Vacate Watch - Speaker Mike Johnson (R - LA)

[jomar]

First off the disingenuous comment from coati is typical. I wasn't being defensive, I was simply stating that the house should fix its own problems.

You're being intellectually dishonest.

Not at all

Dems are screaming that pubs are responsible for not funding 2 wars. The lack of a speaker is holding up the works. No one is asking dems to clean up the mess in aisle three.

Sure they are. Even some repubs have pointed the finger at dems

True that pubs are in disarray. One problem in voting in a new speaker are the hard core republicans that are against anymore funding for Ukraine. They're against another huge 100 billion dollar spending package. That will not change anytime soon. Dems know that those hard core pubs will not budge. If dems wants to see funding go to Israel then all I said is that they have a vote. You can't deny dems wrap themselves around party loyalty, but today it's not such a good idea. People need to start working with each other.

Did you see the voting? 25 apparently more reasonable repubs wouldn’t bend the knee. Of course dems have a vote, but why should dems go along with installing a horror like Jordan, especially if they know the hard core pubs won’t budge and he’s aligned with them. If pubs put up a moderate for speaker dems would probably be ok with that. And, yes, I agree that they should start working together but pubs won’t have it yet.

 

[dkovic77]

Not at all


Sure they are. Even some repubs have pointed the finger at dems


Did you see the voting? 25 apparently more reasonable repubs wouldn’t bend the knee. Of course dems have a vote, but why should dems go along with installing a horror like Jordan, especially if they know the hard core pubs won’t budge and he’s aligned with them. If pubs put up a moderate for speaker dems would probably be ok with that. And, yes, I agree that they should start working together but pubs won’t have it yet.

Not sure Ican’t can count that high…

His place of employment, where he wears his “uniform”, do have 12 value meals. Usually as high as he has to count.

 

[coati]

Time to draft Newt.

Yes, because he managed to get Bill Clinton re-elected.

 

[icanhelp1]

Not at all


Sure they are. Even some repubs have pointed the finger at dems


Did you see the voting? 25 apparently more reasonable repubs wouldn’t bend the knee. Of course dems have a vote, but why should dems go along with installing a horror like Jordan, especially if they know the hard core pubs won’t budge and he’s aligned with them. If pubs put up a moderate for speaker dems would probably be ok with that. And, yes, I agree that they should start working together but pubs won’t have it yet.

As long as both parties put party loyalty over the American people things won’t get done. I think both parties are fuck up. Both have lost their way. You say pubs won’t have it and pubs say Dems are intransigent. I don’t pretend to know the answer but three issues pubs want; 1. spending cuts 2. secure the border/comprehensive immigration policy 3. energy independence.

Pubs point to Dems and Dems point to pubs. You can see it on lit’s PB.

When it comes to Trump or Biden let the voters decide. Todays democrats are not true liberals. I’m not sure what pubs are anymore. One thing for sure there are many conservatives in the house that are done with huge all encompassing omnibus bills.

Im sure in the near future pubs will hold their nose and hire a speaker.

 

[dkovic77]

As long as both parties put party loyalty over the American people things won’t get done. I think both parties are fuck up. Both have lost their way. You say pubs won’t have it and pubs say Dems are intransigent. I don’t pretend to know the answer but three issues pubs want; 1. spending cuts 2. secure the border/comprehensive immigration policy 3. energy independence.

Pubs point to Dems and Dems point to pubs. You can see it on lit’s PB.

When it comes to Trump or Biden let the voters decide. Todays democrats are not true liberals. I’m not sure what pubs are anymore. One thing for sure there are many conservatives in the house that are done with huge all encompassing omnibus bills.

Im sure in the near future pubs will hold their nose and hire a speaker.

Going to blame the interface for not good grammar?

And tired of the omnibus bills, then bring up the bills one at a time through the rules committee and discuss them instead of waiting and trying to get them passed quick before a shutdown.

Who is responsible for the calendar, that’s right the same ‘pubs that can’t find a way to reach a candidate they can all vote for.

Good job for those holdouts led by Venmo.

 

[butters]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...1&cvid=9739fe40c8ce4946b5757ed76920bce4&ei=28

2 of the three texans have pulled out after conferring with god *blink*
both of them did a lot of considerin' and prayin', y'all

U.S. Reps. Jodey Arrington and Roger Williams announced Sunday they will not run for Speaker of the U.S. House, leaving only one Texan in the mix to lead Congress’ lower chamber.

Arrington and Williams had expressed interest in the job Friday after U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan, a deeply conservative Ohioan who co-founded the House Freedom Caucus, dropped out of the race. The two Texans said they would consult with their families before deciding whether to launch a formal bid for the job.

 

[adrina]

 

[butters]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...p&cvid=d3858e989d5241fbacfd969b005e88c1&ei=28

Former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) said on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday that any candidate who voted to reject the results of the 2020 election should be disqualified from running for the Speakership.

i agree

House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-Minn.)​

Emmer opposed the objections to both Arizona’s and Pennsylvania’s election results, making him one of two Speaker candidates who did not vote to overturn either of the state’s results.

Rep. Austin Scott (R-Ga.)​

Scott is the second of only two candidates to not object to either Arizona’s or Pennsylvania’s results.

​

Rep. Kevin Hern (R-Okla.)​

Hern voted to object to both the Arizona and Pennsylvania election results.

House Republican Conference Vice Chairman Mike Johnson (R-La.)​

Johnson also voted to object to the election results in both Arizona and Pennsylvania.

Rep. Kevin Hern (R-Okla.)​

Hern voted to object to both the Arizona and Pennsylvania election results.

House Republican Conference Vice Chairman Mike Johnson (R-La.)​

Johnson also voted to object to the election results in both Arizona and Pennsylvania.

Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.)​

Donalds is another Republican who voted to object to both Arizona’s and Pennsylvania’s election results.

Rep. Jack Bergman (R-Mich.)​

Bergman voted yes on objecting to Arizona’s and Pennsylvania’s election results.

Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas)​

Sessions voted in favor of objecting to Arizona’s and Pennsylvania’s 2020 presidential results.

Rep. Dan Meuser (R-Pa.)​

Meuser split his votes on whether to overturn the two states’ election results. He voted to sustain an objection to his home state of Pennsylvania’s election results but did not object to Arizona’s election results.

Rep. Gary Palmer (R-Ala.)​

Palmer, a five-term congressman, is the sixth Speaker candidate to have objected to both Arizona’s and Pennsylvania’s election results.

 

[alexgriffin74]

Meuser can go die in a fire. Nobody in PA gives two shits about him

 

[dmallord]

You came to a porn board for compelling thought?

Got it.

Well, one can aspire for a sprinkle or two of intelligent thinking. Certainly, this board could see itself arising above aggressive name-calling. Sort of live and let live cutting one a little slack for holding an opposing viewpoint - I'd leave the non-compelling thoughts to the House members of Congress at this point since they seem to have picked that tone up from somewhere; hey, maybe they are members here on Lit, too.

 

[dmallord]

Sorry for double post, had to work around an error code!


Just to step back and put context to the Melania issue. The name Melanie is the more popular name which prompted an autocorrect. That spelling mistake triggered many. That went viral and once that happens forget about any continuance of civility. I'm sure you could care less but hey it is what it is. I do find your narratives are crafted with civility in mind and are eloquently presented and that's a good thing. Posting on what you correctly described as a *political cesspool* is quite challenging considering that the progressive left outnumber the conservative right I estimate to be a ratio of 8 to 2.

I brushed the name issue off, immediately - it was of no importance to the discussion. I appreciate your recognition of my crafted and civil discourse approach. It comes with age. You can only kick a dog when he is down so many times before you find yourself surprised – it bites back. Few stick around to actually mull over what is proffered by radicalized individuals - unless, oddly it seems your name is Donald Trump. I can't figure that out for the life of me. He does not have an ounce of remorse for anything he has ever done, and people continue to soak up what he spreads - all incessant lies

The avenue you speak of is at the ballot box and not some external remedy or quick fix that would trample on the constitutional mandate of separations of powers or dilute the voice of our electorate. The constitution is one of the most brilliant documents ever written and side stepping it for short term resolutions we do at out peril.

There are provisions within the constitution and those provisions are obvious, but the paralysis in the house is not from lack of provisions but the lack of courage to vote on principal and not party loyalty or to resort to some version of tyranny by majority. Let me remind you that if a bill to fund the Ukraine and Israeli war effort, which is considered by most if not all, a critical need, a need so paramount that is puts the very existence of friendly nations in peril then I question why if this aid is deemed so critical did not one democrats put party loyalty in the rear view mirror and vote with conscience. Democrats had a vote in the speaker election process, and yes republicans are in disarray, but dems are not without blame. The house republicans will hold the majority till 2025, why democrats, for the good of the nation, wouldn't cross party lines to remedy the situation, they are not without some of the blame. Every democrat voted against the republican nominee every time, they filed in lockstep in an attempt to rub republican noses in their obvious national delema. People think that voting in lock step, subservient to party loyalty is a strength, it's not. If there's paralysis in the house chamber it's a house problem brought on by past political warfare tactics which, to recall recent history, really took hold during Harry Reid's tenure as senate majority leader choosing to use the nuclear option to confirm lower court appointments. This led to retaliation by republicans which resulted with Merrik Garland, nominated by Obama, to not be granted an up and down vote for Supreme court Justice. That small change in senate rules brought on an onslaught of mini wars between parties from changing the court from left leaning to right leaning, reversing R vs W, out of control spending and a whole host of impediments to good governance.

Merck Garland isn't an issue under discussion; it is the lack of Republican leadership. Just a friendly reminder - the Republicans responded in kind with Nancy Pelosi - straight party-line voting with a few brave Republicans like Liz Chaney, all of whom paid the price either by losing an election or retiring and, on the way out the door, voted their true conscious rather than a party-line. If not for those few honorable souls Donald J. Trump's coup effort would be ruling the USA at this point - imagine a takeover like the Hamas in Gaza – got voted in and refused to hold elections since then.

Your take on the voting process is a misinterpretation. The Democrats didn't vote against the Republican nominee. They voted for Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York. Indeed more honorable than the election denier running at that point on the Republican side. A report even asked Jim Jordan point blank as he pleaded his case to his fellow caucus members if he believed Trump won the 2020 election. Jordan refused to answer! Image having that kind of person overseeing a 'bi-partisan' Congress? No thanks.

I disagree with your suggestion of external pathways. Of course the left is already seething at the bit to draw and quarter me, but I digress. There is, in my opinion, no role for external remedies by other branches of government. No branch of government should ever be subservient to other branches of government, it dilutes checks and balances and conflicts with separation of powers deemed a critical mandate added to our constitution by our forefathers. Just imagine the white house being republican, the senate being republican, a right leaning court while house democrats hold a slight majority. Would intervention by republican majorities overrule the house be prudent measures. That takes all three branches to vote for such a drastic change not just two. That's lunacy and opens a path for tyranny by party majority. If problems exist within the house then let the house bring about remedies. I'm certain that if our own demise was imminent and a declaration of war was needed I believe our lower chamber would fall in line in unison and in a heartbeat declare war, why, because it's a decision that is important enough to unify the house.

IMHO no way, let the house settle its own problems, that's how our republic was crafted, and brilliantly I might add.

The well being of our country rest with a house of representatives that learns to work with each other. The house of representatives is the people's house.

I understand your stance; it's reasonable if things were normal. But desperate times call for drastic measures. It did during 9-11. It was a national emergency, and at this point, I still affirm my belief we are rudderless in Congress and need to act more quickly to affirm we stand with our allies and that the world sees we are not in a state of paralysis as war rages. It seems President Biden, The Senate, and The Supreme Court are aligned with you and have more patience than I have over this international embarrassment. They are allowing the Republican clown show to play out. [I don't plan to march on Washington to force the issue.] I'll bite my tongue and watch it play out as well. After all, I am a law-abiding patriot.

 

[icanhelp1]

I brushed the name issue off, immediately - it was of no importance to the discussion. I appreciate your recognition of my crafted and civil discourse approach. It comes with age. You can only kick a dog when he is down so many times before you find yourself surprised – it bites back. Few stick around to actually mull over what is proffered by radicalized individuals - unless, oddly it seems your name is Donald Trump. I can't figure that out for the life of me. He does not have an ounce of remorse for anything he has ever done, and people continue to soak up what he spreads - all incessant lies

Merck Garland isn't an issue under discussion; it is the lack of Republican leadership. Just a friendly reminder - the Republicans responded in kind with Nancy Pelosi - straight party-line voting with a few brave Republicans like Liz Chaney, all of whom paid the price either by losing an election or retiring and, on the way out the door, voted their true conscious rather than a party-line. If not for those few honorable souls Donald J. Trump's coup effort would be ruling the USA at this point - imagine a takeover like the Hamas in Gaza – got voted in and refused to hold elections since then.

Your take on the voting process is a misinterpretation. The Democrats didn't vote against the Republican nominee. They voted for Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York. Indeed more honorable than the election denier running at that point on the Republican side. A report even asked Jim Jordan point blank as he pleaded his case to his fellow caucus members if he believed Trump won the 2020 election. Jordan refused to answer! Image having that kind of person overseeing a 'bi-partisan' Congress? No thanks.


I understand your stance; it's reasonable if things were normal. But desperate times call for drastic measures. It did during 9-11. It was a national emergency, and at this point, I still affirm my belief we are rudderless in Congress and need to act more quickly to affirm we stand with our allies and that the world sees we are not in a state of paralysis as war rages. It seems President Biden, The Senate, and The Supreme Court are aligned with you and have more patience than I have over this international embarrassment. They are allowing the Republican clown show to play out. [I don't plan to march on Washington to force the issue.] I'll bite my tongue and watch it play out as well. After all, I am a law-abiding patriot.

I have more confidence in our constitution. The left is too quick to side step precedent. A while back the rallying cry was to pack the court, before that when Clinton lost it was eliminate the electoral college. Now if the reasoning for such change was bipartisan and could be generally accepted as needed change then bring on a convention of states and make changes. The democrats sole reasoning was to convert a losing hand to a winning one. In my opinion one change is designed to maintain and possess political power the other is to legislate for the common good putting the American people’s interests first.

I understand changing how many judges sit on the court is a congressional process, if I didn’t add that the Jackals would be out in mass.

A pleasant conversation for once, have a great day.

 

[RoryN]

7 of the 9 people now running for the Speaker spot voted to overturn the 2020 election results.

Let the circus continue!

 

[butters]

going back for a moment to the 'nobility' of jordan dropping his claim for the gavel, seems it didn't quite go down that way;

Republicans voted against keeping Jordan as their speaker-designee by a margin of 86 to 112, lawmakers told reporters after their meeting in the Capitol basement. Jordan then accepted the result.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/jim-jordan-dropped-house-speaker_n_6532c1aae4b011a9cf79871e

 

[butters]

IF Emmer gets chosen as candidate, would the dems in da house back him enough to get him the 217? i believe he was one of the few names they were bandying that they would be prepared to work with

will Emmer get the nom? seems trump (after saying he was keeping out of it) has been busy over the weekend pushing other republican reps to make dure he doesn't get it

 

[coati]

7 of the 9 people now running for the Speaker spot voted to overturn the 2020 election results.

Let the circus continue!

The GOP won't be happy until they shut down the government during an international emergency and then blame it on the Democrats for not supporting an insurrectionist as a Speaker nominee.

 

[RoryN]

The GOP won't be happy until they shut down the government during an international emergency and then blame it on the Democrats for not supporting an insurrectionist as a Speaker nominee.

Sure looks like it. And that will only play to Inmate No. P01135809's base; it'll do nothing but piss everyone else off.

The blinders on these people are amazingly thick...

 

[Bn2f]

I brushed the name issue off, immediately - it was of no importance to the discussion. I appreciate your recognition of my crafted and civil discourse approach. It comes with age. You can only kick a dog when he is down so many times before you find yourself surprised – it bites back. Few stick around to actually mull over what is proffered by radicalized individuals - unless, oddly it seems your name is Donald Trump. I can't figure that out for the life of me. He does not have an ounce of remorse for anything he has ever done, and people continue to soak up what he spreads - all incessant lies

Merck Garland isn't an issue under discussion; it is the lack of Republican leadership. Just a friendly reminder - the Republicans responded in kind with Nancy Pelosi - straight party-line voting with a few brave Republicans like Liz Chaney, all of whom paid the price either by losing an election or retiring and, on the way out the door, voted their true conscious rather than a party-line. If not for those few honorable souls Donald J. Trump's coup effort would be ruling the USA at this point - imagine a takeover like the Hamas in Gaza – got voted in and refused to hold elections since then.

Your take on the voting process is a misinterpretation. The Democrats didn't vote against the Republican nominee. They voted for Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York. Indeed more honorable than the election denier running at that point on the Republican side. A report even asked Jim Jordan point blank as he pleaded his case to his fellow caucus members if he believed Trump won the 2020 election. Jordan refused to answer! Image having that kind of person overseeing a 'bi-partisan' Congress? No thanks.


I understand your stance; it's reasonable if things were normal. But desperate times call for drastic measures. It did during 9-11. It was a national emergency, and at this point, I still affirm my belief we are rudderless in Congress and need to act more quickly to affirm we stand with our allies and that the world sees we are not in a state of paralysis as war rages. It seems President Biden, The Senate, and The Supreme Court are aligned with you and have more patience than I have over this international embarrassment. They are allowing the Republican clown show to play out. [I don't plan to march on Washington to force the issue.] I'll bite my tongue and watch it play out as well. After all, I am a law-abiding patriot.

I absolutely love practically everything that you say. It’s measured, well thought out, intelligence based conclusions off your intuition and known worldly experience. I think that you should post more than you do but understand your sometimes disgust at the rhetoric used here and name calling.
I think that we all walk a fine line, at least I think I do, of trying to have polite discourse and honoring someone’s humanity while also trying to combat against misinformation and harmful policies. You just had what was described as a “pleasant conversation” between someone with opposing viewpoints. I, again, commend your patience and tone, but caution that in walking that fine line you have the person you are interacting with leaving with the belief that their ideas have been legitimized. For example - whereas you correctly point out that Melania’s misspelling is minor and that Garland isn’t relevant to the conversation, the person you’re talking to immediately goes into wild speculations about how the Left is. He wished you a good day and then went off to, lemme check his current postings, go tell others to STFU. I respect you and your approach and I will try to have intelligent discussion where it’s warranted but I gleefully reserve the right to continue calling this person a POS because, for the most part, he is.

 

[butters]

i, too, appreciate the tone and patience of dmallord, though perhaps he should be aware that those of use here 10-20 years are low on patience with the same posters posting the same lies, mis and dis information for as long as we've been here. That's why so many are on my ignore list since even responding to them is a waste of my time—time i willingly gave in attempting measured responses for years only to see the same ignoring of reality on their part and willingness to post absolute lies.

 

[dmallord]

I appreciate the comments on civility and how they resonated with all the comments that have followed, even with the humor embedded within at least one.

So here we sit in front of our keyboards, twiddling our thumbs and awaiting another Tuesday closed session vote on SOMEONE to take the lead for the Speaker's vacant seat. In my younger days, we would have been sitting on the front porch with a jackknife in hand, whittling on some sticks - in the end, nothing came out of those sessions either except a bit of curled-up bark and a few slide whistles – kind of like the Republicans left as chafe writhing on the floor of Congress then blown away in the winds of history.

 

[butters]

So here we sit in front of our keyboards, twiddling our thumbs and awaiting another Tuesday closed session vote on SOMEONE to take the lead for the Speaker's vacant seat. In my younger days, we would have been sitting on the front porch with a jackknife in hand, whittling on some sticks - in the end, nothing came out of those sessions either except a bit of curled-up bark and a few slide whistles – kind of like the Republicans left as chafe writhing on the floor of Congress then blown away in the winds of history.

speak for yourself, mr smallord i've been busy doing yard work but am taking a break with coffee...

i wish they would blow away

do you see Emmer getting the nod as candidate and, if he does, will dems add the votes needed to take him to 217?

 

[Bn2f]

Agreed. We are back to square one. You, dmallord, previously outlined 2 remedies. I think the 2nd, with the president using Emergency powers would be most expedient but I’ve expressed my concerns on taking what I think are unnecessary and drastic measures when the simplest solution is for republicans to nominate a freakin speaker. Country over party seemingly was buried with McCain. Now we have up to 9 Republican hopefuls willing to split their slim majority votes even more.

 

[Bn2f]

The Democrats have been in lock step agreement who they feel should be the speaker. There’s no bunch. There’s one.

 

[dmallord]

We're having a good laugh over here in the UK...we were convinced that WE had the craziest most dis-functional & corrupt government and parliamentary system in the world but as usual you Americans just have to go one better than us!

Glad to have served as a source of some humor across the pond. As a nation, we strive to do better at what we do – this includes being the most dysfunctional, it seems when asked to demonstrate that to the world at large. I wish we had something to chuckle over on this side of the water, too, since the current situation is just so damnably unbecoming of a young nation touting itself as a 'world leader.'

Keep your knives sharp, and your rifles well-oiled. Looks like the war stuff may call for your services. I fear we are once again on the brink.

 

[icanhelp1]

I absolutely love practically everything that you say. It’s measured, well thought out, intelligence based conclusions off your intuition and known worldly experience. I think that you should post more than you do but understand your sometimes disgust at the rhetoric used here and name calling.
I think that we all walk a fine line, at least I think I do, of trying to have polite discourse and honoring someone’s humanity while also trying to combat against misinformation and harmful policies. You just had what was described as a “pleasant conversation” between someone with opposing viewpoints. I, again, commend your patience and tone, but caution that in walking that fine line you have the person you are interacting with leaving with the belief that their ideas have been legitimized. For example - whereas you correctly point out that Melania’s misspelling is minor and that Garland isn’t relevant to the conversation, the person you’re talking to immediately goes into wild speculations about how the Left is. He wished you a good day and then went off to, lemme check his current postings, go tell others to STFU. I respect you and your approach and I will try to have intelligent discussion where it’s warranted but I gleefully reserve the right to continue calling this person a POS because, for the most part, he is.

Ah! the name calling. You just can't help yourself, I recognize your weakness of character. I will use every fibre of my being to rise above the temptation and not stoop to such childish behavior as personal attacks.

Telling others to STFU could be better understood if used in its original context.

Merrick Garland and Harry Reid are relevant to the discussion in that Reid's use of the nuclear option and McConnell's refusal to have an up and down conformation vote for Garland as a supreme court justice plays a big part in understanding the schism between republicans and democrats. Although republicans will reach across the aisle, how else could democrats pass the *gigantic Omnibus* *infrastructure* bills.