An opportunity for Democrats to prove they are the "bigger" party

[Dave Allen]

Both Democrats and Republicans are often accused of putting their party's interests above the needs of the American people. Now would be an excellent time for Democrats to indicate their desire to re-establish a functioning legislative branch by creating a small list of Republicans they could vote for in a bloc large enough to end this crazy contest for house speaker.
Of course this would mean stifling the joy they are experiencing over the current Republican chaos. But by doing this they would let us all know that they are truly sick of bipartisan politics by extending this olive branch and show they really care about our democracy.

[Smoove_B]

If I'm understanding you correctly, it's the responsibility of the party that has 212 (of 217 needed votes) to try and find a compromise with the GOP?

[hepcat]

The moment democrats offer up a name for someone they'd vote, that person would become a punching bag in the republican party. Your plan fails to take into the account just how much republicans hate...well...everyone.

[Dave Allen]

[Alefroth]

Both Democrats and Republicans are often accused of putting their party's interests above the needs of the American people. Now would be an excellent time for Democrats to indicate their desire to re-establish a functioning legislative branch by creating a small list of Republicans they could vote for in a bloc large enough to end this crazy contest for house speaker.
Of course this would mean stifling the joy they are experiencing over the current Republican chaos. But by doing this they would let us all know that they are truly sick of bipartisan politics by extending this olive branch and show they really care about our democracy.

Why can't Republicans show they are the 'bigger' party?

[Alefroth]

Sadly, there are probably a lot of people that think like Dave.

[Smoove_B]

Yes, I'm seeing on social media that this is the fault of the Democrats because they won't support the nomination of whatever GOP member that just finished detailing how they'll dismantle everything while refusing to work with the Democrats after being seated. Why won't the Democrats be reasonable?

[hepcat]

Also, dem leadership HAS indicated they'd support someone who wasn't an insurrectionist or an extremist. So they have tossed out an olive branch, in that regard. What they don't want is MAGA to be in control. That way leads only to pain and misery for both sides, as we're seeing right now. The MAGA people cannot and will not work with anyone. Even their own. They are the least fit people for politics I have ever had the displeasure of seeing in power.

[Smoove_B]

Yes - "We'd support a reasonable nominee."

"The House GOP would like to submit the Honorable Mr. Jordan as House Speaker."

I mean, really.

[Unagi]

Now would be an excellent time for Democrats to indicate their desire to re-establish a functioning legislative branch by creating a small list of Republicans they could vote for in a bloc large enough to end this crazy contest for house speaker.

Now would be a fantastic time for just 6 Republicans to pick a Democrat speaker.

Just 6 reasonable Republicans can do the right thing, any 6 of them.

What you ask is for an entire Democratic house to fall in line behind some member of the GOP.

Surely 6 people is a smaller ask than 212 people ???

Or is it just that there is no way to imagine 6 Republicans could do what you want 212 Democrats to do.

[Unagi]

[malchior]

Hepcat got it right before. That very obvious problem is why the premise here is not particularly well thought out but then again this is a troll thread.

[LordMortis]

I actually don't think it's a bad deal. However, it seems to me that all got shot to hell when they reach across the aisle group imploded when democrats let McCarthy sink. So now they have to be the even bigger party after bipartisan efforts were shut down on them. Still. Put forth a list of people who consider the current Supreme Court a travesty and do not consider TFG the leader of their party and I think I'd have a staring point.

[raydude]

I actually don't think it's a bad deal. However, it seems to me that all got shot to hell when they reach across the aisle group imploded when democrats let McCarthy sink. So now they have to be the even bigger party after bipartisan efforts were shut down on them. Still. Put forth a list of people who consider the current Supreme Court a travesty and do not consider TFG the leader of their party and I think I'd have a staring point.

When the Democrats saved McCarthy's clean funding bill do you know what he did next? He went on Sunday talk shows and blamed Democrats for the spending debacle. Not even a "well, you know, we couldn't have done it without my colleagues across the aisle." Not even that. I'd have thrown my shoe at him were I in the room.

[hepcat]

Yeah, McCarthy is a POS.

[YellowKing]

Fool me once, shame on, shame on you, fool me....you can't get fooled again.

[LordMortis]

Ohhhhhhhh there is no love lost for letting McCarthy sink. He was the scum on the shit on the gum on the bottom of a shoe.

[RunningMn9]

Why is it always the Democrats that has to be the bigger party, to their own self interest to the side to help the Republicans out of their self-induced jam?

Maybe just *once* the GOP could put the country first and not nominate an insurrectionist shit bag for Speaker?

Just once can it be on the GOP to do the right thing?

[waitingtoconnect]

Both Democrats and Republicans are often accused of putting their party's interests above the needs of the American people. Now would be an excellent time for Democrats to indicate their desire to re-establish a functioning legislative branch by creating a small list of Republicans they could vote for in a bloc large enough to end this crazy contest for house speaker.
Of course this would mean stifling the joy they are experiencing over the current Republican chaos. But by doing this they would let us all know that they are truly sick of bipartisan politics by extending this olive branch and show they really care about our democracy.

I don’t think there is much the republicans can do. Any compromise to the democrats makes them “rinos”

And it wasn’t democrats that moved on McCarthy.

I can’t see democrats siding with someone like Jim Jordan when he can’t command loyalty within his own party. And he is not a centrist.

Arguably the centrist factions in both parties could get together like they used to to run things if the extremes in both play up. But the republicans killed that in the 1990s

[Kurth]

Hepcat got it right before. That very obvious problem is why the premise here is not particularly well thought out but then again this is a troll thread.

Agree with all of this except the “this is a troll thread” part. Really? Not to get all meta, but how is this a troll thread? The post is probably something on the minds of many, many Americans right now. The notion is misguided, but is it really troll behavior? That response feels off to me, but maybe there’s a history here I’m not aware of.

[Pyperkub]

It's a troll post. He's not seriously responding to anything.

Sent from my SM-S908U1 using Tapatalk

[Dave Allen]

It's a troll post. He's not seriously responding to anything.

wow didn't expect that...
I was honestly just bringing some brinkmanship here after reading a recent article by Sahil Kapur and Julia Jester.
Excerpt:

Jeffries said Democrats want “a bipartisan path” to reopening the House but didn’t outline what that would look like. Democrats unanimously nominated Jeffries to be speaker, but there’s no chance of him winning when Republicans have a 221-212 majority. Still, Democrats say the onus is on the GOP to negotiate with them and make concessions if they want help electing a speaker.

There are no serious discussions taking place on a coalition speaker picked with bipartisan votes, according to senior lawmakers and aides in both parties.

“No Republican has come to leadership to have a serious conversation of substance,” said a senior Democratic aide. “This is on Republicans to come to the Democrats to try to find a compromise.”

[Victoria Raverna]

They have to wait for the Republicans to approach them since if Democrats are the one that pick the acceptable Republican candidates for house speakers, those Republicans are going to be labelled as RINO and likely to not able to get GOP votes.

[Max Peck]

Both Democrats and Republicans are often accused of putting their party's interests above the needs of the American people. Now would be an excellent time for Republicans to indicate their desire to re-establish a functioning legislative branch by recognizing that Jeffries has more support than any other candidate that has been fielded and vote for him to end this crazy contest for house speaker.

I mean, if the job is such a horror show, why not give it to a Democrat?

[hepcat]

Let’s hope that Matt Gaetz’s name becomes synonymous with dysfunction in government after this though. The crazy eight need to be purged from Washington with extreme prejudice.

[Smoove_B]

I was honestly just bringing some brinkmanship here after reading a recent article by Sahil Kapur and Julia Jester.

I'd humbly suggest you lead with that next time - so it doesn't just sound like you're floating a hot take.

[Exodor]

Let’s hope that Matt Gaetz’s name becomes synonymous with dysfunction in government after this though.

I don't think he cares much - all indications are he's going to run for FL governor and they seem to eat this shit up down there. Probably the result of spending too much time in the sun.

[Dave Allen]

I was honestly just bringing some brinkmanship here after reading a recent article by Sahil Kapur and Julia Jester.

I'd humbly suggest you lead with that next time - so it doesn't just sound like you're floating a hot take.

I get it. My 'nuff said wasn't 'nuff said.
"Oh Lord, please don't let me be misunderstood" by The Animals.

[Grifman]

I actually don't think it's a bad deal. However, it seems to me that all got shot to hell when they reach across the aisle group imploded when democrats let McCarthy sink. So now they have to be the even bigger party after bipartisan efforts were shut down on them. Still. Put forth a list of people who consider the current Supreme Court a travesty and do not consider TFG the leader of their party and I think I'd have a staring point.

When the Democrats saved McCarthy's clean funding bill do you know what he did next? He went on Sunday talk shows and blamed Democrats for the spending debacle. Not even a "well, you know, we couldn't have done it without my colleagues across the aisle." Not even that. I'd have thrown my shoe at him were I in the room.

Exactly, he was nothing but a douche bag when he could have been magnanimous and appreciative.

[Grifman]

It's a troll post. He's not seriously responding to anything.

wow didn't expect that...
I was honestly just bringing some brinkmanship here after reading a recent article by Sahil Kapur and Julia Jester.
Excerpt:

Jeffries said Democrats want “a bipartisan path” to reopening the House but didn’t outline what that would look like. Democrats unanimously nominated Jeffries to be speaker, but there’s no chance of him winning when Republicans have a 221-212 majority. Still, Democrats say the onus is on the GOP to negotiate with them and make concessions if they want help electing a speaker.

There are no serious discussions taking place on a coalition speaker picked with bipartisan votes, according to senior lawmakers and aides in both parties.

“No Republican has come to leadership to have a serious conversation of substance,” said a senior Democratic aide. “This is on Republicans to come to the Democrats to try to find a compromise.”

Don’t you mean bipartisanship rather than brinksmanship?

[Pyperkub]

It's a troll post. He's not seriously responding to anything.

wow didn't expect that...
I was honestly just bringing some brinkmanship here after reading a recent article by Sahil Kapur and Julia Jester.
Excerpt:

Jeffries said Democrats want “a bipartisan path” to reopening the House but didn’t outline what that would look like. Democrats unanimously nominated Jeffries to be speaker, but there’s no chance of him winning when Republicans have a 221-212 majority. Still, Democrats say the onus is on the GOP to negotiate with them and make concessions if they want help electing a speaker.

There are no serious discussions taking place on a coalition speaker picked with bipartisan votes, according to senior lawmakers and aides in both parties.

“No Republican has come to leadership to have a serious conversation of substance,” said a senior Democratic aide. “This is on Republicans to come to the Democrats to try to find a compromise.”

The thing is that the Democrats have been the "bigger" party, and we've had this discussion all year in the house follies thread.

Here is my congress person on what he's was thinking when it the democrats could have saved Mccarthy



Find us an elected Republican who has integrity and would keep his or her word and would work with all members of congress, while not kowtowing to those members who asked for pardons in the wake of Jan 6th, and maybe there's a path to what you asked.

Sent from my SM-S908U1 using Tapatalk

[malchior]

Hepcat got it right before. That very obvious problem is why the premise here is not particularly well thought out but then again this is a troll thread.

Agree with all of this except the “this is a troll thread” part. Really? Not to get all meta, but how is this a troll thread? The post is probably something on the minds of many, many Americans right now. The notion is misguided, but is it really troll behavior? That response feels off to me, but maybe there’s a history here I’m not aware of.

It was a data based assessment.

1. This idea might be in the minds of many, many Americans; however this specific idea mostly comes from and lives almost entirely in the right-wing information bubble in any sort of durable form. In comparison, I've seen relatively few discussions of this idea from liberals and centrists; they always acknowledge the reality that the Republicans have to make an offer first though because they are the broken party here.

Edit: With examples from Xitter protected by spoiler tags for those who hate the terrible but still useful Xitter!

Spoiler:

2. Irregular or new posters in this forum are very likely to have troll intentions. There is a high chance it's trolling when the idea source appears to come from the right wing information space.

3. The image post was confusing to say the least. That could just be miscommunication but the later explanation doesn't make much sense either.

Now we have new information though that refines my viewpoint:

The offered explanation that this came from reading the quoted NBC News political analysis is...odd. It was an analysis piece about the Democratic motives based on the political math and was published a week ago. It also was being framed in it's intersection with 2024 strategy and offered a relatively deep analysis that explained Democratic party rationale in line with what many of us know. How that translates into a thought that maybe it should be the source of a discussion about whether the Democrats should act like the "bigger" party is...strange to me.

Being a relatively old source, in the intervening time we have seen fairly reasonable Democratic party offers floated out and shot down. Not integrating that known knowledge into the "theory" here suggests that this could be more an uninformed or low information take and/or filtered through a diet of right-wing slop. I don't know for sure but I'm reassessing it to a 'probable troll post' as a minute refinement.

[Smoove_B]

As seen online - "The Republicans won't even vote for themselves - why should I?"

[Isgrimnur]

Don’t you mean bipartisanship rather than brinksmanship?

[Dave Allen]

It's a troll post. He's not seriously responding to anything.

wow didn't expect that...
I was honestly just bringing some brinkmanship here after reading a recent article by Sahil Kapur and Julia Jester.
Excerpt:

Jeffries said Democrats want “a bipartisan path” to reopening the House but didn’t outline what that would look like. Democrats unanimously nominated Jeffries to be speaker, but there’s no chance of him winning when Republicans have a 221-212 majority. Still, Democrats say the onus is on the GOP to negotiate with them and make concessions if they want help electing a speaker.

There are no serious discussions taking place on a coalition speaker picked with bipartisan votes, according to senior lawmakers and aides in both parties.

“No Republican has come to leadership to have a serious conversation of substance,” said a senior Democratic aide. “This is on Republicans to come to the Democrats to try to find a compromise.”

Don’t you mean bipartisanship rather than brinksmanship?

Yes, I meant bipartisan, but the brinkmanship will be in how long Democrats wait to do what I initially suggested. Sure I have a pretty simplistic outlook; uninformed, half-baked, and late to the table. I therefore humbly represent the majority of Americans.

[malchior]

Ignore everything offered as an explanation as to why it isn't a reasonable position, doubling down on a right-wing idea, embracing ignorance, and thinking that makes themselves part of a "majority". Looks like my initial read was on target.

[malchior]

Example of Democrats showing leadership.

[Smoove_B]

The GOP has really backed themselves into a corner. Either capitulate to the ~10 lunatics that want to shut down the government in order to seat a chaos-goblin Speaker or cooperate with the Democrats to come to a agreement on a Speaker both parties can work with.

I wonder what they'll choose?

[Pyperkub]

It's a troll post. He's not seriously responding to anything.

wow didn't expect that...
I was honestly just bringing some brinkmanship here after reading a recent article by Sahil Kapur and Julia Jester.
Excerpt:

Jeffries said Democrats want “a bipartisan path” to reopening the House but didn’t outline what that would look like. Democrats unanimously nominated Jeffries to be speaker, but there’s no chance of him winning when Republicans have a 221-212 majority. Still, Democrats say the onus is on the GOP to negotiate with them and make concessions if they want help electing a speaker.

There are no serious discussions taking place on a coalition speaker picked with bipartisan votes, according to senior lawmakers and aides in both parties.

“No Republican has come to leadership to have a serious conversation of substance,” said a senior Democratic aide. “This is on Republicans to come to the Democrats to try to find a compromise.”

Don’t you mean bipartisanship rather than brinksmanship?

Yes, I meant bipartisan, but the brinkmanship will be in how long Democrats wait to do what I initially suggested. Sure I have a pretty simplistic outlook; uninformed, half-baked, and late to the table. I therefore humbly represent the majority of Americans.

You still have it backwards, the brinksmanship is all about which republican will decide that courting democrats can get them the Speakership.

If you haven't noticed, the GOP is having GOP-only secret ballots for Speaker.

Exactly what influence do you think democrats have in those?

Sent from my SM-S908U1 using Tapatalk

[Alefroth]

Have any of the recent candidates campaigned for Democratic votes at all?