Can the Dems retain the House Speaker??! - Page 11

carlosy · 6th January 2023, 05:20 AM

Are they going to have a ballot only on weekdays or the weekends too?
I'll have to plan my schedule accordingly.

Tero · 6th January 2023, 06:03 AM

The house rules about the speaker need to be fixed. This is ridiculous. It has worked 100 years but now there will be more of these insurrectionist congresssmen/women. So the simple solution is to put up nominees, vote. Then go to a second round with the top two. The one that gets the most votes, even by 1, is speaker.

BobTheCoward · 6th January 2023, 06:46 AM

Originally Posted by Tero

The house rules about the speaker need to be fixed. This is ridiculous. It has worked 100 years but now there will be more of these insurrectionist congresssmen/women. So the simple solution is to put up nominees, vote. Then go to a second round with the top two. The one that gets the most votes, even by 1, is speaker.

Why is this ridiculous? What is the problem?

Pixel42 · 6th January 2023, 07:05 AM

It fits that popular definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

jadebox · 6th January 2023, 07:10 AM

Originally Posted by Pixel42

It fits that popular definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

Sort of like Groundhog Day ... with just extremely minor changes each iteration.

It is also the most absolutely boring thing that I have ever felt compelled to continue watching!

Tero · 6th January 2023, 07:52 AM

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

Why is this ridiculous? What is the problem?

It results in minority rule. Any opponent of the candidates still gets to speak their mind in the process before the vote. Both votes. But since there are only two candidates in the final round, they only can speak against those two.

The Don · 6th January 2023, 08:14 AM

Originally Posted by Tero

It results in minority rule. Any opponent of the candidates still gets to speak their mind in the process before the vote. Both votes. But since there are only two candidates in the final round, they only can speak against those two.

psionl0 proposed a similar approach upthread.

The problem is that if less than half of the House members are happy with the speaker then they will seek to depose her/him at the first opportunity.

In the current situation it would result in either McCarthy or Jeffries becoming speaker, neither of which is the first choice of the Freedom Caucus.

If Jeffries won, the GOP would seek to depose him at the first opportunity and would rinse-repeat at every opportunity if he was re-elected due to the GOP's complete inability to pick one of its own.

If McCarthy won, the Freedom Caucus would quickly remember that they hated him and would seek to depose him at the first opportunity and would rinse-repeat at every opportunity if he was re-elected.

Random · 6th January 2023, 08:25 AM

Originally Posted by The Don

psionl0 proposed a similar approach upthread.

The problem is that if less than half of the House members are happy with the speaker then they will seek to depose her/him at the first opportunity.

In the current situation it would result in either McCarthy or Jeffries becoming speaker, neither of which is the first choice of the Freedom Caucus.

If Jeffries won, the GOP would seek to depose him at the first opportunity and would rinse-repeat at every opportunity if he was re-elected due to the GOP's complete inability to pick one of its own.

If McCarthy won, the Freedom Caucus would quickly remember that they hated him and would seek to depose him at the first opportunity and would rinse-repeat at every opportunity if he was re-elected.

Yeah, it should be anonymous approval voting. Everyone votes for as many candidates as they want, but can only vote for any particular candidate once. Whoever gets the most votes wins. Anonymous voting lets people vote their conscience without fear of reprisal or reward.

ETA: Oh, and no vote to remove followed by another vote for the replacement. Just one ballot to switch Speakers if needed.

BobTheCoward · 6th January 2023, 09:49 AM

While silly, none of this has mattered. There really isn't something pressing to be done. Humor but not newsworthy

Segnosaur · 6th January 2023, 10:06 AM

Originally Posted by Susheel

Are any of the Dems under the illusion that whichever Repugnican ultimately gets selected...one might be better than the other? Ultimately whoever is going to get elected is going to go all-in on obstructionism and calling for impeachments on every Dem and their granddad.

There are a couple that might be marginally better than McCarthy or other possible picks. (A few who have spoken against Trump, even if they failed to impeach, and have policies slightly to the left of the fascist core of the Republican party).

But if McCarthy (a man who publicly grovelled to Trump) isn't acceptable to the nutcases in the freedom caucus, I doubt any "moderates" would be.

Sent from my moto e using Tapatalk

Lukraak_Sisser · 6th January 2023, 10:12 AM

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

While silly, none of this has mattered. There really isn't something pressing to be done. Humor but not newsworthy

Exactly, it's not as if these are people elected to run a country or something.

Armitage72 · 6th January 2023, 10:18 AM

Originally Posted by Pixel42

It fits that popular definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

That's also the definition of practice, so they might eventually get it right.

lobosrul5 · 6th January 2023, 10:20 AM

Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser

Exactly, it's not as if these are people elected to run a country or something.

I don't understand why they are being paid, given benefits, or being given a stipend etc... hell even Gaetz had a semi-good point... why is McCarthy already in the Speakers office??? They aren't representatives yet, they are still representatives-elect.

And, how did they hold a vote to remove the metal detectors???

ETA: vote #12 has begun.

acbytesla · 6th January 2023, 10:21 AM

Originally Posted by Tero

The house rules about the speaker need to be fixed. This is ridiculous. It has worked 100 years but now there will be more of these insurrectionist congresssmen/women. So the simple solution is to put up nominees, vote. Then go to a second round with the top two. The one that gets the most votes, even by 1, is speaker.

The answer is simple and it's not fixing the rules. It is ten moderate Republicans making a deal with the Democrats and choosing a moderate Republican to be Speaker.

I'm troubled and not troubled by the present **** show. I don't want McCarthy as Speaker and I don't want any of the wingnuts in charge either. So I'd rather they do this than run a show trial about Hunter Biden's laptop.

Segnosaur · 6th January 2023, 10:27 AM

Originally Posted by Craig4

If the Dems start voting present, I don't think it will be that bad. Kev will know they won't do it a second time. If the Dems do it, they get Kevin out of the deal to allow one member to call for a vote to remove the speaker. If McCarthy breaks the deal with the Dems, they have the votes to call for a new speaker and the never Kevins will join them.

Seems rather risky to me.

It assumes that the republicans won't put in some rules after the speaker is selected to prevent that sort of thing (like a rule that "You can only toss out a speaker if a majority of republicans agree"). And even if they didn't do that, it also assumes the anti-McCarthy faction will vote with the commie liberal hippy democrats when there is an explicit vote where they actually have to vote WITH the democrats.

Quote:

It is possible to get a consensus candidate as speaker. A few hours north of Washington DC, the Pennsylvania House just elected a consensus speaker backed by a bipartisan coalition.

Probably a bit easier to do it at the state level, where the politics is a bit more homogenized and there is less publicity.

I am sure there are wingnuts in Pennsylvania, as well as a certain rural/urban divide, but not as extreme as it is federally where you have "Liberal" states like California and backwards states like Wyoming, and the backwards states have more political influence per-capita. Plus, any politician in Pennsylvania who opposed the pick probably won't get invited onto network cable news, as opposed to people like Gaetz, who can use all this as a fundraising tool by appearing on Fox news.

Segnosaur · 6th January 2023, 10:29 AM

Can we assume that this is just a false promise?

From: Huff Post
Rep. Matt Gaetz threatened to quit Congress Thursday if House Republicans make a deal with Democrats to elect a GOP speaker...

acbytesla · 6th January 2023, 10:55 AM

Originally Posted by Segnosaur

Can we assume that this is just a false promise?

From: Huff Post
Rep. Matt Gaetz threatened to quit Congress Thursday if House Republicans make a deal with Democrats to elect a GOP speaker...

Simple answer is yes.

Gaetz is not going to get a better gig elsewhere. "Hey, if these guys negotiate a
deal that would make me almost irrelevant, I'm going to make myself entirely irrelevant."

lobosrul5 · 6th January 2023, 10:57 AM

Originally Posted by acbytesla

Simple answer is yes.

Gaetz is not going to get a better gig elsewhere. "Hey, if these guys negotiate a
deal that would make me almost irrelevant, I'm going to make myself entirely irrelevant.

I mean... unless he gets a Fox News/NewsMax talking heads show or some such.

Trebuchet · 6th January 2023, 11:00 AM

And he (Gaetz) might need to stay in Congress to avoid being arrested!

The Don · 6th January 2023, 11:10 AM

Some of the "rebels" have now voted McCarthy on the 12th vote but not enough for victory.

Wonder what concessions they were able to extract.

TragicMonkey · 6th January 2023, 11:22 AM

So suppose McCarthy agrees to do X in exchange for support for the vote. What is stopping him from reneging on all promises afterward? Is there an enforcement mechanism? Can they withdraw support after the fact and undo the election?

smartcooky · 6th January 2023, 11:26 AM

Failed again

McCarthy 213
Jordan 4
Hern 3
Jeffries 211

Three votes to come and one of those will go to Jeffries

acbytesla · 6th January 2023, 11:30 AM

Originally Posted by Craig4

If the Dems start voting present, I don't think it will be that bad. Kev will know they won't do it a second time. If the Dems do it, they get Kevin out of the deal to allow one member to call for a vote to remove the speaker. If McCarthy breaks the deal with the Dems, they have the votes to call for a new speaker and the never Kevins will join them.

It is possible to get a consensus candidate as speaker. A few hours north of Washington DC, the Pennsylvania House just elected a consensus speaker backed by a bipartisan coalition. https://www.inquirer.com/politics/pe...-20230103.html

No offense, but I'm not a fan of this tactic of the Dems just voting present without a deal.

I think the Democrats are handling this the best way that they can which is to stay united and wait for a deal come to them even if it is unlikely. The Dems can not and should not solve the Republicans' problems without a tangible benefit to them.

smartcooky · 6th January 2023, 11:43 AM

Originally Posted by Random

Yeah, it should be anonymous approval voting. Everyone votes for as many candidates as they want, but can only vote for any particular candidate once. Whoever gets the most votes wins. Anonymous voting lets people vote their conscience without fear of reprisal or reward.

ETA: Oh, and no vote to remove followed by another vote for the replacement. Just one ballot to switch Speakers if needed.

Originally Posted by Tero

The house rules about the speaker need to be fixed. This is ridiculous. It has worked 100 years but now there will be more of these insurrectionist congresssmen/women. So the simple solution is to put up nominees, vote. Then go to a second round with the top two. The one that gets the most votes, even by 1, is speaker.

Originally Posted by psionl0

If the house is going to make a rule that it takes 218 votes to elect a speaker then anybody with half a brain is going to ask, "What if we can't get 218 votes?".

And it has happened before:

https://www.insideedition.com/us-hou...s-matters-what

These are just solutions in search of a problem, born of an alarmist view of the proceedings. The current system has functioned adequately for 234 years and in that time it has had three failures.... that is a 98.72% success rate.

Even better, on the three occasions it has failed, 1859, 1923 and 2023, it has exposed to the public, fractures and divisions in one party or the other, during controversial times of trouble. That is doing a good service for open government and public accountability.

This system ain't broken. It doesn't need fixing

acbytesla · 6th January 2023, 11:56 AM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

These are just solutions in search of a problem, born of an alarmist view of the proceedings. The current system has functioned adequately for 234 years and in that time it has had three failures.... that is a 98.72% success rate.

Even better, on the three occasions it has failed, 1859, 1923 and 2023, it has exposed to the public, fractures and divisions in one party or the other, during controversial times of trouble. That is doing a good service for open government and public accountability.

This system ain't broken. It doesn't need fixing

I mostly agree. Eventually a deal will be made. Whether it is a deal between the Never Kevins and the rest of the GOP, or another kind of deal maybe including the Democrats. But this problem will eventually be solved.

BobTheCoward · 6th January 2023, 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

These are just solutions in search of a problem, born of an alarmist view of the proceedings. The current system has functioned adequately for 234 years and in that time it has had three failures.... that is a 98.72% success rate.

Even better, on the three occasions it has failed, 1859, 1923 and 2023, it has exposed to the public, fractures and divisions in one party or the other, during controversial times of trouble. That is doing a good service for open government and public accountability.

This system ain't broken. It doesn't need fixing

There just isn't any pressing business right now. It is hard to call it a failure when they really have nothing better to do.

Random · 6th January 2023, 12:13 PM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

These are just solutions in search of a problem, born of an alarmist view of the proceedings. The current system has functioned adequately for 234 years and in that time it has had three failures.... that is a 98.72% success rate.

Even better, on the three occasions it has failed, 1859, 1923 and 2023, it has exposed to the public, fractures and divisions in one party or the other, during controversial times of trouble. That is doing a good service for open government and public accountability.

This system ain't broken. It doesn't need fixing

97.45% success rate. The Speaker of the House is selected every other year, so this is the 118th Congress, not the 234th.

But yeah, it's good enough I guess. I just really like Approval Voting systems.

Tero · 6th January 2023, 12:16 PM

Originally Posted by acbytesla

The answer is simple and it's not fixing the rules. It is ten moderate Republicans making a deal with the Democrats and choosing a moderate Republican to be Speaker.

I'm troubled and not troubled by the present **** show. I don't want McCarthy as Speaker and I don't want any of the wingnuts in charge either. So I'd rather they do this than run a show trial about Hunter Biden's laptop.

Jim Jordan will be on some committee for sure and there may be one other insurrectionist. I think Hunter Biden's laptop will need to interrogated for sure. Maybe install some AI so it can answer in speech.

Suddenly · 6th January 2023, 12:39 PM

Originally Posted by acbytesla

No offense, but I'm not a fan of this tactic of the Dems just voting present without a deal.

I think the Democrats are handling this the best way that they can which is to stay united and wait for a deal come to them even if it is unlikely. The Dems can not and should not solve the Republicans' problems without a tangible benefit to them.

How could the Democrats possibly enforce a deal? Counting on any sort of GOP good faith would be political malpractice.

I agree this is the way to go, but not so much for the deal as much as to force a transformative political crisis. It's coming one way or another and at some point what moderates there might be in the GOP are going to have to come to grips that they have to change parties. Moderate democrats will be happy to abandon progressives to form a mildly socially liberal pro-corporate party which would for now have a hammerlock on power. It would take a few cycles for any sort of viable opposition party to form.

This episode might not cause that, but it will make it clearer that it's inevitable.

dudalb · 6th January 2023, 01:00 PM

Get ser for the House to cause the US to defualt and crash the economy in a couple of months........

dudalb · 6th January 2023, 01:02 PM

GOP moderates are concerned about some of McCarthy's concessions.'
If the Dems were smart they would reach out to them. but I am not sure the Dems will do that. They have their own version of the Freedom Caucus...as much as some here will deny that..who will look at any approach to a GOP member as an act of treason.

dudalb · 6th January 2023, 01:06 PM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

These are just solutions in search of a problem, born of an alarmist view of the proceedings. The current system has functioned adequately for 234 years and in that time it has had three failures.... that is a 98.72% success rate.

Even better, on the three occasions it has failed, 1859, 1923 and 2023, it has exposed to the public, fractures and divisions in one party or the other, during controversial times of trouble. That is doing a good service for open government and public accountability.

This system ain't broken. It doesn't need fixing

If the voters mess up and put idiots in office, no system is going to to work.
I do have a problem that many people here are looking for a mechanical solution, not getting that voters messing up is something you can only do so much about
SOme problems really don't have a neat, rational solution. The rules you use for the physical sciences just don;t work where human beings and their emotions are involved.

Lukraak_Sisser · 6th January 2023, 01:16 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

If the voters mess up and put idiots in office, no system is going to to work.
I do have a problem that many people here are looking for a mechanical solution, not getting that voters messing up is something you can only do so much about
SOme problems really don't have a neat, rational solution. The rules you use for the physical sciences just don;t work where human beings and their emotions are involved.

To be fair, a LOT of US policies seem to work on a form of gentlemen's agreement and the GOP has shown an utter willingness to trash all those agreements the moment it's convenient for them (tax returns, not using the white house to campaign, not appointing judges on your way out etc etc).
Perhaps it IS time for the US to put all those agreements in law to prevent such abuse from happening again.

Norman Alexander · 6th January 2023, 01:19 PM

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

So suppose McCarthy agrees to do X in exchange for support for the vote. What is stopping him from reneging on all promises afterward? Is there an enforcement mechanism? Can they withdraw support after the fact and undo the election?

There is no official enforcement mechanism or rules that cannot be discarded or ignored if you want to. Just ask Trump, their mentor on this.

I suspect that is exactly the ploy happening here: Promise the idiots whatever they want so you can win. Then ditch them like they never existed. Plum positions? Committee assignments? You guys?? Nup.

acbytesla · 6th January 2023, 01:20 PM

Originally Posted by Suddenly

How could the Democrats possibly enforce a deal? Counting on any sort of GOP good faith would be political malpractice.

I agree this is the way to go, but not so much for the deal as much as to force a transformative political crisis. It's coming one way or another and at some point what moderates there might be in the GOP are going to have to come to grips that they have to change parties. Moderate democrats will be happy to abandon progressives to form a mildly socially liberal pro-corporate party which would for now have a hammerlock on power. It would take a few cycles for any sort of viable opposition party to form.

This episode might not cause that, but it will make it clearer that it's inevitable.

They would have to have partners they can trust. There may not be a lot left in the GOP, but there are some.

Garrison · 6th January 2023, 01:29 PM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

These are just solutions in search of a problem, born of an alarmist view of the proceedings. The current system has functioned adequately for 234 years and in that time it has had three failures.... that is a 98.72% success rate.

Even better, on the three occasions it has failed, 1859, 1923 and 2023, it has exposed to the public, fractures and divisions in one party or the other, during controversial times of trouble. That is doing a good service for open government and public accountability.

This system ain't broken. It doesn't need fixing

If this were singular glitch in the system that view would make sense, but it seems to be part of a pattern of the norms of US government breaking down over at least the last decade. The Republicans have consistently chosen to break the system whenever it suited them and now this dysfunction is approaching maximum where they are turning on one another.

dudalb · 6th January 2023, 01:41 PM

Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser

To be fair, a LOT of US policies seem to work on a form of gentlemen's agreement and the GOP has shown an utter willingness to trash all those agreements the moment it's convenient for them (tax returns, not using the white house to campaign, not appointing judges on your way out etc etc).
Perhaps it IS time for the US to put all those agreements in law to prevent such abuse from happening again.

Problem is a lot of those agreements CAN't easily be put into law.
And that the fallacy I am talking about, the "There OUtta Be a Law" fallacy.

dudalb · 6th January 2023, 01:41 PM

Originally Posted by Garrison

If this were singular glitch in the system that view would make sense, but it seems to be part of a pattern of the norms of US government breaking down over at least the last decade. The Republicans have consistently chosen to break the system whenever it suited them and now this dysfunction is approaching maximum where they are turning on one another.

The monster always turns on it's creator in the end.

Suddenly · 6th January 2023, 01:46 PM

Originally Posted by acbytesla

They would have to have partners they can trust. There may not be a lot left in the GOP, but there are some.

Maybe, but if that were true they'd be dealing to permanently cross the aisle.

That's the deal the moderate Democrats make. They offer inducements to those willing to jump the sinking GOP ship. The Democrats have far more credibility in living up to this. It's basically a moderate Democrat wet dream. They get power and more leverage to ignore progressives that make their donors nervous.

If they make a deal that leaves the GOP in power the GOP won't deliver and maybe the Dems get 5% of what was promised and then take a victory lap like this is an accomplishment.

acbytesla · 6th January 2023, 01:53 PM

Originally Posted by Suddenly

Maybe, but if that were true they'd be dealing to permanently cross the aisle.

That's the deal the moderate Democrats make. They offer inducements to those willing to jump the sinking GOP ship. The Democrats have far more credibility in living up to this. It's basically a moderate Democrat wet dream. They get power and more leverage to ignore progressives that make their donors nervous.

If they make a deal that leaves the GOP in power the GOP won't deliver and maybe the Dems get 5% of what was promised and then take a victory lap like this is an accomplishment.

This would basically lead to a coalition House of Representatives where Republicans and Democrats would have to work together. But I don't expect it to happen.

6th January 2023, 05:20 AM	#401
carlosy Muse Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 556	Are they going to have a ballot only on weekdays or the weekends too? I'll have to plan my schedule accordingly.
carlosy Muse Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 556

6th January 2023, 06:03 AM	#402
Tero Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: North American prairie Posts: 3,001	The house rules about the speaker need to be fixed. This is ridiculous. It has worked 100 years but now there will be more of these insurrectionist congresssmen/women. So the simple solution is to put up nominees, vote. Then go to a second round with the top two. The one that gets the most votes, even by 1, is speaker.
	__________________ Dominus vo-bisque'em Et cum spear a tu-tu, oh! Politics blog: https://esapolitics.blogspot.com/ Parody: http://karireport.blogspot.com/ Poll: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...proval-rating/

6th January 2023, 06:46 AM	#403
BobTheCoward Banned Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 22,789	Originally Posted by Tero The house rules about the speaker need to be fixed. This is ridiculous. It has worked 100 years but now there will be more of these insurrectionist congresssmen/women. So the simple solution is to put up nominees, vote. Then go to a second round with the top two. The one that gets the most votes, even by 1, is speaker. Why is this ridiculous? What is the problem?
BobTheCoward Banned Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 22,789

6th January 2023, 07:05 AM	#404
Pixel42 Schrödinger's cat Join Date: May 2004 Location: Malmesbury, UK Posts: 15,300	It fits that popular definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.
	__________________ "If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett

6th January 2023, 07:52 AM	#406
Tero Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: North American prairie Posts: 3,001	Originally Posted by BobTheCoward Why is this ridiculous? What is the problem? It results in minority rule. Any opponent of the candidates still gets to speak their mind in the process before the vote. Both votes. But since there are only two candidates in the final round, they only can speak against those two.
	__________________ Dominus vo-bisque'em Et cum spear a tu-tu, oh! Politics blog: https://esapolitics.blogspot.com/ Parody: http://karireport.blogspot.com/ Poll: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...proval-rating/

6th January 2023, 07:10 AM	#405
jadebox Master Poster Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: USA Posts: 2,440	Originally Posted by Pixel42 It fits that popular definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Sort of like Groundhog Day ... with just extremely minor changes each iteration. It is also the most absolutely boring thing that I have ever felt compelled to continue watching!

6th January 2023, 08:14 AM	#407
The Don Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Sir Fynwy Posts: 36,323	Originally Posted by Tero It results in minority rule. Any opponent of the candidates still gets to speak their mind in the process before the vote. Both votes. But since there are only two candidates in the final round, they only can speak against those two. psionl0 proposed a similar approach upthread. The problem is that if less than half of the House members are happy with the speaker then they will seek to depose her/him at the first opportunity. In the current situation it would result in either McCarthy or Jeffries becoming speaker, neither of which is the first choice of the Freedom Caucus. If Jeffries won, the GOP would seek to depose him at the first opportunity and would rinse-repeat at every opportunity if he was re-elected due to the GOP's complete inability to pick one of its own. If McCarthy won, the Freedom Caucus would quickly remember that they hated him and would seek to depose him at the first opportunity and would rinse-repeat at every opportunity if he was re-elected.

6th January 2023, 08:25 AM	#408
Random Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 3,567	Originally Posted by The Don psionl0 proposed a similar approach upthread. The problem is that if less than half of the House members are happy with the speaker then they will seek to depose her/him at the first opportunity. In the current situation it would result in either McCarthy or Jeffries becoming speaker, neither of which is the first choice of the Freedom Caucus. If Jeffries won, the GOP would seek to depose him at the first opportunity and would rinse-repeat at every opportunity if he was re-elected due to the GOP's complete inability to pick one of its own. If McCarthy won, the Freedom Caucus would quickly remember that they hated him and would seek to depose him at the first opportunity and would rinse-repeat at every opportunity if he was re-elected. Yeah, it should be anonymous approval voting. Everyone votes for as many candidates as they want, but can only vote for any particular candidate once. Whoever gets the most votes wins. Anonymous voting lets people vote their conscience without fear of reprisal or reward. ETA: Oh, and no vote to remove followed by another vote for the replacement. Just one ballot to switch Speakers if needed.
Random Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 3,567	__________________ The road to Fascism is paved with people saying, "You're overreacting!". Last edited by Random; 6th January 2023 at 08:28 AM.

6th January 2023, 09:49 AM	#409
BobTheCoward Banned Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 22,789	While silly, none of this has mattered. There really isn't something pressing to be done. Humor but not newsworthy
BobTheCoward Banned Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 22,789

6th January 2023, 10:06 AM	#410
Segnosaur Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Canada, eh? Posts: 19,656	Originally Posted by Susheel Are any of the Dems under the illusion that whichever Repugnican ultimately gets selected...one might be better than the other? Ultimately whoever is going to get elected is going to go all-in on obstructionism and calling for impeachments on every Dem and their granddad. There are a couple that might be marginally better than McCarthy or other possible picks. (A few who have spoken against Trump, even if they failed to impeach, and have policies slightly to the left of the fascist core of the Republican party). But if McCarthy (a man who publicly grovelled to Trump) isn't acceptable to the nutcases in the freedom caucus, I doubt any "moderates" would be. Sent from my moto e using Tapatalk
	__________________ Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer I'm Mary Poppins Y'all! - Yondu We are Groot - Groot

6th January 2023, 10:12 AM	#411
Lukraak_Sisser Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 4,874	Originally Posted by BobTheCoward While silly, none of this has mattered. There really isn't something pressing to be done. Humor but not newsworthy Exactly, it's not as if these are people elected to run a country or something.

6th January 2023, 10:18 AM	#412
Armitage72 Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Rochester, NY Posts: 7,651	Originally Posted by Pixel42 It fits that popular definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. That's also the definition of practice, so they might eventually get it right.

6th January 2023, 10:20 AM	#413
lobosrul5 Illuminator Join Date: Nov 2017 Posts: 4,419	Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser Exactly, it's not as if these are people elected to run a country or something. I don't understand why they are being paid, given benefits, or being given a stipend etc... hell even Gaetz had a semi-good point... why is McCarthy already in the Speakers office??? They aren't representatives yet, they are still representatives-elect. And, how did they hold a vote to remove the metal detectors??? ETA: vote #12 has begun.
lobosrul5 Illuminator Join Date: Nov 2017 Posts: 4,419	Last edited by lobosrul5; 6th January 2023 at 10:21 AM.

6th January 2023, 10:21 AM	#414
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 31,385	Originally Posted by Tero The house rules about the speaker need to be fixed. This is ridiculous. It has worked 100 years but now there will be more of these insurrectionist congresssmen/women. So the simple solution is to put up nominees, vote. Then go to a second round with the top two. The one that gets the most votes, even by 1, is speaker. The answer is simple and it's not fixing the rules. It is ten moderate Republicans making a deal with the Democrats and choosing a moderate Republican to be Speaker. I'm troubled and not troubled by the present **** show. I don't want McCarthy as Speaker and I don't want any of the wingnuts in charge either. So I'd rather they do this than run a show trial about Hunter Biden's laptop.
	__________________ Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. .

6th January 2023, 10:27 AM	#415
Segnosaur Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Canada, eh? Posts: 19,656	Originally Posted by Craig4 If the Dems start voting present, I don't think it will be that bad. Kev will know they won't do it a second time. If the Dems do it, they get Kevin out of the deal to allow one member to call for a vote to remove the speaker. If McCarthy breaks the deal with the Dems, they have the votes to call for a new speaker and the never Kevins will join them. Seems rather risky to me. It assumes that the republicans won't put in some rules after the speaker is selected to prevent that sort of thing (like a rule that "You can only toss out a speaker if a majority of republicans agree"). And even if they didn't do that, it also assumes the anti-McCarthy faction will vote with the commie liberal hippy democrats when there is an explicit vote where they actually have to vote WITH the democrats. Quote: It is possible to get a consensus candidate as speaker. A few hours north of Washington DC, the Pennsylvania House just elected a consensus speaker backed by a bipartisan coalition. Probably a bit easier to do it at the state level, where the politics is a bit more homogenized and there is less publicity. I am sure there are wingnuts in Pennsylvania, as well as a certain rural/urban divide, but not as extreme as it is federally where you have "Liberal" states like California and backwards states like Wyoming, and the backwards states have more political influence per-capita. Plus, any politician in Pennsylvania who opposed the pick probably won't get invited onto network cable news, as opposed to people like Gaetz, who can use all this as a fundraising tool by appearing on Fox news.
	__________________ Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer I'm Mary Poppins Y'all! - Yondu We are Groot - Groot Last edited by Segnosaur; 6th January 2023 at 10:30 AM.

6th January 2023, 10:29 AM	#416
Segnosaur Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Canada, eh? Posts: 19,656	Can we assume that this is just a false promise? From: Huff Post Rep. Matt Gaetz threatened to quit Congress Thursday if House Republicans make a deal with Democrats to elect a GOP speaker...
	__________________ Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer I'm Mary Poppins Y'all! - Yondu We are Groot - Groot

6th January 2023, 10:55 AM	#417
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 31,385	Originally Posted by Segnosaur Can we assume that this is just a false promise? From: Huff Post Rep. Matt Gaetz threatened to quit Congress Thursday if House Republicans make a deal with Democrats to elect a GOP speaker... Simple answer is yes. Gaetz is not going to get a better gig elsewhere. "Hey, if these guys negotiate a deal that would make me almost irrelevant, I'm going to make myself entirely irrelevant."
	__________________ Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. . Last edited by acbytesla; 6th January 2023 at 11:33 AM.

6th January 2023, 10:57 AM	#418
lobosrul5 Illuminator Join Date: Nov 2017 Posts: 4,419	Originally Posted by acbytesla Simple answer is yes. Gaetz is not going to get a better gig elsewhere. "Hey, if these guys negotiate a deal that would make me almost irrelevant, I'm going to make myself entirely irrelevant. I mean... unless he gets a Fox News/NewsMax talking heads show or some such.
lobosrul5 Illuminator Join Date: Nov 2017 Posts: 4,419

6th January 2023, 11:00 AM	#419
Trebuchet Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Port Townsend, Washington Posts: 35,974	And he (Gaetz) might need to stay in Congress to avoid being arrested!
	__________________ Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.

6th January 2023, 11:10 AM	#420
The Don Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Sir Fynwy Posts: 36,323	Some of the "rebels" have now voted McCarthy on the 12th vote but not enough for victory. Wonder what concessions they were able to extract.

6th January 2023, 11:22 AM	#421
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 65,256	So suppose McCarthy agrees to do X in exchange for support for the vote. What is stopping him from reneging on all promises afterward? Is there an enforcement mechanism? Can they withdraw support after the fact and undo the election?
	__________________ You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.

6th January 2023, 11:26 AM	#422
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 23,089	Failed again McCarthy 213 Jordan 4 Hern 3 Jeffries 211 Three votes to come and one of those will go to Jeffries
	__________________ What is Woke? It is a term that means "awakened to the needs of others". It means to be well-informed, thoughtful, compassionate, humble and kind. Woke people are keen to make the world a better, fairer place for everyone, But, unfortunately, it has also become a pejorative used by racists, homophobes and misogynists on the political right, to describe people who possess a fully functional moral compass. Last edited by smartcooky; 6th January 2023 at 11:27 AM.

6th January 2023, 11:30 AM	#423
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 31,385	Originally Posted by Craig4 If the Dems start voting present, I don't think it will be that bad. Kev will know they won't do it a second time. If the Dems do it, they get Kevin out of the deal to allow one member to call for a vote to remove the speaker. If McCarthy breaks the deal with the Dems, they have the votes to call for a new speaker and the never Kevins will join them. It is possible to get a consensus candidate as speaker. A few hours north of Washington DC, the Pennsylvania House just elected a consensus speaker backed by a bipartisan coalition. https://www.inquirer.com/politics/pe...-20230103.html No offense, but I'm not a fan of this tactic of the Dems just voting present without a deal. I think the Democrats are handling this the best way that they can which is to stay united and wait for a deal come to them even if it is unlikely. The Dems can not and should not solve the Republicans' problems without a tangible benefit to them.
	__________________ Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. .

6th January 2023, 11:43 AM	#424
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 23,089	Originally Posted by Random Yeah, it should be anonymous approval voting. Everyone votes for as many candidates as they want, but can only vote for any particular candidate once. Whoever gets the most votes wins. Anonymous voting lets people vote their conscience without fear of reprisal or reward. ETA: Oh, and no vote to remove followed by another vote for the replacement. Just one ballot to switch Speakers if needed. Originally Posted by Tero The house rules about the speaker need to be fixed. This is ridiculous. It has worked 100 years but now there will be more of these insurrectionist congresssmen/women. So the simple solution is to put up nominees, vote. Then go to a second round with the top two. The one that gets the most votes, even by 1, is speaker. Originally Posted by psionl0 If the house is going to make a rule that it takes 218 votes to elect a speaker then anybody with half a brain is going to ask, "What if we can't get 218 votes?". And it has happened before: https://www.insideedition.com/us-hou...s-matters-what These are just solutions in search of a problem, born of an alarmist view of the proceedings. The current system has functioned adequately for 234 years and in that time it has had three failures.... that is a 98.72% success rate. Even better, on the three occasions it has failed, 1859, 1923 and 2023, it has exposed to the public, fractures and divisions in one party or the other, during controversial times of trouble. That is doing a good service for open government and public accountability. This system ain't broken. It doesn't need fixing
	__________________ What is Woke? It is a term that means "awakened to the needs of others". It means to be well-informed, thoughtful, compassionate, humble and kind. Woke people are keen to make the world a better, fairer place for everyone, But, unfortunately, it has also become a pejorative used by racists, homophobes and misogynists on the political right, to describe people who possess a fully functional moral compass.

6th January 2023, 11:56 AM	#425
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 31,385	Originally Posted by smartcooky These are just solutions in search of a problem, born of an alarmist view of the proceedings. The current system has functioned adequately for 234 years and in that time it has had three failures.... that is a 98.72% success rate. Even better, on the three occasions it has failed, 1859, 1923 and 2023, it has exposed to the public, fractures and divisions in one party or the other, during controversial times of trouble. That is doing a good service for open government and public accountability. This system ain't broken. It doesn't need fixing I mostly agree. Eventually a deal will be made. Whether it is a deal between the Never Kevins and the rest of the GOP, or another kind of deal maybe including the Democrats. But this problem will eventually be solved.
	__________________ Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. .

6th January 2023, 12:05 PM	#426
BobTheCoward Banned Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 22,789	Originally Posted by smartcooky These are just solutions in search of a problem, born of an alarmist view of the proceedings. The current system has functioned adequately for 234 years and in that time it has had three failures.... that is a 98.72% success rate. Even better, on the three occasions it has failed, 1859, 1923 and 2023, it has exposed to the public, fractures and divisions in one party or the other, during controversial times of trouble. That is doing a good service for open government and public accountability. This system ain't broken. It doesn't need fixing There just isn't any pressing business right now. It is hard to call it a failure when they really have nothing better to do.
BobTheCoward Banned Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 22,789

6th January 2023, 12:13 PM	#427
Random Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 3,567	Originally Posted by smartcooky These are just solutions in search of a problem, born of an alarmist view of the proceedings. The current system has functioned adequately for 234 years and in that time it has had three failures.... that is a 98.72% success rate. Even better, on the three occasions it has failed, 1859, 1923 and 2023, it has exposed to the public, fractures and divisions in one party or the other, during controversial times of trouble. That is doing a good service for open government and public accountability. This system ain't broken. It doesn't need fixing 97.45% success rate. The Speaker of the House is selected every other year, so this is the 118th Congress, not the 234th. But yeah, it's good enough I guess. I just really like Approval Voting systems.
Random Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 3,567	__________________ The road to Fascism is paved with people saying, "You're overreacting!".

6th January 2023, 12:16 PM	#428
Tero Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: North American prairie Posts: 3,001	Originally Posted by acbytesla The answer is simple and it's not fixing the rules. It is ten moderate Republicans making a deal with the Democrats and choosing a moderate Republican to be Speaker. I'm troubled and not troubled by the present **** show. I don't want McCarthy as Speaker and I don't want any of the wingnuts in charge either. So I'd rather they do this than run a show trial about Hunter Biden's laptop. Jim Jordan will be on some committee for sure and there may be one other insurrectionist. I think Hunter Biden's laptop will need to interrogated for sure. Maybe install some AI so it can answer in speech.
	__________________ Dominus vo-bisque'em Et cum spear a tu-tu, oh! Politics blog: https://esapolitics.blogspot.com/ Parody: http://karireport.blogspot.com/ Poll: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...proval-rating/

6th January 2023, 12:39 PM	#429
Suddenly No Punting Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Not In Follansbee Posts: 5,444	Originally Posted by acbytesla No offense, but I'm not a fan of this tactic of the Dems just voting present without a deal. I think the Democrats are handling this the best way that they can which is to stay united and wait for a deal come to them even if it is unlikely. The Dems can not and should not solve the Republicans' problems without a tangible benefit to them. How could the Democrats possibly enforce a deal? Counting on any sort of GOP good faith would be political malpractice. I agree this is the way to go, but not so much for the deal as much as to force a transformative political crisis. It's coming one way or another and at some point what moderates there might be in the GOP are going to have to come to grips that they have to change parties. Moderate democrats will be happy to abandon progressives to form a mildly socially liberal pro-corporate party which would for now have a hammerlock on power. It would take a few cycles for any sort of viable opposition party to form. This episode might not cause that, but it will make it clearer that it's inevitable.

6th January 2023, 01:00 PM	#430
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 57,715	Get ser for the House to cause the US to defualt and crash the economy in a couple of months........
	__________________ Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein.

6th January 2023, 01:02 PM	#431
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 57,715	GOP moderates are concerned about some of McCarthy's concessions.' If the Dems were smart they would reach out to them. but I am not sure the Dems will do that. They have their own version of the Freedom Caucus...as much as some here will deny that..who will look at any approach to a GOP member as an act of treason.
	__________________ Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein.

6th January 2023, 01:06 PM	#432
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 57,715	Originally Posted by smartcooky These are just solutions in search of a problem, born of an alarmist view of the proceedings. The current system has functioned adequately for 234 years and in that time it has had three failures.... that is a 98.72% success rate. Even better, on the three occasions it has failed, 1859, 1923 and 2023, it has exposed to the public, fractures and divisions in one party or the other, during controversial times of trouble. That is doing a good service for open government and public accountability. This system ain't broken. It doesn't need fixing If the voters mess up and put idiots in office, no system is going to to work. I do have a problem that many people here are looking for a mechanical solution, not getting that voters messing up is something you can only do so much about SOme problems really don't have a neat, rational solution. The rules you use for the physical sciences just don;t work where human beings and their emotions are involved.
	__________________ Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein.

6th January 2023, 01:16 PM	#433
Lukraak_Sisser Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 4,874	Originally Posted by dudalb If the voters mess up and put idiots in office, no system is going to to work. I do have a problem that many people here are looking for a mechanical solution, not getting that voters messing up is something you can only do so much about SOme problems really don't have a neat, rational solution. The rules you use for the physical sciences just don;t work where human beings and their emotions are involved. To be fair, a LOT of US policies seem to work on a form of gentlemen's agreement and the GOP has shown an utter willingness to trash all those agreements the moment it's convenient for them (tax returns, not using the white house to campaign, not appointing judges on your way out etc etc). Perhaps it IS time for the US to put all those agreements in law to prevent such abuse from happening again.

6th January 2023, 01:19 PM	#434
Norman Alexander Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Dharug & Gundungurra Posts: 14,190	Originally Posted by TragicMonkey So suppose McCarthy agrees to do X in exchange for support for the vote. What is stopping him from reneging on all promises afterward? Is there an enforcement mechanism? Can they withdraw support after the fact and undo the election? There is no official enforcement mechanism or rules that cannot be discarded or ignored if you want to. Just ask Trump, their mentor on this. I suspect that is exactly the ploy happening here: Promise the idiots whatever they want so you can win. Then ditch them like they never existed. Plum positions? Committee assignments? You guys?? Nup.
	__________________ _{...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015}

6th January 2023, 01:20 PM	#435
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 31,385	Originally Posted by Suddenly How could the Democrats possibly enforce a deal? Counting on any sort of GOP good faith would be political malpractice. I agree this is the way to go, but not so much for the deal as much as to force a transformative political crisis. It's coming one way or another and at some point what moderates there might be in the GOP are going to have to come to grips that they have to change parties. Moderate democrats will be happy to abandon progressives to form a mildly socially liberal pro-corporate party which would for now have a hammerlock on power. It would take a few cycles for any sort of viable opposition party to form. This episode might not cause that, but it will make it clearer that it's inevitable. They would have to have partners they can trust. There may not be a lot left in the GOP, but there are some.
	__________________ Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. .