The crackup in the House GOP has gotten so bad that some Republicans are now asking Democrats for help in electing a speaker. So far, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), the current favorite among the right, hasn’t gotten anywhere close to the 217 votes he needs to secure the job.

With Republicans fractured and in need of saving, what should happen is that a few vulnerable members (such as those representing districts Joe Biden won in 2020) join Democrats in supporting Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), for the position. But that’s unlikely, because any Republicans who dare to do this would see their careers implode.

The next best thing, then, is a deal that both sides can accept. Republicans will have to offer meaningful concessions to Democrats to have any hope of getting their support for a consensus, relatively moderate GOP speaker.

At an absolute minimum, a compromise would tackle the core problem: That a few extreme members can propel the House into total meltdown, rendering it ungovernable. Several high-profile, non-MAGA Republicans, such as Reps. Mike D. Rogers (Ala.) and María Elvira Salazar (Fla.), have publicly called on Democrats to specify what they would need to throw the GOP a lifeline — and Democrats have several ideas in mind.

85 points

McCarthy was kicked out because he worked with Democrats to prevent a government shutdown.

This is not a group of people who wants to work with Democrats on any issue what-so-ever. If they end up just working with Democrats anyway (in a way that gives Democrats more power than under McCarthy), then what the hell was the past 2 or 3 weeks for at all?

Then again, maybe the MAGA Republicans are actually that short-sighted and unable to see the long term (erm… 2weeks?) trends of politics…

permalink
report
reply
26 points
*

Exactly. To them, working with Democrats is akin to exposing themselves to ebola.

MAGA Republicans probably aren’t as short-sighted themselves as we’d think, but their stances need to be able to turn on a dime since Trump dictates influences their views.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

I dunno. After recent years, I would expect them to prefer being exposed to ebola than work with Dems. Especially if doing so “stuck it to them”, so to speak.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

Bleeding to death out of every orifice to own the libs. Feels right.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

The thing is, there are still a handful of Republicans willing to work with Democrats, and with the 214 votes the Democrats can offer, it only needs three more Republicans to cross the aisle in a power-sharing agreement. So it’s not that far-fetched. It’s a question of which Republicans will find the courage to defy the extremists in their party.

permalink
report
parent
reply
46 points
*

You misunderstand the current state of politics.

Simply reaching out and talking with Democrats causes various Republicans to lose office. Its literally political suicide. Next year is an election year, and the House needs to win every 2 years to stay in office. They simply don’t have any political cover and their careers will immediately end if they do what you suggest.

Then we have the same problem in 2025 when the new Congress appears, except everyone who worked with Democrats was voted out. Etc. etc. This has been going on for like 15+ years, from Boehner to Paul Ryan and more. This shit is the culimation of a decade-worth of radicalization of the Republican voter base.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Not in districts where Republicans win by narrow margins. Only in districts that are reliably red. Not every Republican seat is perfectly safe.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I would disagree only partially. Because we know these folks are going to vote for whoever has the ® in their name.

It’s also not like Democrats couldn’t get members to switch parties, then support them in their election. This is not as much political suicide, as it is a leap of faith. I could understand why republicans would not want to give up what they have for something new and unknown.

Yet, 3 republicans will make that leap if things become dire… speaking of which… How’s the world doing in our political absence?

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Yep. My rep, John Duarte is a republican and kind of has Obama-era GOP vibes; not quite MAGA, but also not exactly turning his back on MAGA either. I didn’t vote for him, and don’t plan on voting for him (largely due to his policy proposals), but he’s a reasonably professional run-of-the-mill congressman. He’s worked with democrats on a number of issues; I suspect it’s in part due to the fact that his district is pretty purple and he won with margins so thin, you could see right through them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Only 9 Republicans voted to oust him

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Needed only 1 to MTV though.

permalink
report
parent
reply
48 points

No concessions offered by Republicans can be trusted. It’s the whole reason we’re here: because the Republicans insisted that they renege on the agreements when the budget resolution passed.

No agreements.

If the Republicans want to vote for Hakeem, then they can. Otherwise: fuck off

permalink
report
reply
40 points

I don’t think Democrats have much to win by throwing Republicans a lifeline here. On the other hand, Democrats do have a whole lot to win by letting Republicans continue to show the world that they can’t govern. Let them melt to the ground.

permalink
report
reply
13 points

Isn’t a lack of actual governing the Republicans goal? Sure they want to pass a bunch of hate legislation, but they’re also always happy to grind the government to a halt.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-39 points

It would be good for the country? Or is it “party before county” with the Democrats also?

permalink
report
parent
reply
32 points

I like what everyone else is telling you here. This isn’t party over country, you concern-trolling jerk. It’s a simple fact. Jim Jordan is a piece of crap and the Repubicans have been slapping Democrats in the face every chance they get. They refuse to compromise with us. They make their decisions based on what will piss us off the most. You have no right to tell us who we should vote for.

We just need 5 Republicans to vote for Jeffries and we’re out of this mess. He’s a good Speaker candidate. He’ll get shit done, and live up to his agreements, unlike your side (and yes, I’m assuming you’re a Republican, but that’s the side you’re standing up for, so whatever). When he negotiates a bipartisan budget deal that includes shit neither side wants, he’s going to live up to that deal, unlike your side, which wasn’t satisfied with the cuts they extracted in the last negotiation and wanted more. You’ve proven you’re not trustworthy, so why do you dare insist we compromise our principles to bail you out of a mess of your own making. We owe McCarthy jack shit because that’s exactly how he treated us.

You want our help? Then put something on the table. Take the fucking Hastert Rule of the fucking table. Power-sharing, bitches. It’s time because you can’t govern with Team Pepe in your ranks. Live up to your fucking agreements. And this shit better be backed by hard policy BEFORE we give you our help because we know you’re a bunch of lying, back-stabbing jerks looking for your next chance to ‘own the libs’. I think that hard policy will be backing a Moderate Dem as Speaker. You not willing to do that? Then fuck you, fix your problems your own damn self.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points

Allowing nazis to have any power at all is bad for the country. It would be counter-productive and immoral for normal legislators to support them in any way at all.

When a nazi is doing poorly, you do not assist them. That is suicidal behavior.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-23 points

I’m done talking with people who call Republicans nazis. It’s not productive. It’s like talking to Republicans who say “woke agenda”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points
*

Giving Republicans lifelines every single time is how they have learned that they can behave this way. If they keep doing it it will only get even worse. Why is it that the onus is always on Democrats to compromise/fix things, and not the Republicans?

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Yep. This feels like another “why won’t Obama lead?!!” type of narrative.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-26 points

So party over country then.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
36 points

This a republican mess. It’s not up to Democrats to clean it up.

permalink
report
reply
17 points

You’re correct. Democrats are not responsible for cleaning up this mess. But unlike Republicans, Democrats have a vested interest in a functioning government and serving the people. That’s not happening while Republicans are milling about trying to grab power for themselves. Democrats can use their infighting against them to force some concessions that would restore the House to some semblance of functionality and resume the business of government.

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

You know why Jim Jordon didn’t get enough votes? Why he has never passed a piece of legislation in his 16 years in the House of Representative? You’re getting a real time explanation by watching his campaign to become speaker. He can’t build a coalition. His idea of soft power is twisting arms. Most House Democrats will tell you that they are ready to work with Republicans, no Republicans respond. Takes two to tango.

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points

This has been the problem with Republicans for the last 30 years or so:

“WE’RE THE MINORITY PARTY! You have to do it OUR way or YOU’RE not being ‘BIPARTISAN!’”

“WE’RE THE MAJORITY PARTY! You have to do it OUR way! Elections mean things!”

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

All thanks to that festering cunt Newt Gingrich.

That fat, adulterous asshole started us down the path of extreme partisanship. The world will be a better place when he dies.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

The article has some valid points about Dem options, but how can the Dems expect the Magats to act in good faith? As some shitty ex-president said,“Fool me once…”

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I think the only way to get a good faith promise out of the Republicans is to insist on a Speaker of the Dem’s choice. Could be a Moderate Republican or a Moderate Democrat. But it has to be somebody who has a history of reaching across the aisle and keeping promises. With how the GOP of late has acted, I can’t think of a single candidate on the R side of the Aisle.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

They don’t reach out to the MAGAts. They reach out to the ones voting against Gym and Scalise. The ones like McCarthy who are willing to cut a deal with Democrats in order to do their jobs instead of simply trolling the nation in the name of their Anointed One/God Emperor.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

But unlike Republicans, Democrats have a vested interest in a functioning government and serving the people. That’s not happening while Republicans are milling about trying to grab power for themselves.

Getting some concessions that the Republican majority would almost certainly reneg on would be both a tactical and strategic failure. A functioning government that serves the people is one with far fewer Republicans in it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Depends on the concessions. A Moderate Democrat as Speaker would be one hell of a concession…

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

Agreed, but that’s our responsibility. House Democrats can’t do anything about that until we get out the votes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points

But unlike Republicans, Democrats have a vested interest in a functioning government and serving the people.

I don’t think that’s true.

Exactly like the Republicans, Democrats have a vested interest in just creating enough of an appearance of serving the people to get re-elected, but not so much that it interferes with their actual goal of benefitting themselves and their wealthy cronies and patrons.

Republicans can do that fairly straightforwardly, by spinning lies about “deregulation” and “privatization” and such - by overtly pushing for legislation that will benefit the rich and just dressing it up in a sort of costume.

Democrats have a harder time of it because there’s no easy way to make legislation explicitly designed to benefit the oligarchy look like it’s designed to benefit the people at large. So Democrats’ role is mostly just to provide the illusion of opposition - to stand against Republican proposals but not quite manage to defeat them, and to make proposals of their own but not quite manage to pass them.

And as far as that goes, this is a perfect opportunity for them. They can, and certainly will, just make ineffectual noise and accomplish nothing of substance, then blame the Republicans for the failure to accomplish anything of substance.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I see that enlightened centrism has once again reared its ugly head.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I agree. Let the Republicans twist in the wind till they are begging and pleading for salvation. And don’t “ask” for concessions make demand.

People will vote for the extremist candidate regardless of what the current house Republicans do to keep our government functioning. They either grow a backbone and do their job or they keep looking like incompetent fools, which we know they are anyways.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

This all assumes the Republicans want a functioning government. They don’t. They are quite happy to be gridlocked while the country burns.

permalink
report
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 13K

    Posts

  • 388K

    Comments