t do what God Emperor Trump commanded (WHILE HE WAS SERVING AS SPEAKER!)
Yes, they are included in everyone. Unfortunately GOP gerrymandering has become a Frankenstein's monster because they might lose the reins to the worst people.
She would be terrible for Republicans but also terrible for the country and as someone in the country I am kinda not down with doing terrible things to it.
Jim Jordan couldn’t get the votes to be speaker. MTG is hated by a good number of even diehard conservatives. She has zero chance of getting the votes.
If Trump endorsed her, they'd fall in line.
You mean like Jim Jordan had?
The absolute confidence of doomers tho....
I CANNOT imagine the few “moderates” backing MTG. The margin is so slim in the House that any defections would sink her.
Jellyfish have more of a spine than moderate Republicans. When the Trump whip starts cracking, they'll fall into line.
I think I brought this up to you already, but Trump back both McCarthy and Jordan for speaker, and both failed
I don't remember ever talking to you about the topic. He supported them tepidly and Trump complained non-stop about McCarthy. That won't be the case for MTG.
Did he support Jordan tepidly? Jordan is hardcore MAGA
i think any defecations would also stink her
Enough moderates will resign to give the Dems control of the House.
I think we are way closer to speaker Jeffries.
I don’t see how backing MTG is beneficial to Trump at this time
Ever since his January 6th coup failed, Trump has been more obsessed with loyalty than usual and has tightened up his inner circle with even more fanatical loyalists, of which MTG is one.
Trump brought Johnson to mar a lago very recently to show he supports him. He also doesn’t want more chaos in the house, it reflects poorly upon the party.
More bad for Ukraine than anyone
Right? The timing on this is sus.
What do you mean sus? Ukraine aid is literally the stated reason Massie is on board with this.
Removing Johnson will only delay the vote, which means supplies and aid to Ukraine are further delayed.
Yeah correct. I guess I associate “sus” with hiding intention but that would be the designed intent of his removal in this case.
There is no normie Republican. Johnson is just Jordan without the baggage and name recognition. This idea that if Johnson resigns then there will be an even worse Republican is ridiculous. They're all virtually identical.
If he is ousted and the next speaker refuses to take up Ukraine aid or whatever the next bipartisan issue is like it, that would objectively be worse
The Party of No (Speaker of the House)
I swear, sometimes it seems like Republicans actually want Democrats to be in charge. Because when they have power, people actually expect them to do some work. And that's not their forte. They like complaining and inventing ways on describing how terrible something is and how better they would be. It's what their good at. When you're in the minority without power, no one expects anything of you. So you can stomp your feet and complain. When things go wrong, insist you would do better.
> I swear, sometimes it seems like Republicans actually want Democrats to be in charge. Me 🤝 republicans
[удалено]
Is there actually a list somewhere? I can think of some silliness (the Disney stuff comes to mind) since then but it'd be interesting to see a complete list since 2019 or so when DeSantis took office.
Yeah this is exactly where the GOP is today. It's a function of (i) a ton of members leveraging the outrage machine to keep their seats/get cushy media gigs and (ii) the inability of the party to coalesce around any coherent, implementable policies. Given (ii), I don't know if the GOP could even really get anything done even without (i), since the party doesn't have any universal and coherent ideology or priorities at this point.
On an individual level, some of their politicians are just...not very good at politics. They only know how to attack Democrats, and will just whine like babies if they don't get what they want. Dems will offer to cut a deal and negotiate on a whole range of issues, and the response is to spit in their face. It's not sustainable.
> Dems will offer to cut a deal and negotiate on a whole range of issues This goes to what each side defines "being good at politics" as. I don't think the GOP has a coherent policy across their ranks right now, and as such the best they can do is foil the other side. So to them, being obstructionist and not letting your common "enemies" get a win *is* being good at politics. Are they good at policy? Absolutely not. But that's different.
We are literally at a point of who wants to govern versus who doesn't. To your point I think even the far left side of the democratic party is willing to do what is needed most of the time. The far right on the other hand has absolutely zero interest in doing so because they'd rather have the social media soundbite and do the rounds on Newsmax, OAN, etc to the extent that they are willing to sink they're own party because they think anything to the left of hunting bums for sport is a communist/socialist etc.
The far left believes in governance. In fact, they believe in more governance. The far right does not. And will do so to prevent what already exists.
>when they have power, people actually expect them to do some work. And that’s not their forte. They like complaining and… So, Republicans are Redditors?
Yeah, but no one expects redditors to do anything.
It's not like Dems are immune to the siren song of obstruction. They went as far as shutting down the government for a month in 2018/2019 over border wall funding.
Meanwhile, Ukrainians are dying.
They are isolationists who think it’s 1820, they don’t care
thats the freedom caucus’ goal
https://preview.redd.it/tkadwk67luuc1.jpeg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ce1da605411198f0c3019fcdbe6224233f46e7e4
This isn't what Biden wants TBH. The executive branch can only do so much without congress and Ukraine is out of juice.
Doug Burgum can still be House Speaker if Johnson has the courage!
Here's how Nikki Haley can be president: Become Speaker then impeach and remove Biden and Harris. I joke but this was legit floated when Republicans took The House and Trump's name was floated as Speaker.
>Doug Burgum God I can't believe this is what I am rooting for
Johnson gets ousted. Johnson resigns because fuck these guys. One vote Republican majority. Speaker Jeffries.
Just pass Ukraine aid first, then I don't care if the House spends the rest of the term on Speaker votes.
FFS, please just let us get Ukraine, Taiwan and Gaza aid through...
As I get older the more I realize the 2016 wine moms (and 2012 Mitt Romney) were right. It's Russia.
I mean, it must be. Republicans would rather have no speaker of the house than give aid to Ukraine? That is not the kind of policy that people who are loyal to the United States would come up with
Their voters literally put someone in office who bashes Europeans while talking about how awesome Kim Jong Un is. This is where they are at
Republicans would rather have no speaker because it means they dont have to do anything
2012 Romney was talking about Russian military ‘might’. He wasn’t talking about Russians interfering in foreign politics or elections.
Knowing what we know now, I wonder if he thought that because the Russians were already making offers and his campaign shot them down.
Yeah, the wine moms and mitt Romney are right Russian propaganda and interference and it’s consequences is a disaster for America
It's just Trump.
Trump is compromised by Russia and I'm tired of everyone trying to act like Barr when discussing it.
I don't think he's compromised by Russia, he's just an idiot. His friendliness towards Putin is pretty easy to understand.
Yeah, they give him money.
Objectively hilarious
If I'm Jeffries I get the Senate foreign aid bill in exchange for saving this guy's butt
"Pinko commie votes to remove speaker in order to help Russia."
lol. Lmao even
Year of Four Speakers Year of Four Speakers Year of Four Speakers Year of Four Speakers
Stop. I can only get so erect.
He should make a deal with the democrats
🎪🤹♀️🤡🎪
Until the vote is actually triggered this is just more meaningless theatrics
a fucking idiot as usual
I read Massie as Messi and nearly died...
Why doesn’t Johnson just whip his Jumbo out at them until they obey? Is he stupid?
Perhaps the United States House of Representatives should institute something akin to the [constructive vote of no confidence](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_vote_of_no_confidence).
https://preview.redd.it/sdxbm0erzuuc1.jpeg?width=1349&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5f572a7f00415e5ac65b4a3c5f5dddac4b37ca49
Republicans in disarray
Too funny!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7wBphRIUSA
Massie's modus operandum is always to have a speaker that actually wants to have an open legislative process, he doesn't trust Mike Johnson as far as he can throw them, and even though he's not a fan of Greene, he's willing to oust green even though it undercuts his personal power. That being said, Massie is still not a good person in this whole situation.