• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

I think, with huge reservations, that the Democrats should support Steve Scalise for Speaker

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
Not anymore! Republicans chose Jordan. I cannot see the possibility of a single Democrat getting on board with that, so unless Jordan can garner very nearly every Republican vote (and remember, he lost to Scalise), there's no way.

My opinion, Jim Jordan would be a thoroughly horrible Speaker.
Yes, and yes.

It will be interesting to see how many so-called moderate Republicans will demonstrate the capacity to stomach Jordan and how this will reverberate in 2024.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
The Democrats have just made perfectly clear that there will not be a single vote from their side for Jordan. Therefore, he must have 217 votes out of the 221 available. If a mere 5 Republicans can't stomach him (and there have been quite a few who have made their distaste quite public), then it ain't gonna by him!
 

fantome profane

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice
Premium Member
So Jimmy just lost the second vote for speaker. I think is it very unlikely that he will succeed if he goes for a third try, or a 15th try.

Seems more likely Patrick will be bangin that gavel a while longer.
 

beenherebeforeagain

Rogue Animist
Premium Member
What the Dems ought to have done, before the most recent vote was closed, was to all switch their votes to McCarthy, who had 5 votes...he would have been elected speaker again with 217 votes...but would be entirely beholden to the Dems for his return to office...

Just daydreaming about the Republican chaos that would have ensued from that...:D
 

Copernicus

Industrial Strength Linguist
22 Republicans voted against Jordan in the second round, as opposed to 20 in the first. Jordan actually picked up two votes from those who voted against him in the first round, but he lost four votes from those who had voted for him. The math for going forward isn't working in his favor.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
I think it's time for the House to pass a bill to give Speaker-Pro-Tem Patrick McHenry sufficient authority to move bills forward, and to put the search for a new speaker into abeyance. Ninety days ought to be enough. Then at least important stuff could be dealt with, but the more political issues wouldn't likely be brought to the floor. I think sufficient numbers on both sides of the floor might vote in favour of that.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
The fascinating thing here, if you think about it, is what can it mean to "have a majority in the House," if that majority can't agree among themselves and the minority votes as one? In this instance, for example, if just 5 Republicans had voted "present," Hakeem Jeffries would be Speaker!
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Well, the Republicans -- who really, really want to responsibly govern the nation (so they say) -- can't seem to rally around anyone of their number as Speaker. And now, it appears, they won't accept a temporary solution of letting the respected Patrick McHenry to hold the actual power of the gavel for just a couple of short months. Which means, they're more content with nobody at all governing, in a time of great stress at home and abroad.

And these are the guys so many Americans think should run the nation? Then I'll say it in a way you'll understand -- God help you! And thus, sadly, the rest of us.
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
And these are the guys so many Americans think should run the nation?

As for the GOP cohort:

Far-right House Republican Congressman Matt Rosendale of Montana, one of the eight who voted to oust Speaker Kevin McCarthy, is claiming Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan is the “second most popular Republican” in America, next to Donald Trump. [source]​

while:

Several House Republicans who have voted against Rep. Jim Jordan for speaker are seething after threats have been made against them, their offices or even their spouses -- including one that a lawmaker called a "credible death threat." [source]​
America should not be defined by the comments of one Republican congressman or a handful of pro Trump thugs. But it may very well be defined by the the results of our next election. What concerns me the most is not America's noxious right-wing, but it's "they're all the same" crowd.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Yes, Scalise is quite far right -- but he is at least a man who thinks and acts with some deliberation. That's important. Jim Jordan would be absolutely hopeless at trying to unite the Republican conference, and that will be crucial to going forward. In other words, Scalise is an unpleasant choice, but Jordan is freaking scary. Yet sometimes it is necessary to choose the lesser of evils in order to avoid falling into the abyss.

Yet, news seems to suggest that McCarthy allies are working quietly against Scalise. I'm not clear on why.

Jim Jordan, on the other hand, was very definitely a player in January 6. Cassidy Hutchinson has testified he was privy to all of what was going on that day, and that later he worked feverishly to "stop the steal," making entirely baseless claims of election fraud. That would definitely seem to suggest that he is as disinterested in preserving American democracy as Trump is.

So, since the Democrats will never be able to get someone of their own choosing to clutch the gavel, they might be wise to support a nose-holder who will at least keep democracy alive.
That is one line of thought. A reasonable one.

Another might be that the Republicans should be allowed to go through their own contradictions and learn whatever they can from that, and it would be a mistake for the Democrats to get involved in that matter.

Both have serious dangers and potential benefits. Among other things, we should consider what they might bring down to the abyss with them.
 
Last edited:

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
Well, the Republicans -- who really, really want to responsibly govern the nation (so they say) -- can't seem to rally around anyone of their number as Speaker.
They're currently caucusing around that very question: "Should we try a fourth vote to install Jordan, or try another candidate?"

Dan Meuser is cautiously testing the waters. I'm not a fan.
 
Top