(10-12-2023 11:46 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 11:37 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Jordan dropped out and threw his support to Scalise, and Scalise failed to get the votes.

Now lets see Scalise drop out and throw his support to Jordan.

We'll see. My guess is this is going to go the same way as McCarthy. I still think ts going to be Scalise (or someone like that)---but such a Speaker will have to make written assurances to the hard core base representatives that the leadership will address certain issues that are of utmost importance to the base.

The establishment also wants to get rid of the single vote motion to vacate rule. It will be interesting to see if they still want to pursue that if someone like Jordan gets in.

(10-12-2023 11:59 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 11:46 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 11:37 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Jordan dropped out and threw his support to Scalise, and Scalise failed to get the votes.

Now lets see Scalise drop out and throw his support to Jordan.

We'll see. My guess is this is going to go the same way as McCarthy. I still think ts going to be Scalise (or someone like that)---but such a Speaker will have to make written assurances to the hard core base representatives that the leadership will address certain issues that are of utmost importance to the base.

The establishment also wants to get rid of the single vote motion to vacate rule. It will be interesting to see if they still want to pursue that if someone like Jordan gets in.

Which is odd, because that single vote to vacate rule was there for years and was only recently removed by Pelosi.

(10-12-2023 12:03 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 11:59 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 11:46 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 11:37 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Jordan dropped out and threw his support to Scalise, and Scalise failed to get the votes.

Now lets see Scalise drop out and throw his support to Jordan.

We'll see. My guess is this is going to go the same way as McCarthy. I still think ts going to be Scalise (or someone like that)---but such a Speaker will have to make written assurances to the hard core base representatives that the leadership will address certain issues that are of utmost importance to the base.

The establishment also wants to get rid of the single vote motion to vacate rule. It will be interesting to see if they still want to pursue that if someone like Jordan gets in.

Which is odd, because that single vote to vacate rule was there for years and was only recently removed by Pelosi.

yep, which is also my point about the establishment being very much like Pelosi.

And it was used once before.

Pelosi got rid of it because she feared certain democratic factions would opt to vote her out, and she wouldnt have the votes to to survive that and all of the republicans vooting to get rid of her. ( ala McCarthy)

So it turns out Scalise has failed to endorse Trump for 2024, so Trump would not come to Scalise's aid. Scalise apparently thought that once he beat Jordan everyone would fall in line.

(10-12-2023 01:50 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Scalise apparently thought...

Well, there you have it.

(10-12-2023 01:50 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  So it turns out Scalise has failed to endorse Trump for 2024, so Trump would not come to Scalise's aid. Scalise apparently thought that once he beat Jordan everyone would fall in line.

I know you'll disagree. But, I think it's petty childish behavior to say that someone has to endorse someone to secure another endorsement. It would be different obviously if it was the general election. The same babyish behavior was on display over the Iowa governor not endorsing Trump in primary. And him just constantly attacking her over that.

Endorse who you think is best, not who endorses you. This isn't an ego stroking contest. If Jordan hadn't endorsed Trump would he do that to Jordan as well?

But, this is exactly why the house will be in chaos for a very long time. No one will have the votes.

I was promised this would already be over by now earlier in this thread. Was told I was silly for saying it wouldn't be.

(10-12-2023 03:48 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 01:50 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  So it turns out Scalise has failed to endorse Trump for 2024, so Trump would not come to Scalise's aid. Scalise apparently thought that once he beat Jordan everyone would fall in line.

I know you'll disagree. But, I think it's petty childish behavior to say that someone has to endorse someone to secure another endorsement. It would be different obviously if it was the general election. The same babyish behavior was on display over the Iowa governor not endorsing Trump in primary. And him just constantly attacking her over that.

Endorse who you think is best, not who endorses you. This isn't an ego stroking contest. If Jordan hadn't endorsed Trump would he do that to Jordan as well?

But, this is exactly why the house will be in chaos for a very long time. No one will have the votes.

I was promised this would already be over by now earlier in this thread. Was told I was silly for saying it wouldn't be.

Trump DID endorse who he thought would be best, and that was Jim Jordan.

Scalise then needed Trump's endorsement to help pull in the votes after Jordan dropped out, and he didnt get it. The moral of the story; dont wait months making up your mind on a presidential endorsement, then expect that same guy to just endorse you on a whim.

(10-12-2023 04:23 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 03:48 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 01:50 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  So it turns out Scalise has failed to endorse Trump for 2024, so Trump would not come to Scalise's aid. Scalise apparently thought that once he beat Jordan everyone would fall in line.

I know you'll disagree. But, I think it's petty childish behavior to say that someone has to endorse someone to secure another endorsement. It would be different obviously if it was the general election. The same babyish behavior was on display over the Iowa governor not endorsing Trump in primary. And him just constantly attacking her over that.

Endorse who you think is best, not who endorses you. This isn't an ego stroking contest. If Jordan hadn't endorsed Trump would he do that to Jordan as well?

But, this is exactly why the house will be in chaos for a very long time. No one will have the votes.

I was promised this would already be over by now earlier in this thread. Was told I was silly for saying it wouldn't be.

Trump DID endorse who he thought would be best, and that was Jim Jordan.

Scalise then needed Trump's endorsement to help pull in the votes after Jordan dropped out, and he didnt get it. The moral of the story; dont wait months making up your mind on a presidential endorsement, then expect that same guy to just endorse you on a whim.

I was responding specifically to "Scalise has failed to endorse Trump for 2024, so Trump would not come to Scalise's aid" That is what's petty. If the endorsement only came because he endorsed him in the primary.

I doubt it matters anyway. If a Trump endorsement mattered for being speaker then Jordan would have gotten it.

The problem is as always because of such a thin majority pretty much every single person will have to vote on speaker. Which they won't be able to do. Which will increasingly hurt republicans in general as time drags on.

McCarthy was ousted nine days ago. There is no Speaker of the House in place and no one knows when a vote is scheduled on the floor. Yeah, this was a great strategic, political move LOL.

Lol.

Steve Scalise withdraws from the nomination for speaker.

(10-12-2023 04:54 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 04:23 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 03:48 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 01:50 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  So it turns out Scalise has failed to endorse Trump for 2024, so Trump would not come to Scalise's aid. Scalise apparently thought that once he beat Jordan everyone would fall in line.

I know you'll disagree. But, I think it's petty childish behavior to say that someone has to endorse someone to secure another endorsement. It would be different obviously if it was the general election. The same babyish behavior was on display over the Iowa governor not endorsing Trump in primary. And him just constantly attacking her over that.

Endorse who you think is best, not who endorses you. This isn't an ego stroking contest. If Jordan hadn't endorsed Trump would he do that to Jordan as well?

But, this is exactly why the house will be in chaos for a very long time. No one will have the votes.

I was promised this would already be over by now earlier in this thread. Was told I was silly for saying it wouldn't be.

Trump DID endorse who he thought would be best, and that was Jim Jordan.

Scalise then needed Trump's endorsement to help pull in the votes after Jordan dropped out, and he didnt get it. The moral of the story; dont wait months making up your mind on a presidential endorsement, then expect that same guy to just endorse you on a whim.

I was responding specifically to "Scalise has failed to endorse Trump for 2024, so Trump would not come to Scalise's aid" That is what's petty. If the endorsement only came because he endorsed him in the primary.

I doubt it matters anyway. If a Trump endorsement mattered for being speaker then Jordan would have gotten it.

The problem is as always because of such a thin majority pretty much every single person will have to vote on speaker. Which they won't be able to do. Which will increasingly hurt republicans in general as time drags on.

Nope. We know what Trump has done. If Scalise didnt want to endorse maga, then he's not maga, he's establishment swamp. Why would Trump endorse that?

Actions have consequences.

Let's hope the folks who didn't want Jordan yesterday change their minds.

Like I said—-as long as we have GOP House Leadership giving the middle finger to the base I’m not sure how anyone can expect anything but division. House leadership proudly screwing over the GOP base is what I find monumentally stupid.

(10-12-2023 08:18 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Like I said—-as long as we have GOP House Leadership giving the middle finger to the base I’m not sure how anyone can expect anything but division. House leadership proudly screwing over the GOP base is what I find monumentally stupid.

In the House the "base" is pretty varied on the scale of moderate to far-right. I don't think you can say the opinions of the GOP house member from New York is the same as the opinions of MTG's district.

(10-12-2023 08:18 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Like I said—-as long as we have GOP House Leadership giving the middle finger to the base I’m not sure how anyone can expect anything but division. House leadership proudly screwing over the GOP base is what I find monumentally stupid.

Who is the one all or nothing candidate for you this time?

We told you. The longer this goes...

Quote:Democrat strategists are mounting pressure against 18 Republicans representing congressional districts won by President Biden in 2020 ahead of the vote for new House speaker.

House Majority Forward and Center for American Progress (CAP) Action Fund, two top Democratic groups, released a memo Wednesday saying those 18 Republicans have the opportunity to demand that the next House speaker commit to working with Democrats to pass government funding measures following Rep. Kevin McCarthy's ouster from the position.

It seems to suggest that whoever they vote for as the new speaker will have election implications come 2024.

"These 18 Republicans face a clear choice: put the country first by working in a bipartisan fashion – as the Senate is doing – to prevent a painful government shutdown or continue to march in lockstep with MAGA extremists like Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene, Matt Gaetz, and Lauren Boebert. This moment is a true test of their character," the memo penned by CAP Action President Navin Nayak and House Majority Forward President Mike Smith says.

"With a divided government, the only path to keeping the government open is a bipartisan approach. These 18 Republicans will face the same test that other Republicans have faced when staring down the extremism of MAGA: put your party first by leaving the extremists in charge or put your country first," the memo obtained by The Hill says. "As early as today, we will know which choice they make. Either way, their political fate will be sealed."

Potential Consequences of the GOP Power Struggle

And news just broke that democrats were in talks with almost a dozen republicans to get someone as speaker of the house. Something I was told wouldn't happen.

Sometimes in politics, better the devil you know than the devil you don't. In this case, McCarthy vs. _____________.

Thanks Greasy Gaetz +7.

Sadly, for most it was too easy to see all of this coming.

(10-12-2023 07:36 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 04:54 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 04:23 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 03:48 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 01:50 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  So it turns out Scalise has failed to endorse Trump for 2024, so Trump would not come to Scalise's aid. Scalise apparently thought that once he beat Jordan everyone would fall in line.

I know you'll disagree. But, I think it's petty childish behavior to say that someone has to endorse someone to secure another endorsement. It would be different obviously if it was the general election. The same babyish behavior was on display over the Iowa governor not endorsing Trump in primary. And him just constantly attacking her over that.

Endorse who you think is best, not who endorses you. This isn't an ego stroking contest. If Jordan hadn't endorsed Trump would he do that to Jordan as well?

But, this is exactly why the house will be in chaos for a very long time. No one will have the votes.

I was promised this would already be over by now earlier in this thread. Was told I was silly for saying it wouldn't be.

Trump DID endorse who he thought would be best, and that was Jim Jordan.

Scalise then needed Trump's endorsement to help pull in the votes after Jordan dropped out, and he didnt get it. The moral of the story; dont wait months making up your mind on a presidential endorsement, then expect that same guy to just endorse you on a whim.

I was responding specifically to "Scalise has failed to endorse Trump for 2024, so Trump would not come to Scalise's aid" That is what's petty. If the endorsement only came because he endorsed him in the primary.

I doubt it matters anyway. If a Trump endorsement mattered for being speaker then Jordan would have gotten it.

The problem is as always because of such a thin majority pretty much every single person will have to vote on speaker. Which they won't be able to do. Which will increasingly hurt republicans in general as time drags on.

Nope. We know what Trump has done. If Scalise didnt want to endorse maga, then he's not maga, he's establishment swamp. Why would Trump endorse that?

Actions have consequences.

He endorsed Trump in the general and both he and Trump said they have a friendly relationship.

He doesn't want to endorse anyone in the primary. Nothing short of absolute total fealty for some people is acceptable.

And ya I know what Trump has done. Maybe he'll nominate another leftists wet dream like Wray for positions of power. That'll show them. Good lord the trumpists have a mental breakdown if someone shows the smallest bit of none 100% support.