Why Is There Chaos in the House?

 

I’m pretty tired of this issue already, but yesterday Liz Peek at Fox News put out the most clarifying explanation about why this is happening.  I don’t think the situation has changed much in the last 24 hours. She makes this point that I think we all agree with:

The midterm elections delivered an unmistakable message: voters are not buying what the GOP is selling.

Some say voters have no idea what Republicans stand for.

That would be me.

Peek goes on to list the demands of those voting against McCarthy, and those demands are not unreasonable.  In fact, McCarthy is unreasonable not to agree.  To his credit, he has made concessions.

McCarthy opponents cause House chaos but raise valuable objections – Republican Party needs a reboot

This is the best information I have seen.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 94 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Instugator Thatcher
    Instugator
    @Instugator

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Instugator (View Comment):

    Come on Kevin! Lets see your deal making chops. Or show us your petulant side.

    Each vote they take proves more and more that Kevin is not worthy.

    Surely he’ll win with vote #11.

    ELEVEN!

    They are dialing it up to Eleven. Awesome.

    • #31
  2. Dotorimuk Coolidge
    Dotorimuk
    @Dotorimuk

    Potential soundtrack.

    • #32
  3. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Is anyone keeping track of all the instances of name calling and foot-stomping that the “normals,” as Peggy Noonan refers to them, are using to get their way?  Maybe they should refuse to take another breath until they get what they want. They haven’t tried that yet. 

    • #33
  4. Rodin Member
    Rodin
    @Rodin

    I am only mildly interested in the drama. Not clear what any one “leader” can do to curb the existential threat. Whatever happens there should not be a leader selected on January 6.

    • #34
  5. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    By January 13, one week from today, without a Speaker committee staff won’t be paid. 

    So, my bet is that sometime around January 15 or 16 a power sharing agreement between Hakeem Jeffries and Kevin McCarthy will be agreed to.  

    • #35
  6. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    By January 13, one week from today, without a Speaker committee staff won’t be paid.

    So, my bet is that sometime around January 15 or 16 a power sharing agreement between Hakeem Jeffries and Kevin McCarthy will be agreed to.

    I bet you one LIKE that this never happens.

    • #36
  7. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    By January 13, one week from today, without a Speaker committee staff won’t be paid.

    Given that most committee staffers are agents of the deep state, this is great news!

    So, my bet is that sometime around January 15 or 16 a power sharing agreement between Hakeem Jeffries and Kevin McCarthy will be agreed to.

     

    • #37
  8. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    BDB (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    By January 13, one week from today, without a Speaker committee staff won’t be paid.

    So, my bet is that sometime around January 15 or 16 a power sharing agreement between Hakeem Jeffries and Kevin McCarthy will be agreed to.

    I bet you one LIKE that this never happens.

    A LIKE doesn’t cost me anything.  

    But if you asked me to bet a nickel, I wouldn’t take the bet.  

    It does seem that if there is a piece of legislation that at least 218 House members want passed, these House members would be motivated to reach an agreement on a Speaker, a set of House rules and committee ratios in order to pave the way for such legislation to pass.  

    Are there at least 218 House members who think the debt limit should be raised?  I think so.   But there are not, in my estimation, at least 218 House Republicans who think the debt limit should be raised.   

    So, that’s why I think that the end result will be some sort of power sharing a that consists of House members of both parties.  

    I could end up being wrong on this.  We are in territory we have not been in since 1855.  So, no one really knows what will happen.  

    • #38
  9. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    By January 13, one week from today, without a Speaker committee staff won’t be paid.

    So, my bet is that sometime around January 15 or 16 a power sharing agreement between Hakeem Jeffries and Kevin McCarthy will be agreed to.

    I bet you one LIKE that this never happens.

    A LIKE doesn’t cost me anything.

    But if you asked me to bet a nickel, I wouldn’t take the bet.

    It does seem that if there is a piece of legislation that at least 218 House members want passed, these House members would be motivated to reach an agreement on a Speaker, a set of House rules and committee ratios in order to pave the way for such legislation to pass.

    Are there at least 218 House members who think the debt limit should be raised? I think so. But there are not, in my estimation, at least 218 House Republicans who think the debt limit should be raised.

    So, that’s why I think that the end result will be some sort of power sharing a that consists of House members of both parties.

    I could end up being wrong on this. We are in territory we have not been in since 1855. So, no one really knows what will happen.

    I’ll put my nickel on a HFC victory: McCarthy either accepts the terms and gets the votes, or the pressure mounts and he steps aside.

    • #39
  10. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    BDB (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    By January 13, one week from today, without a Speaker committee staff won’t be paid.

    So, my bet is that sometime around January 15 or 16 a power sharing agreement between Hakeem Jeffries and Kevin McCarthy will be agreed to.

    I bet you one LIKE that this never happens.

    A LIKE doesn’t cost me anything.

    But if you asked me to bet a nickel, I wouldn’t take the bet.

    It does seem that if there is a piece of legislation that at least 218 House members want passed, these House members would be motivated to reach an agreement on a Speaker, a set of House rules and committee ratios in order to pave the way for such legislation to pass.

    Are there at least 218 House members who think the debt limit should be raised? I think so. But there are not, in my estimation, at least 218 House Republicans who think the debt limit should be raised.

    So, that’s why I think that the end result will be some sort of power sharing a that consists of House members of both parties.

    I could end up being wrong on this. We are in territory we have not been in since 1855. So, no one really knows what will happen.

    I’ll put my nickel on a HFC victory: McCarthy either accepts the terms and gets the votes, or the pressure mounts and he steps aside.

    I think there are at least 5 House Republicans who will not accept any terms at all.  That’s why I think a Democrat-Republican power sharing agreement will be the end result.  

    • #40
  11. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    By January 13, one week from today, without a Speaker committee staff won’t be paid.

    So, my bet is that sometime around January 15 or 16 a power sharing agreement between Hakeem Jeffries and Kevin McCarthy will be agreed to.

    I bet you one LIKE that this never happens.

    A LIKE doesn’t cost me anything.

    But if you asked me to bet a nickel, I wouldn’t take the bet.

    It does seem that if there is a piece of legislation that at least 218 House members want passed, these House members would be motivated to reach an agreement on a Speaker, a set of House rules and committee ratios in order to pave the way for such legislation to pass.

    Are there at least 218 House members who think the debt limit should be raised? I think so. But there are not, in my estimation, at least 218 House Republicans who think the debt limit should be raised.

    So, that’s why I think that the end result will be some sort of power sharing a that consists of House members of both parties.

    I could end up being wrong on this. We are in territory we have not been in since 1855. So, no one really knows what will happen.

    I’ll put my nickel on a HFC victory: McCarthy either accepts the terms and gets the votes, or the pressure mounts and he steps aside.

    I think there are at least 5 House Republicans who will not accept any terms at all. That’s why I think a Democrat-Republican power sharing agreement will be the end result.

    I think that they’re just the far tent-peg.  They hold a useful position for its effect on the rest of the thing.  I could well be wrong as well.

    • #41
  12. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    GlenEisenhardt (View Comment):

    Because the GOP doesn’t really represent its voters.

    Well, in Arizona, the GOP represents all of the voters of the state.  There were 9 statewide candidates.  Four of the 9 Republican statewide candidates were active promoters of the 2020 election fantasy.  They all lost.  Five of the 9 Republican statewide candidates were not active promoters of the 2020 election fantasy.  They all won, and Kimberly Yee won in landslide.  

    The winning GOP candidates represent all of the voters.

    • #42
  13. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    We are in territory we have not been in since 1855. So, no one really knows what will happen.

    Maybe the same thing that happened a few years later.

    • #43
  14. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    mildlyo (View Comment):

    Once the Trump votes pass 10 that will be the tipping point for McCarthy.

    Paging freedom caucus!

    Except, I am sure that there are at least 5 Republicans who will refuse to vote for Trump under any circumstances.  NeverTrump.  

    We may need to look to the Alaska State Senate, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives and the Ohio House of Representatives for the way out, for the non-Freedom Caucus Republicans to make common cause with other Americans who love their country.

    • #44
  15. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    BDB (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    By January 13, one week from today, without a Speaker committee staff won’t be paid.

    So, my bet is that sometime around January 15 or 16 a power sharing agreement between Hakeem Jeffries and Kevin McCarthy will be agreed to.

    I bet you one LIKE that this never happens.

    You lost that bet before I even read your comment.

    • #45
  16. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    mildlyo (View Comment):

    Once the Trump votes pass 10 that will be the tipping point for McCarthy.

    Paging freedom caucus!

    Except, I am sure that there are at least 5 Republicans who will refuse to vote for Trump under any circumstances. NeverTrump.

    We may need to look to the Alaska State Senate, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives and the Ohio House of Representatives for the way out, for the non-Freedom Caucus Republicans to make common cause with other Americans who love their country.

    There was one House Republican who was on television a few days ago who said, “Those 20 Republicans who are opposing Kevin McCarthy are the brain trust who gave us the fiasco on January 6th.”  

    So, my sense of it is that the differences between the 20 Republicans opposed to McCarthy and a significant number of the 201 who have voted for McCarthy are not reconcilable.  They are too far apart to reach an agreement.  

    But we shall see.  

    • #46
  17. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    mildlyo (View Comment):

    Once the Trump votes pass 10 that will be the tipping point for McCarthy.

    Paging freedom caucus!

    Except, I am sure that there are at least 5 Republicans who will refuse to vote for Trump under any circumstances. NeverTrump.

    We may need to look to the Alaska State Senate, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives and the Ohio House of Representatives for the way out, for the non-Freedom Caucus Republicans to make common cause with other Americans who love their country.

    commoncause dot org, you mean.

    • #47
  18. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    HeavyWater (View Comment):
    There was one House Republican who was on television a few days ago who said, “Those 20 Republicans who are opposing Kevin McCarthy are the brain trust who gave us the fiasco on January 6th.”  

    Seems a weak bit of mean girl gossip to predicate anything on.

    • #48
  19. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    By January 13, one week from today, without a Speaker committee staff won’t be paid.

    So, my bet is that sometime around January 15 or 16 a power sharing agreement between Hakeem Jeffries and Kevin McCarthy will be agreed to.

    I bet you one LIKE that this never happens.

    You lost that bet before I even read your comment.

    That doesn’t even make sense, twice.

    • #49
  20. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    There was one House Republican who was on television a few days ago who said, “Those 20 Republicans who are opposing Kevin McCarthy are the brain trust who gave us the fiasco on January 6th.”

    What an idiotic thing to say.

    What idiot would agree?

    • #50
  21. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    I refused to vote for Trump in 2016 and 2020, or for Trump election fantasy promoters in the 2022 election.  I do not have standing to say that the so-called Freedom Caucus can’t refuse to give their votes to McCarthy.  (Given McCarthy’s betrayal at Mar-A-Lago only days after January 6th, I wouldn’t ever vote for him either.)  However, the so-called “Freedom Caucus” needs to get a reality check.  In swing states and swing districts, voters rejected their brand of conservatism.  (See Arizona, where all four statewide Republican candidates who promoted the 2020 election fantasy were defeated while the other five statewide Republican candidates all won.)   

    It time to ask who can get 218 votes from the entire House of Representatives.  McCarthy can’t.  But nor can the so-called Freedom Caucus get to 218 votes.  Nor can the Democrats, unless they are willing to share power with Republicans.

    In 1857, the Whig Party had dissolved over the issue of the extension of slavery into the territories after the creation of the Republican Party.  Now the Republican Party has a cleavage that can not be papered over, those who promote the 2020 election fantasy, and those who do not.  

    • #51
  22. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I refused to vote for Trump in 2016 and 2020, or for Trump election fantasy promoters in the 2022 election.

    Really? I had no idea.

    However, the so-called “Freedom Caucus” needs to get a reality check. In swing states and swing districts, voters rejected their brand of conservatism.

    Umm. Voters did not reject them. They won their elections. That’s why they’re there.

    • #52
  23. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    • #53
  24. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    Now the Republican Party has a cleavage that can not be papered over,

    To be fair, we’ve never been short of cleavage.

    • #54
  25. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I refused to vote for Trump in 2016 and 2020, or for Trump election fantasy promoters in the 2022 election.

    Really? I had no idea.

    However, the so-called “Freedom Caucus” needs to get a reality check. In swing states and swing districts, voters rejected their brand of conservatism.

    Umm. Voters did not reject them. They won their elections. That’s why they’re there.

    The folks who won were mostly in very, very heavily Republican Congressional Districts. 

    But, if we look at statewide races in swing states, the 2020 election fantasy promoters all lost their races.  (I don’t consider Wyoming to be a swing state.  A 2020 election fantasy promoter won the Secretary of State Race in Wyoming.)

    • #55
  26. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    It time to ask who can get 218 votes from the entire House of Representatives.  McCarthy can’t.  But nor can the so-called Freedom Caucus get to 218 votes.  Nor can the Democrats, unless they are willing to share power with Republicans.

    That’s not how this works.  McCarthy may be able to if he meets the HFC’s requirements.  “May”.  And if instead he steps (is shoved) aside, then the next fellow may be able to gain enough votes the way grown-ups do — by negotiating WITHIN the party to fight against Democrats — and not the other way around.

    • #56
  27. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    BDB (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    It time to ask who can get 218 votes from the entire House of Representatives. McCarthy can’t. But nor can the so-called Freedom Caucus get to 218 votes. Nor can the Democrats, unless they are willing to share power with Republicans.

    That’s not how this works. McCarthy may be able to if he meets the HFC’s requirements. “May”. And if instead he steps (is shoved) aside, then the next fellow may be able to gain enough votes the way grown-ups do — by negotiating WITHIN the party to fight against Democrats — and not the other way around.

    No, that is how it is working in the Alaska State Senate and the Ohio House of Representatives.

    See the new 2023 Alaska State Senate where 8 Republicans joined all 9 Democrats to elect a Republican President by a 17-3 vote.

    See the new 2023 Ohio House of Representatives where 22 Republicans joined all 32 Democrats to elect a Republican Speaker by a 54 to 43 vote.

    • #57
  28. Steve Fast Member
    Steve Fast
    @SteveFast

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I refused to vote for Trump in 2016 and 2020, or for Trump election fantasy promoters in the 2022 election.

    Really? I had no idea.

    However, the so-called “Freedom Caucus” needs to get a reality check. In swing states and swing districts, voters rejected their brand of conservatism.

    Umm. Voters did not reject them. They won their elections. That’s why they’re there.

    The folks who won were mostly in very, very heavily Republican Congressional Districts.

    But, if we look at statewide races in swing states, the 2020 election fantasy promoters all lost their races. (I don’t consider Wyoming to be a swing state. A 2020 election fantasy promoter won the Secretary of State Race in Wyoming.)

    But the Freedom Caucus is standing for positions that are broadly popular across the country, even though the liberal and conservative media have joined in smearing them.

    • #58
  29. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I refused to vote for Trump in 2016 and 2020, or for Trump election fantasy promoters in the 2022 election.

    Really? I had no idea.

    However, the so-called “Freedom Caucus” needs to get a reality check. In swing states and swing districts, voters rejected their brand of conservatism.

    Umm. Voters did not reject them. They won their elections. That’s why they’re there.

    The folks who won were mostly in very, very heavily Republican Congressional Districts.

    But, if we look at statewide races in swing states, the 2020 election fantasy promoters all lost their races. (I don’t consider Wyoming to be a swing state. A 2020 election fantasy promoter won the Secretary of State Race in Wyoming.)

    But the members of the “Freedom Caucus” won their elections. They serve their constituents, not the constituency of other members’ districts.

    And knock it off with the “2020 election fantasy promoters” childish insults.

    • #59
  30. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I refused to vote for Trump in 2016 and 2020, or for Trump election fantasy promoters in the 2022 election.

    Really? I had no idea.

    However, the so-called “Freedom Caucus” needs to get a reality check. In swing states and swing districts, voters rejected their brand of conservatism.

    Umm. Voters did not reject them. They won their elections. That’s why they’re there.

    The folks who won were mostly in very, very heavily Republican Congressional Districts.

    But, if we look at statewide races in swing states, the 2020 election fantasy promoters all lost their races. (I don’t consider Wyoming to be a swing state. A 2020 election fantasy promoter won the Secretary of State Race in Wyoming.)

    But the members of the “Freedom Caucus” won their elections. They serve their constituents, not the constituency of other members’ districts.

    And knock it off with the “2020 election fantasy promoters” childish insults.

    Bryan has asked that I not call them “election deniers,” so I am using a less objectionable description of “2020 election fantasy promoters.”

    The 2020 election fantasy promoters aren’t doing too well these days.

    Those candidates are losing in swing districts and in swing states.  See Arizona above.

    The lawsuits against the media are proceeding apace.  (Hannity admitted in a deposition that he knew that the allegations of election fraud were false.)

    Several lawyers have been sanctioned, not only for costs, but for attorney’s fees.

    Rudy Giuliani has been suspended as an attorney, and discipline cases are proceeding in other jurisdictions.

    So far, hundreds of the January 6th rioters are being convicted.

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.