Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
How Would You React to a Coalition Majority in the House?
Now that Kevin McCarthy has dropped out of the running to be Speaker John Boehner’s replacement, and given the lack of any clear alternative (who actually wants the job?), some are floating the the idea of a coalition:
One crossover vote — from one member, in one election — does not a precedent make. But Representative Charlie Dent (R-PA) nonetheless told CNN minutes after McCarthy withdrew, to elect the next Speaker “we [may] have to assemble a bipartisan coalition, that’s the reality of this place.”
Moderate Republicans would join with Democrats to elect a speaker. It’s unprecedented in modern history in the House, but it’s happened at the state level before. (It happened in the New York State Senate a few years ago, and I’ve read that it happened in Texas, but I don’t know the details. I’m sure there are other examples).
There are currently 188 Democrats in the House. If they all voted together, it would only take 30 Republicans to get the 218 votes necessary to elect a speaker.
Improbable? Yes. But it’s been a very weird year.
Suppose that happened: If 30 or more moderate Republicans (possibly even members of the “establishment”) joined with the Democrats to form a coalition, what would your reaction be?
Published in Elections, General, Politics
Nonsense- how many “repeal ObamaCare” votes have been take in the House since 2010, with absolutely zero effect? We can talk forever about our desire to eliminate ObamaCare, etc., and it means zilch. Or are you saying to shut down the government again, after twice learning that it is not a positive tool for change?
If you are, let me remind you that Mark Levin and Michael Needham have a different agenda than you may think, and, contrary to popular belief, it is not the good of conservatism, measured in terms of actual progress. I am tired of True Believers who get ratings and raise money from the uneducated based on specious “logic.”
I’d rather, any day, have someone around who holds the Republican Senate, moderate or right, and prevents any vote in favor of ObamaCare, preserves 90% of the Bush tax cuts, etc.
I’ve never listened to Levin and never heard of Needham so please go flog your personal strawmen elsewhere. We know you’re content with the status quo. That kind of response is exactly why people continue to support Trump (though I’ll save you the trouble of accusing me of that, too; I don’t).
What is that different agenda?
False dichotomy.
Please tell us more about Mark Levin’s hidden agenda. And source it if you don’t mind. Otherwise, it comes off as a pretty ugly smear.