You can do it!

Jan 6, 2023 4:45 AM

PC54

Views

93353

Likes

998

Dislikes

15

Clearly it’s a rigged election. It’s one they can do over until they get the result they want - and they still can’t win.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Have they put the metal detectors back up for the entrance to the House?

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

This is just embarrassing. I'm a liberal, and seeing republicans fail is good wholesome fun, but...GEEZE this country is a $hitthole

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

records are made to be broken

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Wait, is that rule still on the books, or was it a "one time only" deal? It would be a *great* way for things to end.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Simpsons[MostThingy]SoFar.jpeg

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

He reminds me of Tyrion Lannister.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

"Challenge accepted." - Kevin McCarthy

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I’m curious to know how they governed finally after picking the speaker.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

We can only watch McCarthy lose so much

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

No, I could watch MacArthy lose all day, I don't give a shit about your MacArthy

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Okay, okay, I know this is unheard of for you guys, but last Belgian federal parliament had almost 500 days between elections and oathtaking

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Then again, we have a multiparty system that always rules in coalitions.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Hope they didn't get paid.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Sure, why not.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's about leverage, it's not a democratic vote, "what will you give me " politicians have an obligation to the people, and people would be

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Able to stop this nonsense if they were all doing their jobs. What is best for this country is polarizing. It's not always simple yet,

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

At it's core should be one question, "What is best for them, not me." Civil servants are in their barest form , what can I do for YOU.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You can do it ALL NIGHT LONG!!!

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Banks overflowed

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Wasn't that an early harbinger of civil war ...

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

133 ballots that were not all for the same candidate who has clearly demonstrated he cannot secure a majority.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

And no single party had a majority either, the issue was constantly shifting coalitions.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Without a speaker, pure majority rules. Might actually be more effective, given the sick agenda of the extreme GOP.

3 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 7

The newly elected members can’t even be sworn in. Technically, they’re still rep elects.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Nope. Without a Speaker, there is no House. All procedures require one, which is why they keep having votes, because they can't do anything.

3 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 0

Dont worry, they wouldn't be doing anything even if they could decide on a speaker.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Performative as usual. Republicans are allergic to work. That's why all their solutions are lapdogging to big $$ and ludicrous proposals.

3 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 0

Matt Gaetz literally said "watch this" before voting for T****. This comes shortly after he said he didn't want to turn the vote for +

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

+ Speaker into "political theater".. like the Bengazi investigations. So yes. All of this is performative. Two steps back, one step forward.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Y'know, if the Republicans want to keep anything from getting done, having a Republican-majority House with a Democrat Speaker might do it.

3 years ago | Likes 137 Dislikes 1

They won't get to investigate hunter Biden's penis that way.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The problem is they then won't get to waste taxpayer money on pointless investigations because Dems were mean to Trumpy-poo.

3 years ago | Likes 30 Dislikes 0

The problem (for them) is that, as Speaker he can call votes for all the bills they don't want to have recorded votes against.

3 years ago | Likes 78 Dislikes 0

I'm not sure they care about their voting records looking bad. Hasn't hurt their elections near as much as it should've so far

3 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 0

The bots heads would explode

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

If they were as moderate as they say, they could make deal to elect him and actually do something for their constituents.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

They seems to be accomplishing their goal this way

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Can someone explain this to me? I thought voting work like „the person with the most votes wins.“ why do they keep voting? (European here)

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

It’s similar to our electoral college; first past the post wins, not the person with the most votes.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I've never been a friend of that system... okay thanks.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The speaker needs the majority of the votes to win the position. (218). So far nobody jas gotten 218 yet.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

*has

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Thank you!

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Right before we all started shooting each other..........

3 years ago | Likes 44 Dislikes 0

USA was on the verge of a civilwar. It was a complete other situation..oh wait...

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

Not me, I wasn't even there

3 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 0

Sounds like something someone who was there would say!

3 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

Kansas was already blood-soaked by then.

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

And them Jayhawks had it a coming! - Quantrell probably

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Vote by plurality. Jefferies for the win.

3 years ago | Likes 327 Dislikes 1

I'd love to see this, but odds are enough republicans would switch to McCarthy to avoid that happening

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

I say this because in that 34th congress, that's exactly what they did.

3 years ago | Likes 125 Dislikes 0

3 years ago | Likes 27 Dislikes 0

Was that rule change ever explicitly undone?

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

It was made for that session, essentially get your shit together in 3 votes or else.

3 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 0

Uhh then why haven't they done that...

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

More likely Republicans will give some concessions to democrats in exchange for their support for a moderate GOP speaker.

3 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 5

WTF is a moderate GOP speaker these days? "Hitler was kind of bad?" "Don't lynch black people?"

3 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

There are 200 of them that are currently refusing to give the QAnon group what they want. That's why they can't elect a speaker.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That's librul talk. Moderate GOP speaker would say to "Lynch only the black people. I mean 'bad people'."

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Why should Democrats go for a moderate GOP Speaker? Why don't 6 Republicans work out a deal with Democrats? Why don't Rep. compromise first?

3 years ago | Likes 30 Dislikes 0

Because there are more Republicans and that gives them a slightly stronger bargaining position.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Given how they've pissed in the faces of Democrats trying to compromise in the last 20+ years, - strong doubt.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The power of Dem's bargaining position will evaporate the second a Speaker is finally chosen. There is zero point in trying to compromise

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Fascists don't compromise. They pretend to compromise and then immediately renege on their promises.

3 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 1

Because GOP has majority, eventually they will find a speaker. So Dem's can either just wait for them to get their shit together or use the

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 6

opportunity to get influence at a time where they shouldn't have any.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Trusting Republicans to keep a promise is plain stupid. Especially given their track record for breaking them.

3 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

That they've been incapable of doing it in 11 rounds of voting is not the Democrat's job to fix. Besides, R's haven't compromised in 20yrs

3 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

Why should, yet again, Democrats clean up the shit the Republicans took on the floor. Let them grab a mop first.

3 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

11 is enough. Provide a viable candidate.

3 years ago | Likes 76 Dislikes 2

They have enough votes to establish a 10% average....

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I keep hearing good things about that Jeffries guy, he has consistent backing.

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

A part of me that wants it to keep going so their districts will suffer and see what a laughing-stock shit-show they put in office.

3 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

"it's no worse than that Jan 6 debacle" - repubs from work

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Republican districts already do worse on just about every standard of living. Historical R districts are shit holes

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Voters only care about the (R).

3 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

And that's literally why this is happening. Many of those 21 are from deep red districts, they don't need GQP support to win, they're safe.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

When they say “single issue voter” they didn’t mean repeal Roe, they meant the letter after the name.

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Jeffries only needs a few cross-overs in the spirit of bipartisanship.

3 years ago | Likes 32 Dislikes 0

Or enough gop to vote present

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Oh how I'd love it. Highly unlikely though.

3 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 0

If McCarthy were smart he would just deal with 20 Democrats, but they won't because not a single R actually cares about governing

3 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

He'll instead trade away any ability to govern for the R votes, because Republican politics is purely grievance.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

After cocking off about hitting Nancy in the face with the gavel ?

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Despite this vote, the Democratic party is not a monolith. I'm sure there are some Democrats that agree with him entirely.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I wouldn't trust McCarthy to make a deal. It's like going into business with Donald Trump and being shocked you got fucked over

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

That's a fair point, but I do think he could find 20 Democrats to fool

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Do you think there are 20 Dems who would cross the aisle to do that?

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Yeah there are 20 conservative D's that could find a ton of common ground with a reasonable McCarthy if they got pork or power in exchange

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Do you think all of the GOP that is currently voting for McCarthy would still vote for him with that deal in place?

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0