Scalise nominated Speaker
- Thread starter BidenPresident
- Start date
Althea
Althea told me...
I don't believe McCarthy reached across the aisle. He didn't honor the agreement he had with Biden. Truthfully, he had an impossible job from the start.
He just wanted that gavel, and didn't care about anything else. There is no way any Republicans would allow a spending bill that gave Dems. anything that they want. In fact, a fairly good percentage of the extreme MAGAmorons believe that a shutdown is a good thing.
He created a compromise, one that even Ds voted for, and making even the smallest attempt to work with the folks who are always crying about nobody "reaching across that aisle" they took their first opportunity to make sure that the person who did it was punished for it. Seriously, the only group that voted as a block to ensure there was no speaker were not the republicans, only the Ds did that, and they made a love connection with MAGA to do it.
Althea
Althea told me...
I see a three way stalemate for quite some time, with Dems. possibly putting McCarthy back as a big fuck you to Gaetz.
He clearly did, as evinced by the vote carried by both Rs and Ds. I realize you don't want to consider that the Ds voted as a block in order to punish a republican for working with them, but they did. No incentive to ever work with Ds exist for any future Speaker. And the Speaker will not be a D, all you've done is ensure that the next Speaker will not work with you even on small things.
BidenPresident
Verified User
Not inconceivable McCarthy could be in the running. Probably will be Scalise.
Nomad
Every trumper is a N4T.
Your ilk made a deal with the MAGA and cry when the Democrats refused to ride in and rescue you. I’ve heard it said that had if MCCarthy hadn’t absolved Trump after 1/6 they would have rescued him.
QP!
Verified User
Working across the aisle DOES NOT mean Dems prop a Republican for a leadership role when he cannot win via his own party, when they want a Dem for that same leadership role. That is NOT done.
You are conflating voting on a bill (bi partisan) with saying 'if Biden is threatened and does not have Dem support anymore the GOP should save him'. THAT IS NOT DONE.
In other countries where coalition governments are common (like ISrael) that type of horse trading is done all day, with power sharing agreements. 'You support my goal in role X and we will support yours for role Y'.
This is a "you did it first" excuse, it is the excuse of children.
Reality: The only block that voted with the folks you call "MAGA" to punish the person who created a compromise that 209 Democrats voted for is the party with which he compromised.
No matter how much whiney excuses you come up with, the reality is the Democrats voted like MAGA Republicans in order to punish a republican that worked with them. Brilliant job, Ds. Make sure nobody will try it again, good plan.
BidenPresident
Verified User
The Speaker is partisan by design.
None of this changes what I stated. In this vote it was a vote with the folks you call "MAGAs" and believe are truly "evil" in some way and was not a vote to elect a Democrat Speaker, it was simply a vote to make the man you worked with moments before, who reached across the aisle, in order to punish him for working with you.
ExpressLane
Verified User
BidenPresident
Verified User
Not sure I understood that. You mean Democrats should help the House Republicans elect their leader?
ExpressLane
Verified User
EXACTLY !!
QP!
Verified User
McCarthy did not reach out across the aisle. He did not ask the Dem's to save him. He did not offer any deals.
He simply made a bet, that if he put out a good bill to save the govt from shutting down the Dems would vote for it, when his maga right would not and it would pass. He did that. The Dems like the bill and voted for it when it otherwise would have failed and that saved his job.
He then went straight on to TV and lied to the media saying 'this was all the Dem's fault'. The Dems were rightly pissed as the 'snake had delivered a near lethal bite' and their was deliberations as to whether they should save him or not, they played that press conference of him blaming them, and they all voted against.
QP!
Verified User
Its just not a thing. What he is saying is BS.
he is conflating the type of bipartisan expectation on voting for a bill with saying that if Nancy Pelosi does not have enough votes from Democrats to be Speaker the Republicans should prop her up. That is NOT a thing. it has never been a thing for the various POSITIONS the party wants their own person to hold.
If Mitch McConnell did not have the votes to be Senate Leader during the last session because HIS OWN PARTY HAD THE POWER BUT REFUSED there would be no expectation that the Dems would jump in and save him and keep him in his job.
This ignores what happened. He was Speaker already and the vote was not for a D or him it was to keep him or vacate for another republican, as it is a partisan position by design.
Now the Ds could have someone that has shown he was willing to reach across that aisle and work with them, or they could reject him and get someone that has learned that reaching across that aisle to work with Ds only begets them joining with "MAGA" to get rid of him. The vote to get rid of him will not elect a D to that position, your only gain would be to have someone that you know would work with you in that seat rather than someone that has learned that it is useless to try. Your party chose not to gain from his position, because you thought it would be better for you if the Rs had to select someone new and you could pretend that it wasn't your vote to get rid of him.
We now know that Democrats will work with Satan Himself (or at least what they claim is the same thing when they call them MAGA Republicans) to punish someone that will work with them.
The Rs should have learned from back in the day when they had a majority with the VP and they chose to "share" power. The Ds did not do the same when the same result came later and they had the VP majority...
BidenPresident
Verified User
With a narrow majority, Republicans can only lose four members to allow anything to pass through their ranks. Democrats have no plans to help elect either Republican candidate as speaker and instead will vote for Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.) as they did during the 15 rounds of balloting it took for McCarthy to win the gavel this year.
They do have some incentive to work with someone that showed a proclivity to reach across the aisle. I don't expect even one to vote for Scalise, at that point they are voting for a D or an R, I would expect them to vote for the D.
Now in a vote to vacate the seat, one that you know will not be replaced by a D, it will be an unknown R that you have now shown that working with you gains them nothing at all. That one they could choose to have a few vote his way to keep him in the seat. He's been known to compromise... Instead the Ds gathered and worked with those "evil MAGA Republicans" to ensure that the next speaker will not work with them.
I think the Ds are collective idiots, they'll get someone even less inclined to work with them, and it will be their own fault. And it won't last long enough to affect next year's elections in any significant way.