Kevin McCarthy’s fate on the line, House conservatives warn speaker’s election could take days

[Maj. Bill Martin]

If McCarthy had what it takes to be Speaker, he would have had all the votes he needed before the first ballot.

Then no Republican has what it takes to be Speaker because none of them had the votes to be Speaker before the first ballot.

[Hoodat]

I understand why conservatives in the House do not trust Kevin McCarthy, which really has more to do with the faithlessness of the GOP national leadership, than his own behavior.

No, it's his own behavior.  He stood at Paul Ryan's side each and every time Ryan gave Democrats everything they asked for, and then some.  He has already moved all of his things into the Speaker's office as it if was some sort of rite of passage.  And now he declares Conservatives to be Public Enemy #1.  This is 100% on McCarthy himself.

But this behavior is not going to get them anywhere. It is useless, harmful to the chances of getting anything done, and it is helping the Democrats.

Electing McCarthy is helping the Democrats.  Paul Ryan was the best Speaker they ever had.

[Mesaclone]

Sounds like a sound endorsement of the swamp.  Thanks for responding.

What you're doing is helping the swamp...so spare me the glib condescension.

Is Mark Levin a liberal? Sean Hannity? Tucker Carlson? Ron Desantis? President Trump? Jim Jordan? Ted Cruz? All of these staunch conservatives are calling for this dimwitted moralizing to end...because it is HURTING conservatism, not advancing it.

Quit being useful idiots of the Left...and of the swamp. There's a reason Chip Roy and Andy Biggs are not LOVED by the Dems.

[Bigun]

https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1610635935921893379

[Maj. Bill Martin]

I seen it coming long ago... But at least now it's out front. They ain't even a bit bashful about it.

Feel free to continue ignoring the actual point I made, and instead keep pretending that I'm against an actual balanced budget. 

[Hoodat]

Then no Republican has what it takes to be Speaker because none of them had the votes to be Speaker before the first ballot.

Uh, no.  Not a fair comparison.  McCarthy alone held the highest GOP Leadership position.  It is like saying Reagan didn't have what it takes to be President because he didn't win the Iowa Caucus.

[Mesaclone]

No, it's his own behavior.  He stood at Paul Ryan's side each and every time Ryan gave Democrats everything they asked for, and then some.  He has already moved all of his things into the Speaker's office as it if was some sort of rite of passage.  And now he declares Conservatives to be Public Enemy #1.  This is 100% on McCarthy himself.


Electing McCarthy is helping the Democrats.  Paul Ryan was the best Speaker they ever had.

Huh...than why did the Dems vote in Nancy Pelosi rather than bringing back Paul Ryan? Or perhaps what your claiming about McCarthy is just a stupid hyperbolic assertion given in hopes of justifying the tactics of idiocy.

[Hoodat]

Feel free to continue ignoring the actual point I made, and instead keep pretending that I'm against an actual balanced budget.

It's hard to make the case that you are in favor of a balanced budget when you support someone who is openly opposed to one.

[Hoodat]

Huh...than why did the Dems vote in Nancy Pelosi rather than bringing back Paul Ryan?

Power.  No point in settling for Democrat-lite when you can have a real Democrat.

[Hoodat]

I prefer Republicans who fight and lose over those who concede defeat without trying.

What whould The Alamo be if the Texans just surrendered to General Santa Ana?

It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat. Shame on the man of cultivated taste who permits refinement to develop into fastidiousness that unfits him for doing the rough work of a workaday world.

-Theodore Roosevelt-

[roamer_1]

Feel free to continue ignoring the actual point I made, and instead keep pretending that I'm against an actual balanced budget.

Well, from @catfish1957 :

2. Bring up Balanced Budget provisons up from committe for review, and conferencing.

https://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,488463.msg2762576.html#msg2762576

To which you replied:

I find the first two to be unreasonable.  Don't know enough about the third.

https://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,488463.msg2762919.html#msg2762919

That seems pretty self-explanatory. 

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Thanks for a carefully thought out response......  My take, howerver is much much different.

First Term limits-  It is no secret that the Republic has suffered from career politicians for for up 40 years line their pockets with graft, influence money, and entrenched entitlement.  100's of years ago, we had politicians who though there for their own benefit, at least had the nation's best interest at hand.  Now that is not the case.  know it would take a constitutional amendment to implement, but there has to be a first step some where.

But this isn't even a first step.  It's just blatant pandering that Gaetz already knows with 100% certainty will fail.

A constitutional amendment requires a two-thirds vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate.  We have a razor-thin (at best) margin in the House, the Democrats control the Senate, and we don't have a Republican President with the bully pulpit to apply pressure.  It has absolutely zero chance of passing even the House with the required margin.  And yet, THAT is the issue that Gaetz apparently has chosen as his red line.

How much of a non-substantive, performative clownshow is that?  If he was going to the mat over something like raising the debt ceiling, or more money for the border, or at least something that had even a small chance of success, that would be different.  But for the sake of getting purely symbolic votes on issues he knows will never even make it out of the House, he's handing Democrats the 2024 theme that Republicans are not even capable of governing themselves, much less the country.

I'd love to see Congress pass a Balanced Budget Amendment (even though it would never make it through the states), but trying it when you actually have a majority in the House and Senate makes a hell of a lot more sense.  But it is simply ridiculous to hand the Democrats a ready-made example of Republican incompetence for the sake of purely performative votes you know ahead of time that you are going to lose.

What I'd like to see even more than a Balanced Budget Amendment in Congress is moving entitlement programs to the state level.  Because states do have balanced budget requirements, so you'd get the impact of a Balanced Budget Amendment without having to meet the impossible standard of 38 states ratifying it.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Well, from @catfish1957 :https://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,488463.msg2762576.html#msg2762576

To which you replied:https://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,488463.msg2762919.html#msg2762919

That seems pretty self-explanatory. 

For some reason, you seem to equate holding a meaningless vote in the House on a balanced budget amendment that is 100% certain to fall short of the 2/3rds required threshold with actually having a Balanced Budget Amendment added to the Constitution.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat. Shame on the man of cultivated taste who permits refinement to develop into fastidiousness that unfits him for doing the rough work of a workaday world.

-Theodore Roosevelt-

We're not talking "deeds" or "striving".  We're talking about hurting the GOP's chances to win more seats in 2024 for the sake of a vote that you know ahead of time you will lose.

[Hoodat]

For some reason, you seem to equate holding a meaningless vote in the House on a balanced budget amendment that is 100% certain to fall short of the 2/3rds required threshold with actually having a Balanced Budget Amendment added to the Constitution.

Something so "meaningless".  Yet McCarthy couldn't go along with it?  THAT is stupidity.  McCarthy had the choice to give up something "meaningless" to become Speaker, yet chose not to.  Amazing.  Looks like Establishment principles matter more than political expediency.

[Hoodat]

We're not talking "deeds" or "striving".  We're talking about hurting the GOP's chances to win more seats in 2024 for the sake of a vote that you know ahead of time you will lose.

Are you freaking kidding me?  It is this exact mentality perpetrated by McCarthy right now that cost us the House and Senate in 2018.  Win more seats in 2024?  With more anti-Conservative Democrat-lite?  Give me a break.

[Mesaclone]

Power.  No point in settling for Democrat-lite when you can have a real Democrat.

As I said, if you think McCarthy and Pelosi agree on policy issues....there's a box of rocks on my desk that can outthink you. Most likely, you're simply saying it because you can't justify your position without making that kind of absurd hyperbolic assertion...but on the off chance you actually believe it...wow.

[Hoodat]

As I said, if you think McCarthy and Pelosi agree on policy issues....there's a box of rocks on my desk that can outthink you. Most likely, you're simply saying it because you can't justify your position without making that kind of absurd hyperbolic assertion...but on the off chance you actually believe it...wow.

Policy issues?  No.  But when it comes to getting Pelosi policy passed, McCarthy does nothing to stop it.  Nothing.  Zero.  Zip.  Nada.  The recent $1.7 trillion spending package is a prime example.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Huh...than why did the Dems vote in Nancy Pelosi rather than bringing back Paul Ryan? Or perhaps what your claiming about McCarthy is just a stupid hyperbolic assertion given in hopes of justifying the tactics of idiocy.

Ryan rammed through the evisceration of ObamaCare.  If not for McCain's personal pettiness towards Trump (and arguably vice-versa as well), it would have been gutted.

[Hoodat]

Ryan rammed through the evisceration of ObamaCare.

The evisceration?  Lies make Jesus cry.  The ONLY thing that got changed was the penalty for not having health insurance.  Meanwhile, the taxpayer continues to be on the hook for 'Free health insurance' for a continually growing percentage of the population.

[Mesaclone]

Policy issues?  No.  But when it comes to getting Pelosi policy passed, McCarthy does nothing to stop it.  Nothing.  Zero.  Zip.  Nada.  The recent $1.7 trillion spending package is a prime example.

There WAS nothing McCarthy could do to stop it. Zip. Zero. Nada. Unlike the GOP, the Dems...despite internal disagreement...are smart enough to vote along party lines when they need to. Which means no GOP house leader had ANY power to stop the 1.7 trillion dollar package.

You're flailing at windmills and destroying Conservatives chances in 2024...we are going to lose the House and the Presidency because of this stupidity.

What citizen in their right mind would vote for the GOP after the fiasco these 19 idiots are pulling? 

We have a caucus. The caucus votes for a Speaker. Whoever gets the majority within the caucus, all Republicans vote for in the larger House vote. That's the ONLY formula that doesn't make everyone of us look like dip$hit morons. If 20 idiots on the right of the party won't do that...or 20 idiots on the left ofthe party won't do that...the Dems win. So congrats, you've handed the Dems a huge win here.

[Free Vulcan]

McCarthy has now lost FIVE votes. He can't get it done, time to step off.

[DefiantMassRINO]

McCarthy lost another vote in this 5th round after Trump sent out a a message of support.

[Hoodat]

There WAS nothing McCarthy could do to stop it. Zip. Zero. Nada. Unlike the GOP, the Dems...despite internal disagreement...are smart enough to vote along party lines when they need to. Which means no GOP house leader had ANY power to stop the 1.7 trillion dollar package.

A spending bill which originated in the US Senate in violation of the Constitution of the United States of America, and there was nothing McCarthy could do to stop it?  I prefer a Speaker who is willing to fight.

[Hoodat]

McCarthy has now lost FIVE votes. He can't get it done, time to step off.

Just as his supporters have argued that there was nothing McCarthy could do to stop Democrats, it is clear now that he is equally impotent when it comes to Republicans.