Byron Donalds Press Release

[bilo]

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2023/10/21/06/76829015-12656031-The_politician_44_who_endorsed_Donald_Trump_s_2024_White_House_b-a-1_1697866768236.jpg

[bilo]

I think he would be a great Speaker. He's articulate, conservative, and quick on his feet.

Probably not a chance in the world, since the Establishment Loyalists are so hell bent on ignoring the base of the party that elected them.

[Hoodat]

My best gauge so far on who would be best for the position would have been the person the Democrats showed the most contempt for.  Jordan was that guy.

At this point, I will take anyone who has no connection to McCarthy.

[Free Vulcan]

I like his style. He's green but he'll learn.

[libertybele]

I like his style. He's green but he'll learn.

He will make an excellent Speaker of the House.  I have no doubts.

[bilo]

My best gauge so far on who would be best for the position would have been the person the Democrats showed the most contempt for.  Jordan was that guy.

At this point, I will take anyone who has no connection to McCarthy.

I am right there with you!

I think the Pub party is misreading how deeply the base wants real change. The Treasury released the fiscal year data. Revenue came in below expectations at 4.4 Trillion and the reported deficit is 1.7 Trillion. However, the deficit is much higher because they aren't reporting all expenditures. The whole battle over the Speaker is about the budget process and trying to instill some restrain.

[bilo]

I like his style. He's green but he'll learn.

A breath of fresh air!

The old guard has failed us, instead of gaining wisdom over time they became corrupt and stopped representing their constituents and began to only focus on themselves.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

The whole battle over the Speaker is about the budget process and trying to instill some restrain.

The Speaker will make little or no difference on that.  Never did.

The real issue you have is with all the GOP members of the House who are not conservative, and who will not support a long shutdown.   Who the Speaker is doesn't change how they vote.

[Hoodat]

The Speaker will make little or no difference on that.  Never did.

The real issue you have is with all the GOP members of the House who are not conservative, and who will not support a long shutdown.   Who the Speaker is doesn't change how they vote.

There wouldn't have to be a shutdown if we had a Speaker willing to work towards fulfilling his promises instead of giving everyone an entire month off as the deadline approaches.  It would be so refreshing to have a Republican Speaker working for Republican voters instead of working for Democrat politicians.

[bilo]

The Speaker will make little or no difference on that.  Never did.

The real issue you have is with all the GOP members of the House who are not conservative, and who will not support a long shutdown.   Who the Speaker is doesn't change how they vote.

At some point posters with this view have to stop denying what is the cause of the current situation.

McCarthy agreed to follow the law and have 12 appropriation bills voted on in open debate on the House floor. McCarthy through action and inaction sidestepped that agreement and was voted out as Speaker.

Now we see that at least half of the Pub reps are in fact Establishment Loyalists and do not want to live up to the commitments they made to their constituents.

So next year we can anticipate that some of these Pub Establishment Loyalists will have unanticipated tough primaries and may lose in a general election since the base now has definitive proof they don't represent them. All because the idea of introducing accountability and some fiscal restrain is abhorrent to them.

BTW, the official defecit is 1.7 Trillion. The actual number is higher because the Treasury is not reporting all expenditures.

[bilo]

There wouldn't have to be a shutdown if we had a Speaker willing to work towards fulfilling his promises instead of giving everyone an entire month off as the deadline approaches.  It would be so refreshing to have a Republican Speaker working for Republican voters instead of working for Democrat politicians.

Spot on!

 

This crisis in govt has been building since the TEA Party movement began, if not earlier. Eventually the law of big numbers is going to force real change. We at least are trying to avoid the day where the most draconian measures will have to be taken.

[libertybele]

The Speaker will make little or no difference on that.  Never did.

The real issue you have is with all the GOP members of the House who are not conservative, and who will not support a long shutdown.   Who the Speaker is doesn't change how they vote.

Perhaps those that want a particular committee may be persuaded to vote a certain way?

[Maj. Bill Martin]

At some point posters with this view have to stop denying what is the cause of the current situation.

McCarthy agreed to follow the law and have 12 appropriation bills voted on in open debate on the House floor. McCarthy through action and inaction sidestepped that agreement and was voted out as Speaker.

No, he did not.  That was and is beyond his sole power anyway.  The bills have to be agreed on and approved by committees first - and he sits on none of them - and they did not make it out of committee because the Republicans who sit on those committees could not agree on the numbers.  Not a damn thing McCarthy could do about that.

I'd also point out that one of the other promises allegedly made by McCarthy was to:
"create a plan for a balanced federal budget within 10 years, including “long-term reforms” to mandatory spending programs (entitlements like Medicare, Social Security, and Medicaid),

Which of course meant that McCarthy was bound to push entitlement cuts expressly condemned by Trump and his supporters.

Those promises was set-up for failure from the start, to which McCarthy had no choice to agree.  So screw them.

Now we see that at least half of the Pub reps are in fact Establishment Loyalists and do not want to live up to the commitments they made to their constituents.

I don't buy that for one second.  Gaetz, Rosendale, and for that matter most GOP voters, already knew where the caucus stood long before this happened.  We didn't learn squat.   Where we are now is unquestionable a worse position than if Gaetz and Co. would have just kept their yappers shut.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Perhaps those that want a particular committee may be persuaded to vote a certain way?

Committee assignments were made in January.  And as you may or may not remember, one of the demands made by Gaetz and Co. was that the Speaker could not retaliate against members who refuse to vote a certain way by depriving them of committee assignments or primarying them. In other words, they wanted a weak Speaker who lacked the ability to bully other members of the caucus. That was one of their express goals back in January.

I made a post back then that pointed out the impossibility of all of this. I said passing 12 appropriations bills with this narrow of a majority was almost impossible anyway, and that the hardliners made it even worse by weakening the coercive power of Speaker.  To argue now that the Speaker should have put pressure on people is laughable - that's exactly what the hardliners wanted to prevent. 
Of course, what they were thinking about at the time was it the Speaker might use those powers against them. So they figured it was very clever of them to take those powers away from the Speaker.  But it apparently didn't occur to their teeny tiny little brains that would also deprive the Speaker of the ability to force through their agenda.

I hope how much I despise them is coming through. I remember writing about all of this crap back in January and predicting this is exactly what would happen.  And here we are.

[libertybele]

No, he did not.  That was and is beyond his sole power anyway.  The bills have to be agreed on and approved by committees first - and he sits on none of them - and they did not make it out of committee because the Republicans who sit on those committees could not agree on the numbers.  Not a damn thing McCarthy could do about that.

I'd also point out that one of the other promises allegedly made by McCarthy was to:
"create a plan for a balanced federal budget within 10 years, including “long-term reforms” to mandatory spending programs (entitlements like Medicare, Social Security, and Medicaid),

Which of course meant that McCarthy was bound to push entitlement cuts expressly condemned by Trump and his supporters.

Those promises was set-up for failure from the start, to which McCarthy had no choice to agree.  So screw them.

I don't buy that for one second.  Gaetz, Rosendale, and for that matter most GOP voters, already knew where the caucus stood long before this happened.  We didn't learn squat.   Where we are now is unquestionable a worse position than if Gaetz and Co. Would have just kept their yappers shut.

At the present moment the GOP House is obviously not in a good position; but I am hopeful that things will get resolved quickly.  We have a couple running for Speaker, so it's just a matter of time and hopefully we will be in a better position than had McCarthy the traitor been retained as Speaker.

[Smokin Joe]

At some point posters with this view have to stop denying what is the cause of the current situation.

McCarthy agreed to follow the law and have 12 appropriation bills voted on in open debate on the House floor. McCarthy through action and inaction sidestepped that agreement and was voted out as Speaker.

Now we see that at least half of the Pub reps are in fact Establishment Loyalists and do not want to live up to the commitments they made to their constituents.

So next year we can anticipate that some of these Pub Establishment Loyalists will have unanticipated tough primaries and may lose in a general election since the base now has definitive proof they don't represent them. All because the idea of introducing accountability and some fiscal restrain is abhorrent to them.

BTW, the official defecit is 1.7 Trillion. The actual number is higher because the Treasury is not reporting all expenditures.