1) McCarthy gets elected promises to split bills into smaller portions to get elected after republicans can barely hold it together to get anyone. Does so. 4 of the many appropriations bills do pass. Those 4 cut spending significantly. None of them pass the dem held Senate. The other bills get bogged down with republicans not being able to agree on them. They are either too centrist or cut too much. So republicans can't fund the government. If there was then no bill funding the government it would be blamed on republicans with very little in the way of republicans being able to point to how it isn't their fault. Because saying they didn't fund the government at that point is 100% true.

And also a quick note. Jim Jordan being speaker wouldn't solve any of that. Republicans still would not have been able to get the smaller appropriations bills passed and the government shutdown assuming he did not negotiate with dems to get it passed would be blamed 100% on republicans, and rightfully so.

2) Then in order to get a bill funding the government and republicans not get rightfully blamed for shutting the government down because they have no bill McCarthy makes a general funding bill against the promise he made. The general bill also cannot get a majority of republican support. In negotiations it is once again either too centrist or too far right. So once again republicans face the reality if they don't pass a bill they will rightfully be blamed for not funding the government and shutting the government down. So McCarthy and a few republicans go to the dems to negotiate since republicans can't agree.

3) The dems and the republicans involved negotiate a spending bill to fund the government for just 45 days so republicans can come up with a longer term bill that funds it longer. Dems get everything in that bill with no cuts save one thing. Ukraine funding is cut. Which forces dems in the Senate to either fund Ukraine or fund the United States. It's a smart ploy as it pins the failure of the bill entirely on dems after several have promised to not vote on any bill that doesn't fund Ukraine. It's also for only 45 days where republicans can hopefully come back and actually get bills funding the government done after they come back. The bill passes with almost total dem support and about 2/3 republican support.

4) Then Gaetz says McCarthy broke his promise. Which yes he did, and sides with the democrats to remove McCarthy as speaker. Now with republicans not able to get bills together funding the government, they also cannot get support for a speaker. And the only time republicans have gotten anything done, both funding bill wise and removing the speaker have been with dem support. But, I'm told it totally won't happen for electing the new speaker even though the history of this congressional session has shown otherwise.

Gaetz isn't wrong. But, he is very likely to end up giving the house to someone republicans in general will not like. And the only losers will be the American people.

(10-13-2023 01:58 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  1) McCarthy gets elected promises to split bills into smaller portions to get elected after republicans can barely hold it together to get anyone. Does so. 4 of the many appropriations bills do pass. Those 4 cut spending significantly. None of them pass the dem held Senate. The other bills get bogged down with republicans not being able to agree on them. They are either too centrist or cut too much. So republicans can't fund the government. If there was then no bill funding the government it would be blamed on republicans with very little in the way of republicans being able to point to how it isn't their fault. Because saying they didn't fund the government at that point is 100% true.

And also a quick note. Jim Jordan being speaker wouldn't solve any of that. Republicans still would not have been able to get the smaller appropriations bills passed and the government shutdown assuming he did not negotiate with dems to get it passed would be blamed 100% on republicans, and rightfully so.

2) Then in order to get a bill funding the government and republicans not get rightfully blamed for shutting the government down because they have no bill McCarthy makes a general funding bill against the promise he made. The general bill also cannot get a majority of republican support. In negotiations it is once again either too centrist or too far right. So once again republicans face the reality if they don't pass a bill they will rightfully be blamed for not funding the government and shutting the government down. So McCarthy and a few republicans go to the dems to negotiate since republicans can't agree.

3) The dems and the republicans involved negotiate a spending bill to fund the government for just 45 days so republicans can come up with a longer term bill that funds it longer. Dems get everything in that bill with no cuts save one thing. Ukraine funding is cut. Which forces dems in the Senate to either fund Ukraine or fund the United States. It's a smart ploy as it pins the failure of the bill entirely on dems after several have promised to not vote on any bill that doesn't fund Ukraine. It's also for only 45 days where republicans can hopefully come back and actually get bills funding the government done after they come back. The bill passes with almost total dem support and about 2/3 republican support.

4) Then Gaetz says McCarthy broke his promise. Which yes he did, and sides with the democrats to remove McCarthy as speaker. Now with republicans not able to get bills together funding the government, they also cannot get support for a speaker. And the only time republicans have gotten anything done, both funding bill wise and removing the speaker have been with dem support. But, I'm told it totally won't happen for electing the new speaker even though the history of this congressional session has shown otherwise.

Gaetz isn't wrong. But, he is very likely to end up giving the house to someone republicans in general will not like. And the only losers will be the American people.

So---the short version is---having McCarthy as Speaker resulted in the Democrats getting everything they wanted---except for Ukraine spending----which is silly---because roughly half of the Republicans actually favor aid to Ukraine. And some wonder why I dont see losing McCarthy as any big loss.

I just dont see this as a "sky as falling" issue given McCarthy's lame tenure.
Worst case is we end up with a Democrat Speaker who gives the Democrats everything they want slightly more efficiently than McCarthy did. I suspect the more likely case is we get a Republican Speaker who does no worse than McCarthy----and if we are lucky---perhaps he does a bit better than McCarthy. After McCarthy's bumbling---my bar for "success" for the current Republican majority is set pretty low.

Here is what I dont understand. Why are RINO's so intransigent? Pass the conservative spending bills---even if its a little too conservative for your blood. Its not going to pass the Senate anyway. Then---when it comes time to negotiate with the Senate---you have chips to give away and the final bill will end up where the RINO's wanted to be in the first place. If you pass the watered down RINO bill to start with----you START negotiations from a spending point that was already way more than most Republicans wanted and we end up with a compromise bill that looks much closer to what the Democrats wanted all along. Its like RINO's have never had to negotiate anything before in their entire lives.

Well said, Coog. I agree.

McCarthy announced he supports Jim Jordan for speaker.

Uh oh. Jordan must be a Rino.

And that Knucklehead Austin Scott who said he wouldn't vote for Jordan no matter what....is now running, too.

This feels like a sorority house election.

(10-13-2023 02:13 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-13-2023 01:58 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  1) McCarthy gets elected promises to split bills into smaller portions to get elected after republicans can barely hold it together to get anyone. Does so. 4 of the many appropriations bills do pass. Those 4 cut spending significantly. None of them pass the dem held Senate. The other bills get bogged down with republicans not being able to agree on them. They are either too centrist or cut too much. So republicans can't fund the government. If there was then no bill funding the government it would be blamed on republicans with very little in the way of republicans being able to point to how it isn't their fault. Because saying they didn't fund the government at that point is 100% true.

And also a quick note. Jim Jordan being speaker wouldn't solve any of that. Republicans still would not have been able to get the smaller appropriations bills passed and the government shutdown assuming he did not negotiate with dems to get it passed would be blamed 100% on republicans, and rightfully so.

2) Then in order to get a bill funding the government and republicans not get rightfully blamed for shutting the government down because they have no bill McCarthy makes a general funding bill against the promise he made. The general bill also cannot get a majority of republican support. In negotiations it is once again either too centrist or too far right. So once again republicans face the reality if they don't pass a bill they will rightfully be blamed for not funding the government and shutting the government down. So McCarthy and a few republicans go to the dems to negotiate since republicans can't agree.

3) The dems and the republicans involved negotiate a spending bill to fund the government for just 45 days so republicans can come up with a longer term bill that funds it longer. Dems get everything in that bill with no cuts save one thing. Ukraine funding is cut. Which forces dems in the Senate to either fund Ukraine or fund the United States. It's a smart ploy as it pins the failure of the bill entirely on dems after several have promised to not vote on any bill that doesn't fund Ukraine. It's also for only 45 days where republicans can hopefully come back and actually get bills funding the government done after they come back. The bill passes with almost total dem support and about 2/3 republican support.

4) Then Gaetz says McCarthy broke his promise. Which yes he did, and sides with the democrats to remove McCarthy as speaker. Now with republicans not able to get bills together funding the government, they also cannot get support for a speaker. And the only time republicans have gotten anything done, both funding bill wise and removing the speaker have been with dem support. But, I'm told it totally won't happen for electing the new speaker even though the history of this congressional session has shown otherwise.

Gaetz isn't wrong. But, he is very likely to end up giving the house to someone republicans in general will not like. And the only losers will be the American people.

So---the short version is---having McCarthy as Speaker resulted in the Democrats getting everything they wanted---except for Ukraine spending----which is silly---because roughly half of the Republicans actually favor aid to Ukraine. And some wonder why I dont see losing McCarthy as any big loss.

I just dont see this as a "sky as falling" issue given McCarthy's lame tenure.
Worst case is we end up with a Democrat Speaker who gives the Democrats everything they want slightly more efficiently than McCarthy did. I suspect the more likely case is we get a Republican Speaker who does no worse than McCarthy----and if we are lucky---perhaps he does a bit better than McCarthy. After McCarthy's bumbling---my bar for "success" for the current Republican majority is set pretty low.

Here is what I dont understand. Why are RINO's so intransigent? Pass the conservative spending bills---even if its a little too conservative for your blood. Its not going to pass the Senate anyway. Then---when it comes time to negotiate with the Senate---you have chips to give away and the final bill will end up where the RINO's wanted to be in the first place. If you pass the watered down RINO bill to start with----you START negotiations from a spending point that was already way more than most Republicans wanted and we end up with a compromise bill that looks much closer to what the Democrats wanted all along. Its like RINO's have never had to negotiate anything before in their entire lives.

Democrats got what they wanted for 45 days. Minus Ukraine. A narrative the republicans could have forced on media. But, instead we got the clown show we have now.

The moderates did vote on many spending bills that cut spending. 4 of them that cut a lot were passed. Many moderates voted on the one's that didn't pass. You have to remember though, it only takes just a few votes to not pass. This is the consequence of not getting a big enough majority. Have more republicans, have more chances to pass legislation. Just as how Obamacare was able to pass with about 30 democrats voting against it. You have to have a bigger majority if you want more republican bills. But, a nearly 50/50 house with a dem Senate and a dem president is not going to give you the opportunity to pass strong conservative bills.

You say a democrat would be the same. Despite the fact that a dem speaker or Liz Cheney would end investigations into the FBI, Covid, Fauci, Joe Biden. Ya you insist nothing would actually happen, and sure maybe, but one thing it does is keep the news on dems. Now it shifts to investigating republicans primarily Trump. News media gets that plus republicans not being able to govern until next election. Ya great strategy to keep the news focused on republican ineptitude instead of dems.

No speaker no matter who they are is going to overcome the issue of republicans having a paper thin majority and both sides not willing to compromise enough.

Getting what you can vs getting nothing. Some people like nothing.

(10-13-2023 02:27 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  McCarthy announced he supports Jim Jordan for speaker.

Uh oh. Jordan must be a Rino.

I don't think there's a republican on the planet who hasn't been called a Rino lately. It no longer has any bearing on the actual positions/ideology held and instead is entirely based on who you support and oppose.

(10-13-2023 02:39 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  

(10-13-2023 02:27 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  McCarthy announced he supports Jim Jordan for speaker.

Uh oh. Jordan must be a Rino.

I don't think there's a republican on the planet who hasn't been called a Rino lately. It no longer has any bearing on the actual positions/ideology held and instead is entirely based on who you support and oppose.

Nowadays it just means you don't agree with them on everything and you have a trump flag in your yard.

Frankly if you agree with a politician on everything you are either easily duped or you have a crush.

(10-13-2023 02:37 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  

(10-13-2023 02:13 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-13-2023 01:58 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  1) McCarthy gets elected promises to split bills into smaller portions to get elected after republicans can barely hold it together to get anyone. Does so. 4 of the many appropriations bills do pass. Those 4 cut spending significantly. None of them pass the dem held Senate. The other bills get bogged down with republicans not being able to agree on them. They are either too centrist or cut too much. So republicans can't fund the government. If there was then no bill funding the government it would be blamed on republicans with very little in the way of republicans being able to point to how it isn't their fault. Because saying they didn't fund the government at that point is 100% true.

And also a quick note. Jim Jordan being speaker wouldn't solve any of that. Republicans still would not have been able to get the smaller appropriations bills passed and the government shutdown assuming he did not negotiate with dems to get it passed would be blamed 100% on republicans, and rightfully so.

2) Then in order to get a bill funding the government and republicans not get rightfully blamed for shutting the government down because they have no bill McCarthy makes a general funding bill against the promise he made. The general bill also cannot get a majority of republican support. In negotiations it is once again either too centrist or too far right. So once again republicans face the reality if they don't pass a bill they will rightfully be blamed for not funding the government and shutting the government down. So McCarthy and a few republicans go to the dems to negotiate since republicans can't agree.

3) The dems and the republicans involved negotiate a spending bill to fund the government for just 45 days so republicans can come up with a longer term bill that funds it longer. Dems get everything in that bill with no cuts save one thing. Ukraine funding is cut. Which forces dems in the Senate to either fund Ukraine or fund the United States. It's a smart ploy as it pins the failure of the bill entirely on dems after several have promised to not vote on any bill that doesn't fund Ukraine. It's also for only 45 days where republicans can hopefully come back and actually get bills funding the government done after they come back. The bill passes with almost total dem support and about 2/3 republican support.

4) Then Gaetz says McCarthy broke his promise. Which yes he did, and sides with the democrats to remove McCarthy as speaker. Now with republicans not able to get bills together funding the government, they also cannot get support for a speaker. And the only time republicans have gotten anything done, both funding bill wise and removing the speaker have been with dem support. But, I'm told it totally won't happen for electing the new speaker even though the history of this congressional session has shown otherwise.

Gaetz isn't wrong. But, he is very likely to end up giving the house to someone republicans in general will not like. And the only losers will be the American people.

So---the short version is---having McCarthy as Speaker resulted in the Democrats getting everything they wanted---except for Ukraine spending----which is silly---because roughly half of the Republicans actually favor aid to Ukraine. And some wonder why I dont see losing McCarthy as any big loss.

I just dont see this as a "sky as falling" issue given McCarthy's lame tenure.
Worst case is we end up with a Democrat Speaker who gives the Democrats everything they want slightly more efficiently than McCarthy did. I suspect the more likely case is we get a Republican Speaker who does no worse than McCarthy----and if we are lucky---perhaps he does a bit better than McCarthy. After McCarthy's bumbling---my bar for "success" for the current Republican majority is set pretty low.

Here is what I dont understand. Why are RINO's so intransigent? Pass the conservative spending bills---even if its a little too conservative for your blood. Its not going to pass the Senate anyway. Then---when it comes time to negotiate with the Senate---you have chips to give away and the final bill will end up where the RINO's wanted to be in the first place. If you pass the watered down RINO bill to start with----you START negotiations from a spending point that was already way more than most Republicans wanted and we end up with a compromise bill that looks much closer to what the Democrats wanted all along. Its like RINO's have never had to negotiate anything before in their entire lives.

Democrats got what they wanted for 45 days. Minus Ukraine. A narrative the republicans could have forced on media. But, instead we got the clown show we have now.

The moderates did vote on many spending bills that cut spending. 4 of them that cut a lot were passed. Many moderates voted on the one's that didn't pass. You have to remember though, it only takes just a few votes to not pass. This is the consequence of not getting a big enough majority. Have more republicans, have more chances to pass legislation. Just as how Obamacare was able to pass with about 30 democrats voting against it. You have to have a bigger majority if you want more republican bills. But, a nearly 50/50 house with a dem Senate and a dem president is not going to give you the opportunity to pass strong conservative bills.

You say a democrat would be the same. Despite the fact that a dem speaker or Liz Cheney would end investigations into the FBI, Covid, Fauci, Joe Biden. Ya you insist nothing would actually happen, and sure maybe, but one thing it does is keep the news on dems. Now it shifts to investigating republicans primarily Trump. News media gets that plus republicans not being able to govern until next election. Ya great strategy to keep the news focused on republican ineptitude instead of dems.

No speaker no matter who they are is going to overcome the issue of republicans having a paper thin majority and both sides not willing to compromise enough.

Getting what you can vs getting nothing. Some people like nothing.

Now your just fear mongering. Liz---along with virtually every Republican moron that aligned with her---were all sent packing from their cushy jobs in DC. Nobody is aligning with Democrats to install Liz as Speaker because it would spell their political doom. No group of Republicans is going to be responsible for creating a House that only investigates Republicans. Frankly, no--Im not worried about a Democrat Speaker because----nothing would happen with a Democrat Speaker. The only thing worse than being Speaker with a small majority is being Speaker with a small minority. Im not even sure Democrats would be heading committees or hold a majority on them---because they dont have a majority and likely couldnt win a vote for any disadvantaging floor proposal beyond Speaker. The main reason Im not worried about a Democrat Speaker is because its not going to happen. That kind of sky is falling scenario you paint is just jumping the shark.

(10-13-2023 03:07 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-13-2023 02:37 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  

(10-13-2023 02:13 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-13-2023 01:58 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  1) McCarthy gets elected promises to split bills into smaller portions to get elected after republicans can barely hold it together to get anyone. Does so. 4 of the many appropriations bills do pass. Those 4 cut spending significantly. None of them pass the dem held Senate. The other bills get bogged down with republicans not being able to agree on them. They are either too centrist or cut too much. So republicans can't fund the government. If there was then no bill funding the government it would be blamed on republicans with very little in the way of republicans being able to point to how it isn't their fault. Because saying they didn't fund the government at that point is 100% true.

And also a quick note. Jim Jordan being speaker wouldn't solve any of that. Republicans still would not have been able to get the smaller appropriations bills passed and the government shutdown assuming he did not negotiate with dems to get it passed would be blamed 100% on republicans, and rightfully so.

2) Then in order to get a bill funding the government and republicans not get rightfully blamed for shutting the government down because they have no bill McCarthy makes a general funding bill against the promise he made. The general bill also cannot get a majority of republican support. In negotiations it is once again either too centrist or too far right. So once again republicans face the reality if they don't pass a bill they will rightfully be blamed for not funding the government and shutting the government down. So McCarthy and a few republicans go to the dems to negotiate since republicans can't agree.

3) The dems and the republicans involved negotiate a spending bill to fund the government for just 45 days so republicans can come up with a longer term bill that funds it longer. Dems get everything in that bill with no cuts save one thing. Ukraine funding is cut. Which forces dems in the Senate to either fund Ukraine or fund the United States. It's a smart ploy as it pins the failure of the bill entirely on dems after several have promised to not vote on any bill that doesn't fund Ukraine. It's also for only 45 days where republicans can hopefully come back and actually get bills funding the government done after they come back. The bill passes with almost total dem support and about 2/3 republican support.

4) Then Gaetz says McCarthy broke his promise. Which yes he did, and sides with the democrats to remove McCarthy as speaker. Now with republicans not able to get bills together funding the government, they also cannot get support for a speaker. And the only time republicans have gotten anything done, both funding bill wise and removing the speaker have been with dem support. But, I'm told it totally won't happen for electing the new speaker even though the history of this congressional session has shown otherwise.

Gaetz isn't wrong. But, he is very likely to end up giving the house to someone republicans in general will not like. And the only losers will be the American people.

So---the short version is---having McCarthy as Speaker resulted in the Democrats getting everything they wanted---except for Ukraine spending----which is silly---because roughly half of the Republicans actually favor aid to Ukraine. And some wonder why I dont see losing McCarthy as any big loss.

I just dont see this as a "sky as falling" issue given McCarthy's lame tenure.
Worst case is we end up with a Democrat Speaker who gives the Democrats everything they want slightly more efficiently than McCarthy did. I suspect the more likely case is we get a Republican Speaker who does no worse than McCarthy----and if we are lucky---perhaps he does a bit better than McCarthy. After McCarthy's bumbling---my bar for "success" for the current Republican majority is set pretty low.

Here is what I dont understand. Why are RINO's so intransigent? Pass the conservative spending bills---even if its a little too conservative for your blood. Its not going to pass the Senate anyway. Then---when it comes time to negotiate with the Senate---you have chips to give away and the final bill will end up where the RINO's wanted to be in the first place. If you pass the watered down RINO bill to start with----you START negotiations from a spending point that was already way more than most Republicans wanted and we end up with a compromise bill that looks much closer to what the Democrats wanted all along. Its like RINO's have never had to negotiate anything before in their entire lives.

Democrats got what they wanted for 45 days. Minus Ukraine. A narrative the republicans could have forced on media. But, instead we got the clown show we have now.

The moderates did vote on many spending bills that cut spending. 4 of them that cut a lot were passed. Many moderates voted on the one's that didn't pass. You have to remember though, it only takes just a few votes to not pass. This is the consequence of not getting a big enough majority. Have more republicans, have more chances to pass legislation. Just as how Obamacare was able to pass with about 30 democrats voting against it. You have to have a bigger majority if you want more republican bills. But, a nearly 50/50 house with a dem Senate and a dem president is not going to give you the opportunity to pass strong conservative bills.

You say a democrat would be the same. Despite the fact that a dem speaker or Liz Cheney would end investigations into the FBI, Covid, Fauci, Joe Biden. Ya you insist nothing would actually happen, and sure maybe, but one thing it does is keep the news on dems. Now it shifts to investigating republicans primarily Trump. News media gets that plus republicans not being able to govern until next election. Ya great strategy to keep the news focused on republican ineptitude instead of dems.

No speaker no matter who they are is going to overcome the issue of republicans having a paper thin majority and both sides not willing to compromise enough.

Getting what you can vs getting nothing. Some people like nothing.

Now your just fear mongering. Liz---along with virtually every Republican moron that aligned with her---were all sent packing from their cushy jobs in DC. Nobody is aligning with Democrats to install Liz as Speaker because it would spell their political doom. No group of Republicans is going to be responsible for creating a House that only investigates Republicans. Frankly, no--Im not worried about a Democrat Speaker because----nothing would happen with a Democrat Speaker. The only thing worse than being Speaker with a small majority is being Speaker with a small minority. Im not even sure Democrats would be heading committees or hold a majority on them---because they dont have a majority and likely couldnt win a vote for any disadvantaging floor proposal beyond Speaker. The main reason Im not worried about a Democrat Speaker is because its not going to happen. That kind of sky is falling scenario you paint is just jumping the shark.

The speaker of the house appoints members to committees. Which is a huge power. Also can create and destroy congressional committees. This is not a power I want dems to have. I don't know what to say if you think that's a small deal giving the dems that power.

As for this not happening. I was told it would be over by this time and we'd already have a speaker. The people saying it would already be over are the same ones saying a dem or Liz Cheney won't be speaker. They were already wrong once with this.

The people who said this was disaster and would take a long time to be resolved have at very least turned out right on that so far. They are the same people saying this would have a decent chance of handing someone the speakership over to someone that would be awful for republicans. Which is why they were so upset about it happening.

FWIW---Jim Jordan has won the nomination for Speaker starting at 125 votes----which was more than Scalise had when he began his quest to 217---so we will see how this goes.

(10-13-2023 03:21 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  FWIW---Jim Jordan has won the nomination for Speaker starting at 125 votes----which was more than Scalise had to start---so we will see how this goes.

Hope springs eternal.

I do hope Jordan wins. There are already a dozen republicans who said they wouldn't vote for him though. So I'm not holding much hope for it.

(10-13-2023 03:27 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  I do hope Jordan wins. There are already a dozen republicans who said they wouldn't vote for him though. So I'm not holding much hope for it.

There is a certain pressure building to get this resolved after 10 days, so that will help Jordan gain momentum. But his margin is very thin. And he (like most others that reach that level) has made his share of enemies over the years. I really doubt he will get to 217.

(10-13-2023 03:36 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(10-13-2023 03:27 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  I do hope Jordan wins. There are already a dozen republicans who said they wouldn't vote for him though. So I'm not holding much hope for it.

There is a certain pressure building to get this resolved after 10 days, so that will help Jordan gain momentum. But his margin is very thin. And he (like most others that reach that level) has made his share of enemies over the years. I really doubt he will get to 217.

He'll get the needed votes - - just so long as publicly confirms that he wears orange poke-a-dot underwear.

(10-13-2023 03:40 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(10-13-2023 03:36 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(10-13-2023 03:27 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  I do hope Jordan wins. There are already a dozen republicans who said they wouldn't vote for him though. So I'm not holding much hope for it.

There is a certain pressure building to get this resolved after 10 days, so that will help Jordan gain momentum. But his margin is very thin. And he (like most others that reach that level) has made his share of enemies over the years. I really doubt he will get to 217.

He'll get the needed votes - - just so long as publicly confirms that he wears orange poke-a-dot underwear.

Just can't help yourself can you.

(10-13-2023 03:21 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  FWIW---Jim Jordan has won the nomination for Speaker starting at 125 votes----which was more than Scalise had when he began his quest to 217---so we will see how this goes.

Looks like they took another vote and Jordan got 155.

Amazing Jim Jordan has never sponsored a bill that even passed the house and he may be speaker. Gotta love America, you can just fail up

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

(10-13-2023 04:46 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Looks like they took another vote and Jordan got 155.

Correct. This shiit show isn't getting resolved soon despite what some think. Instead of blaming McCarthy, Gaetz and his band of brothers need to own this.

Quote:House Republicans are adjourning for the weekend after their designated candidate for speaker, Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, appears to be well short of the support needed for a chamber-wide vote to give him the gavel.

It's the second time GOP lawmakers have gathered to pick a speaker-designate in three days. Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., won an internal vote on Wednesday but stepped back from the race on Thursday night after it became clear he did not have enough support for a House floor vote. 

Jordan won 124 votes against his rival in the race, Rep. Austin Scott, R-Ga., who won 81. It was followed by a second secret ballot vote on whether lawmakers would support Jordan on the House floor, in which he won 152 votes. 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-adjourns-disarray-support-jordan-looks-weaker-than-expected

Let's start an office pool on who can pick the jerk offs that will vote with every Democrat.