McCarthy doesn't have the votes to become Speaker. Last time this happened was 1923, so few people alive have ever seen a potential Speaker unable to unite their caucus. Not too auspicious for being able to govern.
McCarthy doesn't have the votes to become Speaker. Last time this happened was 1923, so few people alive have ever seen a potential Speaker unable to unite their caucus. Not too auspicious for being able to govern.
@TonyStark One way to keep Santos from being sworn in is not having anyone sworn in because you can't get it together to pick a Speaker.
In a parliamentary system, before long the opposition party (Democrats in this case) would be given leave to form a government, but we have a two-party system.
@MariaHill
I mentioned this elsewhere but I'm very curious what they think the best next steps are.
We cannot just simply halt governing because a handful of cultists can't find one voice. That is a failure of their side to plan and execute. If the laws in place won't allow us to move forward without a Speaker because they can't find the numbers - seems like a problem in local leadership.
That's not the goal. Republicans get to own this House. Democrats aren't going to give McCarthy (or Jordan, Scalise, or whoever else they put up) any support so will vote for the preferred Democrat (so Jeffries), but a Democratic Speaker in a Republican House would only end up tarnished for when Democrats do take the majority.
Round 1
@ClintBarton It took two months and 133 votes in 1856 (the time it happened before 1923). Hopefully they'll get it together faster this Congress.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2022/12/30/house-speaker-longest-vote/
Awesome!!