Wow. McCarthy just dropped out of the Speaker race. I wonder if they'll find another candidate or if Boehner will end up sticking around longer.

We are well and truly fucked, aren't we?

At least we can take comfort in knowing that both sides are equally to blame for the chaos.

By "longer" I figure a few days past the initial end of October is at least conceivable if there was some procedural wonkiness but I can't imagine anything beyond that.

I mean, it's the taint of Boehner that made McCarthy vulnerable as a candidate & inspired opposition in the first place. I imagine you'd see an outright uprising within the party if he suddenly decided to stick around.

Chaffetz is probably the frontrunner, Webster seems less likely to me ... but I wonder if the eventual solution won't be someone that has already passed on the race. I figure another run at Gowdy will be made. I also wouldn't put it past Price (GA) to float himself as a possibility but I don't think anything would come of that.

I see that McCarthy essentially stated in an interview that the Benghazi Special Committee was created with the intention of tearing Hillary down. Could be why he stepped out of the race?

I think it has to be a new candidate. Neither Chaffetz nor Webster will be able to get the support of the Boehner backers. Gowdy would win easily, but he certainly doesn't seem to want it.

The problem as I see it is there's no one that wants the job that's acceptable to the far-right and center-right blocks.

:popcorn:

Very interesting (and what I hoped would happen):

McCarthy Drops Out Of Speaker Race, Throwing GOP Leadership Into Chaos : It's All Politics : NPR

Maybe I'm missing something here but if this recap of the process is correct there really isn't a need for a party candidate to get a majority of the caucus on the first try

http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/08/politi...-speaker-vote/

To win the GOP nomination, a candidate needs a simple majority of all House Republicans -- or 125 votes. (That number could change if any House Republicans are absent or opts not to vote in the election.)

Once all the ballots are counted, a representative of the conference will announce the results, along with the vote totals.

If no candidate gets a majority of the conference on the first vote, a second ballot circulates with the names of the top two vote-getters, and a winner is announced after those ballots are counted.

It'd be nice, but from that it isn't really required. A majority will occur on the 2nd ballot (barring an exact tie) no matter what happens in round one.

Pick one, put 'em up against Pelosi on the floor and let it fall where it may. I don't think enough of the 'establishment' members will put their seats at risk back home by letting Pelosi have it by sitting out the main vote.

Yeah, but in that case, I think there are far more establishment members than Tea Party members. The question is whether the Tea Party members will work with the establishment chosen Speaker.

From twitter:


And yet these are the same people who are OK with shutting down the government.

The GOP has (if I do my math right) 49 more seats than the Democrats in the House.

So they can afford plenty of defections/abstentions and still elect a speaker.

But, the split in the GOP was always going to turn this into a lose-lose.

TP members can't support an establishment candidate because a) they'll lose support of their base and, ironically, might get primaried by a moderate and b) plenty of them are pretty ideologically pure. We're talking about the same people who are perfectly fine with shutting down the government to get their way.

Establishment members can't support a TP candidate because it undermines them with their constituency and makes them more open to a TP primary, plus it's increasingly clear that a number of them are fed up with the TP and Boehner on his way out just gave them air cover with his disparaging remarks about the TP.

Like I said before: :popcorn:

I'm betting the ones who are crying aren't the same ones who are ok with shutting down the government.

Anyway, it's probably just Boehner who's crying because a) he does that and b) it means he has to be in charge of this mess even longer.

but frequently they lack the balls to do much of anything, that's why they're as much problem as solution in the first place.


If it's a Boehner clone -- or anyone willing to appease the left -- then the answer is, and should be, no.

I don't think they can make anybody else that orange.

If it worked for Hulk Hogan ...

Isn't that the problem the Tea Party have with them is the exact opposite? They do plenty, but they don't agree with any of it?

Well I wasn't really counting capitulation as "doing something". Splitting a semantic hair most likely {shrug}

The thing is, I'm pretty sure the "Freedom Caucus" (Tea Party by another name) is close to 50 members. And they will be fucked if they're going to support anybody who isn't willing to burn everything down.

So...the Republicans don't really have enough seats, no, to keep fuckery out of the Speaker's chair without the help of the Democrats.

strictly fwiw I think the number is a little lower than that. I've seen 30 mentioned a couple of times today in articles referencing them. Wiki says its 42 but only lists 38.

The biggest disappointment with this entire situation, however, is that Democrats lack the troll game to make hay while the sun shines here.

Saying that there are eight fewer functionally insane people in the House of Representatives doesn't do much to change the math.

They can get a candidate without the help of the Freedom Caucus. They can't get him or her elected without the help of the Democrats.

You mean ones that aren't willing to toady to the left, gleefully complicit in their attempts to destroy a nation? It's nothing short of a disgrace that there even has to BE a conservative caucus within a party that claims to be conservative. And the insane -- or worse -- are the damned fools who don't see that. Useful idiots at best.


Well that shouldn't be too difficult to achieve. The faux conservatives have given them enough help, not that much substantial difference in the two.

I'm just impressed that after all these years you still haven't lost that fire, Jon. :D

That may be true


On the other hand I think you just hit the Tea Party on the head. What exactly is it you don't understand about "burn everything down"? That is exactly what the Tea Party wants. They have this idea that if they destroy everything a glorious new conservative America will rise from the ashes and liberalism will be dead forever.

Speaker of the House Thread
 

To move the discussion from the GOP Primary Thread . . .

To help Jim, I propose moving the Speaker discussion here: Speaker of the House Thread - Front Office Football Central

The Speaker need not be a current member of the House. Probably some good outside the box candidates for the GOP to consider.

Posts moved. The timing of the posts makes it look like albion started the thread later than he did, but oh well.

I will never forgive you for this tarnishing of my good name :mad:

First, I had no intention of causing a shitstorm.

Next, it appears Boehner is going at Paul Ryan hard. He says he doesn't want the job, but I expect he'll eventually relent and take it.

Has he stated why he doesn't want the position? For a guy who wanted to be VP but is staying out of the presidential race and refusing to take on the Speaker role, I'm a little curious if he's really satisfied where he is in public life or just doesn't want to take what has to be an awful job.

Gawker is reporting affair rumors for McCarthy.

Makes me wonder if he has skeletons in his closet. If he had the guts to run for VP, you'd think he'd go for President or anything that would keep him in the public eye.

Ryan's young. He probably sees the Speakership for the problem it is. The longer he is publicly courted for things like Speaker, etc., and the longer he publicly refuses, the more he becomes all-things-to-all-Republicans.

If I'm Ryan, I am staying out for now. Hoping for a bloody primary with a wounded candidate. The GOP losing to Hillary. Spend time after that taking the high road and using targeted media appearances to stay in the spotlight and provide insightful conservative commentary on whatever the issues of the day are. Then, come 2020 or 2024, the GOP is begging you to take the nomination. It's a high risk strategy, but one he seems smart enough and patient enough to pull off.

Heh, I mentioned that to my brother just guessing... Funny

I think Ryan's smart enough to realize that there's no way to effectively lead the far right part of the caucus. The far right thinks the problem is that the leaders haven't fought hard enough, but the problem is the Dems can filibuster and the President can veto. No leader is going to fix that structural issue, so the Speaker is going to continue to get hammered from all sides on the really big issues like the budget and the debt limit.

I don't see any way the speakership does anything but diminish Ryan's standing.

Well, you know, it's always been burning since the world's been turning.

I wonder if Ryan turns it down, that Boehner doesn't just stay on until after the elections.

I read some speculation of that. Boehner would become invincible if he stayed.

That is true of any House rep with ambitions beyond being a Congressman at this point. The GOP caucus is ungovernable at this point, and becoming the Speaker means nationalizing your House race next fall - the Democrats solicit campaign contributions for your opponent from all over the country.

If you're looking to springboard from Speaker to the VP slot in 2016, you might be able to use that bully pulpit, but if your long-term political ambitions begin in 2018 or beyond, the Speakership is an albatross.

You saw the same thing from the far left. The folks who wanted a public option as part of the ACA still think that President Obama just didn't want it bad enough. That he could have somehow gotten it passed through sheer force of will.

On the flip side, the Freedom Caucus/Tea Party folks just think that if Boehener and McConnell had just wanted to destroy the ACA a little bit more that somehow the Dems would have just decided to give up on their most significant legislative achievement.

The same voters who would never never never never never never never never never never never never never never never give in seem to think that the other side does not hold its convictions just as strongly.

On top of what JPhillips & albion said about Ryan, remember he's also Chair of Ways & Means, which is arguably even more important than the Speaker.

This needs to be an internet picture - Invincible Boehner!

Cut that out.

Ryan is praying on a decision to run, I guess, according to CNN

Indeed. Given the heat and longevity of his wrath, I've often thought Jon could be mistaken for a New York native. He's often in that state of mind, at least.

He certainly does go to extremes.

Speaking of Invincible Boehner:

And just like that, Boehner's back? - Vox