Why can't the Dems, the nearly equal minority party, effectively choose
the Speaker of the House from among Repubs they find somewhat palatable
and who would garner at least a dozen or so Repub votes?

And, if they can, why don't/haven't they?

(I'm sure the answer is elementary, but I skipped elementary school.)

On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 13:48:06 -0400, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
wrote:

>
>Why can't the Dems, the nearly equal minority party, effectively choose
>the Speaker of the House from among Repubs they find somewhat palatable
>and who would garner at least a dozen or so Repub votes?
>
>And, if they can, why don't/haven't they?
>
>(I'm sure the answer is elementary, but I skipped elementary school.)

Because the Dems would choose a Democrat and any Republican who voted
for a Democrat as Speaker is certain to be challenged during the next
Primary. So any of the Republicans that would be likely to go along
are afraid of losing their job if they didn't vote for a Republican
Speaker of the House.

Now if the Republicans can't come behind any single Republican over
multiple votes and we come to needing another continuing spending
resolution or something else then they still wouldn't be likely to
vote for a Democrat as Speaker. Instead they would just invest more
authority in the temporary Speaker so that the Republican temp Speaker
can keep doing the job until they can find a Republican candidate they
can actually vote for. It certainly doesn't look like it will be Jim
Jordan and no other Republican looks ready to take on the role with
the votes to win the nomination.

On 10/20/2023 10:48 AM, moviePig wrote:
>
> Why can't the Dems, the nearly equal minority party, effectively choose
> the Speaker of the House from among Repubs they find somewhat palatable
> and who would garner at least a dozen or so Repub votes?
>
> And, if they can, why don't/haven't they?
>
> (I'm sure the answer is elementary, but I skipped elementary school.)

The more moderate Rs usually come from Dem majority districts and are
afraid of losing their seats to Ds next election. Or being chastised by
the minority Rs.

In article <q3zYM.84785$tnmf.69776@fx09.iad>,
moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:

> Why can't the Dems, the nearly equal minority party, effectively choose
> the Speaker of the House from among Repubs they find somewhat palatable
> and who would garner at least a dozen or so Repub votes?

Because they're in the minority. Even if it's a close vote, on their
own, they lose.

And if they could choose, they also wouldn't choose from among the
Republicans. They'd choose a Democrat, specifically Hakeem Jeffries if
social media is any indication.

In article <q3zYM.84785$tnmf.69776@fx09.iad>, pwallace@moviepig.com wrote:

>Why can't the Dems, the nearly equal minority party, effectively choose
>the Speaker of the House from among Repubs they find somewhat palatable
>and who would garner at least a dozen or so Repub votes?
>
>And, if they can, why don't/haven't they?

Democrats never vote for Republicans (but not vica-versa) because they put
party ahead of the country.

--
Let's go Brandon!

On 10/20/2023 1:48 PM, moviePig wrote:
>
> Why can't the Dems, the nearly equal minority party, effectively choose
> the Speaker of the House from among Repubs they find somewhat palatable
> and who would garner at least a dozen or so Repub votes?
>
> And, if they can, why don't/haven't they?
>
> (I'm sure the answer is elementary, but I skipped elementary school.)

Thanks for all the responses. Let me be clearer about the proposal:

The House Repubs have a slight majority, but can't become unanimous
enough among themselves to elect a Speaker.

I would *assume* that, among the 200+ House Repubs, there must be a
*few* whom the Dems consider preferable to the rest.

And, among those few Repubs should be one or two who'd receive at
least a dozen or so of their fellow Repubs' votes.

Those dozen-plus votes along with 200-plus Dem votes, would suffice
to install a *Repub* Speaker that Dems nevertheless find preferable to
most Repub alternatives.

To me, this prospect seems so rational that I question whether it's not
somehow disallowed...

On 10/20/2023 1:39 PM, moviePig wrote:
> On 10/20/2023 1:48 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>
>> Why can't the Dems, the nearly equal minority party, effectively
>> choose the Speaker of the House from among Repubs they find somewhat
>> palatable and who would garner at least a dozen or so Repub votes?
>>
>> And, if they can, why don't/haven't they?
>>
>> (I'm sure the answer is elementary, but I skipped elementary school.)
>
> Thanks for all the responses.  Let me be clearer about the proposal:
>
>
>    The House Repubs have a slight majority, but can't become unanimous
> enough among themselves to elect a Speaker.
>
>    I would *assume* that, among the 200+ House Repubs, there must be a
> *few* whom the Dems consider preferable to the rest.
>
>    And, among those few Repubs should be one or two who'd receive at
> least a dozen or so of their fellow Repubs' votes.
>
>    Those dozen-plus votes along with 200-plus Dem votes, would suffice
> to install a *Repub* Speaker that Dems nevertheless find preferable to
> most Repub alternatives.
>
>
> To me, this prospect seems so rational that I question whether it's not
> somehow disallowed...
>
>
I think the Dems have no intention of voting for a Repub for speaker.
Not necessarily because they're R, but because they're all incompetent.

There's 221 R representatives, there needs to be 217 votes to be
elected. The Rs don't need Ds to get it done. See reference to
incompetency above.

On 10/20/2023 4:13 PM, suzeeq wrote:
> On 10/20/2023 1:39 PM, moviePig wrote:
>> On 10/20/2023 1:48 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>
>>> Why can't the Dems, the nearly equal minority party, effectively
>>> choose the Speaker of the House from among Repubs they find somewhat
>>> palatable and who would garner at least a dozen or so Repub votes?
>>>
>>> And, if they can, why don't/haven't they?
>>>
>>> (I'm sure the answer is elementary, but I skipped elementary school.)
>>
>> Thanks for all the responses.  Let me be clearer about the proposal:
>>
>>
>>     The House Repubs have a slight majority, but can't become
>> unanimous enough among themselves to elect a Speaker.
>>
>>     I would *assume* that, among the 200+ House Repubs, there must be
>> a *few* whom the Dems consider preferable to the rest.
>>
>>     And, among those few Repubs should be one or two who'd receive at
>> least a dozen or so of their fellow Repubs' votes.
>>
>>     Those dozen-plus votes along with 200-plus Dem votes, would
>> suffice to install a *Repub* Speaker that Dems nevertheless find
>> preferable to most Repub alternatives.
>>
>>
>> To me, this prospect seems so rational that I question whether it's
>> not somehow disallowed...
>>
>>
> I think the Dems have no intention of voting for a Repub for speaker.
> Not necessarily because they're R, but because they're all incompetent.
>
> There's 221 R representatives, there needs to be 217 votes to be
> elected. The Rs don't need Ds to get it done. See reference to
> incompetency above.

Well, from the Democrats POV the longer this chaos continues the more
Democratic votes there will be in the next elections. ;)

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

On Oct 20, 2023 at 5:53:38 PM PDT, "Dimensional Traveler" <dtravel@sonic.net>
wrote:

> On 10/20/2023 4:13 PM, suzeeq wrote:
>> On 10/20/2023 1:39 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>> On 10/20/2023 1:48 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Why can't the Dems, the nearly equal minority party, effectively
>>>> choose the Speaker of the House from among Repubs they find somewhat
>>>> palatable and who would garner at least a dozen or so Repub votes?
>>>>
>>>> And, if they can, why don't/haven't they?
>>>>
>>>> (I'm sure the answer is elementary, but I skipped elementary school.)
>>>
>>> Thanks for all the responses.  Let me be clearer about the proposal:
>>>
>>>
>>>     The House Repubs have a slight majority, but can't become
>>> unanimous enough among themselves to elect a Speaker.
>>>
>>>     I would *assume* that, among the 200+ House Repubs, there must be
>>> a *few* whom the Dems consider preferable to the rest.
>>>
>>>     And, among those few Repubs should be one or two who'd receive at
>>> least a dozen or so of their fellow Repubs' votes.
>>>
>>>     Those dozen-plus votes along with 200-plus Dem votes, would
>>> suffice to install a *Repub* Speaker that Dems nevertheless find
>>> preferable to most Repub alternatives.
>>>
>>>
>>> To me, this prospect seems so rational that I question whether it's
>>> not somehow disallowed...
>>>
>>>
>> I think the Dems have no intention of voting for a Repub for speaker.
>> Not necessarily because they're R, but because they're all incompetent.
>>
>> There's 221 R representatives, there needs to be 217 votes to be
>> elected. The Rs don't need Ds to get it done. See reference to
>> incompetency above.
>
> Well, from the Democrats POV the longer this chaos continues the more
> Democratic votes there will be in the next elections. ;)

Don't count t on it. The Hamas massacre has revealed the dark anti-semitic
underbelly of a significant number of leftist Democrats. Biden is turning off
that part of the base in droves by embracing Israel and a lot of the rest of
the base is becoming repulsed by the likes of Rashida Tlaib and all these
leftist academes who are praising Hamas, which could result in either
significant defection from the Democrat Party or Dem voters who just decide
not to vote at all.

On 10/20/23 1:48 PM, moviePig wrote:
>
> Why can't the Dems, the nearly equal minority party, effectively choose
> the Speaker of the House from among Repubs they find somewhat palatable
> and who would garner at least a dozen or so Repub votes?
>
> And, if they can, why don't/haven't they?
>
> (I'm sure the answer is elementary, but I skipped elementary school.)

Why can't Republicans effectively choose a moderate Democrat as Speaker
of the House? Or why don't the Red Sox help the Yankees by telling them
their signs?

Because the Republicans would have to agree to vote for them, and they
clearly refuse to do that. Dems bailed them out on the government
shutdown on a Saturday - and Kevin McCarthty went on the Sunday shows
and trashed them.

Funny... but Nancy Pelosi had the same slim margin, and she didn't need
to beg the Republicans to help her get elected. And not one of them
voted for her either.

Republicans made a deal with Biden on the budget numbers, and reneged on
it afterwards. How can you trust the word of liars?
Why would you?

--
"Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man’s mind." - OC
Bible 25B.G.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ek8kap93bmk0q5w/D%20U%20N%20E%20Part%20II.jpg?dl=0

Gracie, age 6.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0es3xolxka455iw/BetterThingsToDo.jpg?dl=0

On 10/20/23 4:39 PM, moviePig wrote:
> On 10/20/2023 1:48 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>
>> Why can't the Dems, the nearly equal minority party, effectively
>> choose the Speaker of the House from among Repubs they find somewhat
>> palatable and who would garner at least a dozen or so Repub votes?
>>
>> And, if they can, why don't/haven't they?
>>
>> (I'm sure the answer is elementary, but I skipped elementary school.)
>
> Thanks for all the responses.  Let me be clearer about the proposal:
>
>
>   The House Repubs have a slight majority, but can't become unanimous
> enough among themselves to elect a Speaker.
>
>   I would *assume* that, among the 200+ House Repubs, there must be a
> *few* whom the Dems consider preferable to the rest.
>
>   And, among those few Repubs should be one or two who'd receive at
> least a dozen or so of their fellow Repubs' votes.
>
>   Those dozen-plus votes along with 200-plus Dem votes, would suffice
> to install a *Repub* Speaker that Dems nevertheless find preferable to
> most Repub alternatives.
>
>
> To me, this prospect seems so rational that I question whether it's not
> somehow disallowed...

It's a valid question. And one you need to direct to Republicans, as
the party in the majority.

The simplest answer is that any Republican that wants to work with the
Anti-Christ Democrats risks a primary, and loss of voters in the general
election.

Work with Dems, and they lose their seats. Don't work with Dem an they
lose their seats anyway. The only way it works is to all hold hands and
jump off the cliff together.

--
"Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man’s mind." - OC
Bible 25B.G.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ek8kap93bmk0q5w/D%20U%20N%20E%20Part%20II.jpg?dl=0

Gracie, age 6.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0es3xolxka455iw/BetterThingsToDo.jpg?dl=0

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>On Oct 20, 2023 at 5:53:38 PM PDT, "Dimensional Traveler" <dtravel@sonic.net>
>wrote:
>
>> On 10/20/2023 4:13 PM, suzeeq wrote:
>>> On 10/20/2023 1:39 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>> On 10/20/2023 1:48 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Why can't the Dems, the nearly equal minority party, effectively
>>>>> choose the Speaker of the House from among Repubs they find somewhat
>>>>> palatable and who would garner at least a dozen or so Repub votes?
>>>>>
>>>>> And, if they can, why don't/haven't they?
>>>>>
>>>>> (I'm sure the answer is elementary, but I skipped elementary school.)
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for all the responses.  Let me be clearer about the proposal:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     The House Repubs have a slight majority, but can't become
>>>> unanimous enough among themselves to elect a Speaker.
>>>>
>>>>     I would *assume* that, among the 200+ House Repubs, there must be
>>>> a *few* whom the Dems consider preferable to the rest.
>>>>
>>>>     And, among those few Repubs should be one or two who'd receive at
>>>> least a dozen or so of their fellow Repubs' votes.
>>>>
>>>>     Those dozen-plus votes along with 200-plus Dem votes, would
>>>> suffice to install a *Repub* Speaker that Dems nevertheless find
>>>> preferable to most Repub alternatives.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To me, this prospect seems so rational that I question whether it's
>>>> not somehow disallowed...
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I think the Dems have no intention of voting for a Repub for speaker.
>>> Not necessarily because they're R, but because they're all incompetent.
>>>
>>> There's 221 R representatives, there needs to be 217 votes to be
>>> elected. The Rs don't need Ds to get it done. See reference to
>>> incompetency above.
>>
>> Well, from the Democrats POV the longer this chaos continues the more
>> Democratic votes there will be in the next elections. ;)
>
>Don't count t on it. The Hamas massacre has revealed the dark anti-semitic
>underbelly of a significant number of leftist Democrats.

Of course it's my fantasy that the anti-Semites will be punished, but
my prediction is that no one will run against them in the primary and
the Republicans won't bother to nominate a moderate.

>Biden is turning off
>that part of the base in droves by embracing Israel and a lot of the rest of
>the base is becoming repulsed by the likes of Rashida Tlaib and all these
>leftist academes who are praising Hamas, which could result in either
>significant defection from the Democrat Party or Dem voters who just decide
>not to vote at all.

It's an opportunity for sure. Will the Republicans take advantage of it?
Doubtful.

On 10/20/23 7:13 PM, suzeeq wrote:
> On 10/20/2023 1:39 PM, moviePig wrote:
>> On 10/20/2023 1:48 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>
>>> Why can't the Dems, the nearly equal minority party, effectively
>>> choose the Speaker of the House from among Repubs they find somewhat
>>> palatable and who would garner at least a dozen or so Repub votes?
>>>
>>> And, if they can, why don't/haven't they?
>>>
>>> (I'm sure the answer is elementary, but I skipped elementary school.)
>>
>> Thanks for all the responses.  Let me be clearer about the proposal:
>>
>>
>>     The House Repubs have a slight majority, but can't become
>> unanimous enough among themselves to elect a Speaker.
>>
>>     I would *assume* that, among the 200+ House Repubs, there must be
>> a *few* whom the Dems consider preferable to the rest.
>>
>>     And, among those few Repubs should be one or two who'd receive at
>> least a dozen or so of their fellow Repubs' votes.
>>
>>     Those dozen-plus votes along with 200-plus Dem votes, would
>> suffice to install a *Repub* Speaker that Dems nevertheless find
>> preferable to most Repub alternatives.
>>
>>
>> To me, this prospect seems so rational that I question whether it's
>> not somehow disallowed...
>>
>>
> I think the Dems have no intention of voting for a Repub for speaker.
> Not necessarily because they're R, but because they're all incompetent.
>
> There's 221 R representatives, there needs to be 217 votes to be
> elected. The Rs don't need Ds to get it done. See reference to
> incompetency above.

No need. The House Speaker is elected by a majority of all those voting
for a specific Speaker candidate, not necessarily all members. Those
voting "present" and those who are absent do not count toward that
total, lowering the threshold.

Either side could do it just by not showing up, or voting "present".

--
"Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man’s mind." - OC
Bible 25B.G.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ek8kap93bmk0q5w/D%20U%20N%20E%20Part%20II.jpg?dl=0

Gracie, age 6.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0es3xolxka455iw/BetterThingsToDo.jpg?dl=0

On 10/20/23 8:53 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
> On 10/20/2023 4:13 PM, suzeeq wrote:
>> On 10/20/2023 1:39 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>> On 10/20/2023 1:48 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Why can't the Dems, the nearly equal minority party, effectively
>>>> choose the Speaker of the House from among Repubs they find somewhat
>>>> palatable and who would garner at least a dozen or so Repub votes?
>>>>
>>>> And, if they can, why don't/haven't they?
>>>>
>>>> (I'm sure the answer is elementary, but I skipped elementary school.)
>>>
>>> Thanks for all the responses.  Let me be clearer about the proposal:
>>>
>>>
>>>     The House Repubs have a slight majority, but can't become
>>> unanimous enough among themselves to elect a Speaker.
>>>
>>>     I would *assume* that, among the 200+ House Repubs, there must be
>>> a *few* whom the Dems consider preferable to the rest.
>>>
>>>     And, among those few Repubs should be one or two who'd receive at
>>> least a dozen or so of their fellow Repubs' votes.
>>>
>>>     Those dozen-plus votes along with 200-plus Dem votes, would
>>> suffice to install a *Repub* Speaker that Dems nevertheless find
>>> preferable to most Repub alternatives.
>>>
>>>
>>> To me, this prospect seems so rational that I question whether it's
>>> not somehow disallowed...
>>>
>>>
>> I think the Dems have no intention of voting for a Repub for speaker.
>> Not necessarily because they're R, but because they're all incompetent.
>>
>> There's 221 R representatives, there needs to be 217 votes to be
>> elected. The Rs don't need Ds to get it done. See reference to
>> incompetency above.
>
> Well, from the Democrats POV the longer this chaos continues the more
> Democratic votes there will be in the next elections.  ;)
>

"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake." - attributed
to Napoleon Bonaparte

--
"Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man’s mind." - OC
Bible 25B.G.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ek8kap93bmk0q5w/D%20U%20N%20E%20Part%20II.jpg?dl=0

Gracie, age 6.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0es3xolxka455iw/BetterThingsToDo.jpg?dl=0

On Oct 20, 2023 at 6:25:44 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>> On Oct 20, 2023 at 5:53:38 PM PDT, "Dimensional Traveler" <dtravel@sonic.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/20/2023 4:13 PM, suzeeq wrote:
>>>> On 10/20/2023 1:39 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>>> On 10/20/2023 1:48 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why can't the Dems, the nearly equal minority party, effectively
>>>>>> choose the Speaker of the House from among Repubs they find somewhat
>>>>>> palatable and who would garner at least a dozen or so Repub votes?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And, if they can, why don't/haven't they?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (I'm sure the answer is elementary, but I skipped elementary school.)
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for all the responses.  Let me be clearer about the proposal:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>     The House Repubs have a slight majority, but can't become
>>>>> unanimous enough among themselves to elect a Speaker.
>>>>>
>>>>>     I would *assume* that, among the 200+ House Repubs, there must be
>>>>> a *few* whom the Dems consider preferable to the rest.
>>>>>
>>>>>     And, among those few Repubs should be one or two who'd receive at
>>>>> least a dozen or so of their fellow Repubs' votes.
>>>>>
>>>>>     Those dozen-plus votes along with 200-plus Dem votes, would
>>>>> suffice to install a *Repub* Speaker that Dems nevertheless find
>>>>> preferable to most Repub alternatives.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> To me, this prospect seems so rational that I question whether it's
>>>>> not somehow disallowed...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I think the Dems have no intention of voting for a Repub for speaker.
>>>> Not necessarily because they're R, but because they're all incompetent.
>>>>
>>>> There's 221 R representatives, there needs to be 217 votes to be
>>>> elected. The Rs don't need Ds to get it done. See reference to
>>>> incompetency above.
>>>
>>> Well, from the Democrats POV the longer this chaos continues the more
>>> Democratic votes there will be in the next elections. ;)
>>
>> Don't count t on it. The Hamas massacre has revealed the dark anti-semitic
>> underbelly of a significant number of leftist Democrats.
>
> Of course it's my fantasy that the anti-Semites will be punished, but
> my prediction is that no one will run against them in the primary and
> the Republicans won't bother to nominate a moderate.
>
>> Biden is turning off
>> that part of the base in droves by embracing Israel and a lot of the rest of
>> the base is becoming repulsed by the likes of Rashida Tlaib and all these
>> leftist academes who are praising Hamas, which could result in either
>> significant defection from the Democrat Party or Dem voters who just decide
>> not to vote at all.
>
> It's an opportunity for sure. Will the Republicans take advantage of it?
> Doubtful.

There's no greater certainty than that the Republican Party will squander
every opportunity handed to them on a silver platter.

On 10/20/23 9:14 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> On Oct 20, 2023 at 5:53:38 PM PDT, "Dimensional Traveler" <dtravel@sonic.net>
> wrote:
>
>> On 10/20/2023 4:13 PM, suzeeq wrote:
>>> On 10/20/2023 1:39 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>> On 10/20/2023 1:48 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Why can't the Dems, the nearly equal minority party, effectively
>>>>> choose the Speaker of the House from among Repubs they find somewhat
>>>>> palatable and who would garner at least a dozen or so Repub votes?
>>>>>
>>>>> And, if they can, why don't/haven't they?
>>>>>
>>>>> (I'm sure the answer is elementary, but I skipped elementary school.)
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for all the responses.  Let me be clearer about the proposal:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     The House Repubs have a slight majority, but can't become
>>>> unanimous enough among themselves to elect a Speaker.
>>>>
>>>>     I would *assume* that, among the 200+ House Repubs, there must be
>>>> a *few* whom the Dems consider preferable to the rest.
>>>>
>>>>     And, among those few Repubs should be one or two who'd receive at
>>>> least a dozen or so of their fellow Repubs' votes.
>>>>
>>>>     Those dozen-plus votes along with 200-plus Dem votes, would
>>>> suffice to install a *Repub* Speaker that Dems nevertheless find
>>>> preferable to most Repub alternatives.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To me, this prospect seems so rational that I question whether it's
>>>> not somehow disallowed...
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I think the Dems have no intention of voting for a Repub for speaker.
>>> Not necessarily because they're R, but because they're all incompetent.
>>>
>>> There's 221 R representatives, there needs to be 217 votes to be
>>> elected. The Rs don't need Ds to get it done. See reference to
>>> incompetency above.
>>
>> Well, from the Democrats POV the longer this chaos continues the more
>> Democratic votes there will be in the next elections. ;)
>
> Don't count t on it. The Hamas massacre has revealed the dark anti-semitic
> underbelly of a significant number of leftist Democrats. Biden is turning off
> that part of the base in droves by embracing Israel and a lot of the rest of
> the base is becoming repulsed by the likes of Rashida Tlaib and all these
> leftist academes who are praising Hamas, which could result in either
> significant defection from the Democrat Party or Dem voters who just decide
> not to vote at all.
>
>

Sure. You're all set, then. Go and celebrate your upcoming Second Big
Red Wave.

--
"Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man’s mind." - OC
Bible 25B.G.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ek8kap93bmk0q5w/D%20U%20N%20E%20Part%20II.jpg?dl=0

Gracie, age 6.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0es3xolxka455iw/BetterThingsToDo.jpg?dl=0

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>On Oct 20, 2023 at 6:25:44 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>> On Oct 20, 2023 at 5:53:38 PM PDT, "Dimensional Traveler" <dtravel@sonic.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 10/20/2023 4:13 PM, suzeeq wrote:
>>>>> On 10/20/2023 1:39 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/20/2023 1:48 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why can't the Dems, the nearly equal minority party, effectively
>>>>>>> choose the Speaker of the House from among Repubs they find somewhat
>>>>>>> palatable and who would garner at least a dozen or so Repub votes?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And, if they can, why don't/haven't they?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (I'm sure the answer is elementary, but I skipped elementary school.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for all the responses.  Let me be clearer about the proposal:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     The House Repubs have a slight majority, but can't become
>>>>>> unanimous enough among themselves to elect a Speaker.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     I would *assume* that, among the 200+ House Repubs, there
>must be
>>>>>> a *few* whom the Dems consider preferable to the rest.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     And, among those few Repubs should be one or two who'd
>receive at
>>>>>> least a dozen or so of their fellow Repubs' votes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     Those dozen-plus votes along with 200-plus Dem votes, would
>>>>>> suffice to install a *Repub* Speaker that Dems nevertheless find
>>>>>> preferable to most Repub alternatives.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To me, this prospect seems so rational that I question whether it's
>>>>>> not somehow disallowed...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> I think the Dems have no intention of voting for a Repub for speaker.
>>>>> Not necessarily because they're R, but because they're all incompetent.
>>>>>
>>>>> There's 221 R representatives, there needs to be 217 votes to be
>>>>> elected. The Rs don't need Ds to get it done. See reference to
>>>>> incompetency above.
>>>>
>>>> Well, from the Democrats POV the longer this chaos continues the more
>>>> Democratic votes there will be in the next elections. ;)
>>>
>>> Don't count t on it. The Hamas massacre has revealed the dark anti-semitic
>>> underbelly of a significant number of leftist Democrats.
>>
>> Of course it's my fantasy that the anti-Semites will be punished, but
>> my prediction is that no one will run against them in the primary and
>> the Republicans won't bother to nominate a moderate.
>>
>>> Biden is turning off
>>> that part of the base in droves by embracing Israel and a lot of the rest of
>>> the base is becoming repulsed by the likes of Rashida Tlaib and all these
>>> leftist academes who are praising Hamas, which could result in either
>>> significant defection from the Democrat Party or Dem voters who just decide
>>> not to vote at all.
>>
>> It's an opportunity for sure. Will the Republicans take advantage of it?
>> Doubtful.
>
>There's no greater certainty than that the Republican Party will squander
>every opportunity handed to them on a silver platter.

Democrats win certain elections because Republicans make it impossible
to vote for them.

I long for the days in which politicians were truly interested in
winning votes by appealing to the best interests of their constituents.

On 10/20/23 9:14 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> On Oct 20, 2023 at 5:53:38 PM PDT, "Dimensional Traveler" <dtravel@sonic.net>
> wrote:
>
>> On 10/20/2023 4:13 PM, suzeeq wrote:
>>> On 10/20/2023 1:39 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>> On 10/20/2023 1:48 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Why can't the Dems, the nearly equal minority party, effectively
>>>>> choose the Speaker of the House from among Repubs they find somewhat
>>>>> palatable and who would garner at least a dozen or so Repub votes?
>>>>>
>>>>> And, if they can, why don't/haven't they?
>>>>>
>>>>> (I'm sure the answer is elementary, but I skipped elementary school.)
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for all the responses.  Let me be clearer about the proposal:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     The House Repubs have a slight majority, but can't become
>>>> unanimous enough among themselves to elect a Speaker.
>>>>
>>>>     I would *assume* that, among the 200+ House Repubs, there must be
>>>> a *few* whom the Dems consider preferable to the rest.
>>>>
>>>>     And, among those few Repubs should be one or two who'd receive at
>>>> least a dozen or so of their fellow Repubs' votes.
>>>>
>>>>     Those dozen-plus votes along with 200-plus Dem votes, would
>>>> suffice to install a *Repub* Speaker that Dems nevertheless find
>>>> preferable to most Repub alternatives.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To me, this prospect seems so rational that I question whether it's
>>>> not somehow disallowed...
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I think the Dems have no intention of voting for a Repub for speaker.
>>> Not necessarily because they're R, but because they're all incompetent.
>>>
>>> There's 221 R representatives, there needs to be 217 votes to be
>>> elected. The Rs don't need Ds to get it done. See reference to
>>> incompetency above.
>>
>> Well, from the Democrats POV the longer this chaos continues the more
>> Democratic votes there will be in the next elections. ;)
>
> Don't count t on it. The Hamas massacre has revealed the dark anti-semitic
> underbelly of a significant number of leftist Democrats. Biden is turning off
> that part of the base in droves by embracing Israel and a lot of the rest of
> the base is becoming repulsed by the likes of Rashida Tlaib and all these
> leftist academes who are praising Hamas, which could result in either
> significant defection from the Democrat Party or Dem voters who just decide
> not to vote at all.

Yeah, Biden will lose the terrorist vote BIG. And, of course, he won't
pick up any more of the pro-Israel vote either.

Brilliant strategist, you are.

--
"Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man’s mind." - OC
Bible 25B.G.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ek8kap93bmk0q5w/D%20U%20N%20E%20Part%20II.jpg?dl=0

Gracie, age 6.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0es3xolxka455iw/BetterThingsToDo.jpg?dl=0

On 10/20/23 9:30 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> On Oct 20, 2023 at 6:25:44 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>> On Oct 20, 2023 at 5:53:38 PM PDT, "Dimensional Traveler" <dtravel@sonic.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 10/20/2023 4:13 PM, suzeeq wrote:
>>>>> On 10/20/2023 1:39 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/20/2023 1:48 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why can't the Dems, the nearly equal minority party, effectively
>>>>>>> choose the Speaker of the House from among Repubs they find somewhat
>>>>>>> palatable and who would garner at least a dozen or so Repub votes?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And, if they can, why don't/haven't they?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (I'm sure the answer is elementary, but I skipped elementary school.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for all the responses.  Let me be clearer about the proposal:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     The House Repubs have a slight majority, but can't become
>>>>>> unanimous enough among themselves to elect a Speaker.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     I would *assume* that, among the 200+ House Repubs, there must be
>>>>>> a *few* whom the Dems consider preferable to the rest.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     And, among those few Repubs should be one or two who'd receive at
>>>>>> least a dozen or so of their fellow Repubs' votes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     Those dozen-plus votes along with 200-plus Dem votes, would
>>>>>> suffice to install a *Repub* Speaker that Dems nevertheless find
>>>>>> preferable to most Repub alternatives.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To me, this prospect seems so rational that I question whether it's
>>>>>> not somehow disallowed...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> I think the Dems have no intention of voting for a Repub for speaker.
>>>>> Not necessarily because they're R, but because they're all incompetent.
>>>>>
>>>>> There's 221 R representatives, there needs to be 217 votes to be
>>>>> elected. The Rs don't need Ds to get it done. See reference to
>>>>> incompetency above.
>>>>
>>>> Well, from the Democrats POV the longer this chaos continues the more
>>>> Democratic votes there will be in the next elections. ;)
>>>
>>> Don't count t on it. The Hamas massacre has revealed the dark anti-semitic
>>> underbelly of a significant number of leftist Democrats.
>>
>> Of course it's my fantasy that the anti-Semites will be punished, but
>> my prediction is that no one will run against them in the primary and
>> the Republicans won't bother to nominate a moderate.
>>
>>> Biden is turning off
>>> that part of the base in droves by embracing Israel and a lot of the rest of
>>> the base is becoming repulsed by the likes of Rashida Tlaib and all these
>>> leftist academes who are praising Hamas, which could result in either
>>> significant defection from the Democrat Party or Dem voters who just decide
>>> not to vote at all.
>>
>> It's an opportunity for sure. Will the Republicans take advantage of it?
>> Doubtful.
>
> There's no greater certainty than that the Republican Party will squander
> every opportunity handed to them on a silver platter.
>
>

But at least they'll get to steal the platter.

--
"Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man’s mind." - OC
Bible 25B.G.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ek8kap93bmk0q5w/D%20U%20N%20E%20Part%20II.jpg?dl=0

Gracie, age 6.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0es3xolxka455iw/BetterThingsToDo.jpg?dl=0

On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 13:48:06 -0400, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
wrote:

>
>Why can't the Dems, the nearly equal minority party, effectively choose
>the Speaker of the House from among Repubs they find somewhat palatable
>and who would garner at least a dozen or so Repub votes?
>
>And, if they can, why don't/haven't they?
>
>(I'm sure the answer is elementary, but I skipped elementary school.)

Because having overthrown the current speaker, they want the
government paralyzed.

On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 16:39:48 -0400, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
wrote:

>On 10/20/2023 1:48 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>
>> Why can't the Dems, the nearly equal minority party, effectively choose
>> the Speaker of the House from among Repubs they find somewhat palatable
>> and who would garner at least a dozen or so Repub votes?
>>
>> And, if they can, why don't/haven't they?
>>
>> (I'm sure the answer is elementary, but I skipped elementary school.)
>
>Thanks for all the responses. Let me be clearer about the proposal:
>
>
> The House Repubs have a slight majority, but can't become unanimous
>enough among themselves to elect a Speaker.
>
> I would *assume* that, among the 200+ House Repubs, there must be a
>*few* whom the Dems consider preferable to the rest.
>
> And, among those few Repubs should be one or two who'd receive at
>least a dozen or so of their fellow Repubs' votes.
>
> Those dozen-plus votes along with 200-plus Dem votes, would suffice
>to install a *Repub* Speaker that Dems nevertheless find preferable to
>most Repub alternatives.
>
>
>To me, this prospect seems so rational that I question whether it's not
>somehow disallowed...
>

As far as I know it's allowed but the Dems aren't about making sure
the government keeps running.

On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 16:13:20 -0700, suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:

>On 10/20/2023 1:39 PM, moviePig wrote:
>> On 10/20/2023 1:48 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>
>>> Why can't the Dems, the nearly equal minority party, effectively
>>> choose the Speaker of the House from among Repubs they find somewhat
>>> palatable and who would garner at least a dozen or so Repub votes?
>>>
>>> And, if they can, why don't/haven't they?
>>>
>>> (I'm sure the answer is elementary, but I skipped elementary school.)
>>
>> Thanks for all the responses.  Let me be clearer about the proposal:
>>
>>
>>    The House Repubs have a slight majority, but can't become unanimous
>> enough among themselves to elect a Speaker.
>>
>>    I would *assume* that, among the 200+ House Repubs, there must be a
>> *few* whom the Dems consider preferable to the rest.
>>
>>    And, among those few Repubs should be one or two who'd receive at
>> least a dozen or so of their fellow Repubs' votes.
>>
>>    Those dozen-plus votes along with 200-plus Dem votes, would suffice
>> to install a *Repub* Speaker that Dems nevertheless find preferable to
>> most Repub alternatives.
>>
>>
>> To me, this prospect seems so rational that I question whether it's not
>> somehow disallowed...
>>
>>
>I think the Dems have no intention of voting for a Repub for speaker.
>Not necessarily because they're R, but because they're all incompetent.

Yeah that it's it...

<eyeroll>

>
>There's 221 R representatives, there needs to be 217 votes to be
>elected. The Rs don't need Ds to get it done. See reference to
>incompetency above.

The dems caused the issue by voting as a block to overthrow the
speaker (only 8 Republicans voted that way). It is THEIR duty to help
fix the problem they created.

On 10/21/2023 7:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 16:39:48 -0400, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 10/20/2023 1:48 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>
>>> Why can't the Dems, the nearly equal minority party, effectively choose
>>> the Speaker of the House from among Repubs they find somewhat palatable
>>> and who would garner at least a dozen or so Repub votes?
>>>
>>> And, if they can, why don't/haven't they?
>>>
>>> (I'm sure the answer is elementary, but I skipped elementary school.)
>>
>> Thanks for all the responses. Let me be clearer about the proposal:
>>
>>
>> The House Repubs have a slight majority, but can't become unanimous
>> enough among themselves to elect a Speaker.
>>
>> I would *assume* that, among the 200+ House Repubs, there must be a
>> *few* whom the Dems consider preferable to the rest.
>>
>> And, among those few Repubs should be one or two who'd receive at
>> least a dozen or so of their fellow Repubs' votes.
>>
>> Those dozen-plus votes along with 200-plus Dem votes, would suffice
>> to install a *Repub* Speaker that Dems nevertheless find preferable to
>> most Repub alternatives.
>>
>>
>> To me, this prospect seems so rational that I question whether it's not
>> somehow disallowed...
>>
>
> As far as I know it's allowed but the Dems aren't about making sure
> the government keeps running.
>
Really? Seems like it' the R who have that attitude.

On 10/21/2023 7:34 AM, NoBody wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 16:13:20 -0700, suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
>
>> On 10/20/2023 1:39 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>> On 10/20/2023 1:48 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Why can't the Dems, the nearly equal minority party, effectively
>>>> choose the Speaker of the House from among Repubs they find somewhat
>>>> palatable and who would garner at least a dozen or so Repub votes?
>>>>
>>>> And, if they can, why don't/haven't they?
>>>>
>>>> (I'm sure the answer is elementary, but I skipped elementary school.)
>>>
>>> Thanks for all the responses.  Let me be clearer about the proposal:
>>>
>>>
>>>    The House Repubs have a slight majority, but can't become unanimous
>>> enough among themselves to elect a Speaker.
>>>
>>>    I would *assume* that, among the 200+ House Repubs, there must be a
>>> *few* whom the Dems consider preferable to the rest.
>>>
>>>    And, among those few Repubs should be one or two who'd receive at
>>> least a dozen or so of their fellow Repubs' votes.
>>>
>>>    Those dozen-plus votes along with 200-plus Dem votes, would suffice
>>> to install a *Repub* Speaker that Dems nevertheless find preferable to
>>> most Repub alternatives.
>>>
>>>
>>> To me, this prospect seems so rational that I question whether it's not
>>> somehow disallowed...
>>>
>>>
>> I think the Dems have no intention of voting for a Repub for speaker.
>> Not necessarily because they're R, but because they're all incompetent.
>
> Yeah that it's it...
>
> <eyeroll>
>
>>
>> There's 221 R representatives, there needs to be 217 votes to be
>> elected. The Rs don't need Ds to get it done. See reference to
>> incompetency above.
>
> The dems caused the issue by voting as a block to overthrow the
> speaker (only 8 Republicans voted that way). It is THEIR duty to help
> fix the problem they created.
>
No, it's the Rs duty to elect a speaker.

suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
>On 10/21/2023 7:34 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 16:13:20 -0700, suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
>>>On 10/20/2023 1:39 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>>On 10/20/2023 1:48 PM, moviePig wrote:

>>>>>Why can't the Dems, the nearly equal minority party, effectively
>>>>>choose the Speaker of the House from among Repubs they find somewhat
>>>>>palatable and who would garner at least a dozen or so Repub votes?

>>>>>And, if they can, why don't/haven't they?

>>>>>(I'm sure the answer is elementary, but I skipped elementary school.)

>>>>Thanks for all the responses. Let me be clearer about the proposal:

>>>> The House Repubs have a slight majority, but can't become unanimous
>>>>enough among themselves to elect a Speaker.

>>>> I would *assume* that, among the 200+ House Repubs, there must be a
>>>>*few* whom the Dems consider preferable to the rest.

>>>> And, among those few Repubs should be one or two who'd receive at
>>>>least a dozen or so of their fellow Repubs' votes.

>>>> Those dozen-plus votes along with 200-plus Dem votes, would suffice
>>>>to install a *Repub* Speaker that Dems nevertheless find preferable to
>>>>most Repub alternatives.

>>>>To me, this prospect seems so rational that I question whether it's not
>>>>somehow disallowed...

>>>I think the Dems have no intention of voting for a Repub for speaker.
>>>Not necessarily because they're R, but because they're all incompetent.

>>Yeah that it's it...

>><eyeroll>

>>>There's 221 R representatives, there needs to be 217 votes to be
>>>elected. The Rs don't need Ds to get it done. See reference to
>>>incompetency above.

>>The dems caused the issue by voting as a block to overthrow the
>>speaker (only 8 Republicans voted that way). It is THEIR duty to help
>>fix the problem they created.

>No, it's the Rs duty to elect a speaker.

There are additional issues. McCarthy and McCarthy alone is responsible
for his own fate. He's the one who agreed to absurd rules that tied his
own hands in order to be elected Speaker. That he'd lose a no-confidence
vote was inevitable.

McCarthy deserved to lose. Over the summer, he violated major promises
that he made to reform budget-making by, essentially, passing
appropriations bills through the committee process and through regular
order, the intended way to pass legislation.

McCarthy first tried to save his own ass by proclaiming the start of the
impeachment inquiry versus Biden that WOULD NOT have had enough votes on
the House floor to begin. He did it to appease the handful of Republicans
that wanted revenge for the two Trump impeachments, thinking they'd vote
for the continuing resolution to keep the government funded. Well, they
refused to vote for McCarthy's usual budget crap. That's when McCarthy
passed the CR with adequate support from Democrats.

In theory, yes, a coalition of Republicans and Democrats was possible to
retain McCarthy. But McCarthy proclaimed that he was not seeking support
from Democrats.

He wasn't going to get bailed out by Democrats anyway; the impeachment
inquiry was clearly the last straw for Democrats.

McCarthy and McCarthy alone is responsible for his own fate, certainly
not House Democrats.

suzeeq, of course a coalition between some in the two parties to elect the
next Speaker is not outside the realm of possibility. As has been pointed
out, the Republicans most likely to be willing to join that coalition
are the ones whose districts Biden either won or barely lost. These same
Republicans are vulnerable to losing in 2024 if Democrats don't nominate
Socialists in those districts.

But for the moment, I think putting enough pressure on Republicans who
are holding extreme positions to get them to drop those positions so
that they can elect a Speaker who can be successful for the remainder of
the Congressional term would be better.

Those holding extreme positions demonstrated that the person they
supported, Jim Jordan, had no ability to win over ordinary Repubicans in
the House, which should be a huge hint that their politics aren't
viable. Jordan lost significant support from the first vote to the third
vote.

The Republicans trying to expand the power of the interim Speaker so
that some business could get done are on the wrong track. I'm glad that
didn't happen. The party needs to face up to their inability to govern
and address that.

Patrick McHenry had taken extreme positions in the past but dropped
them, unlike Jim Jordan. He's now become Wall Street's darling, which is
why it would be difficult for him to win over support from Republicans
elected from rural districts that campaign against Wall Street. McHenry
knows this, which is why he wasn't campaigning to be the next Speaker.