Why didn't the Dems organize so that McCarthy didn't have to give the farm away?

[Marcus IM]

If the Dems would have organised and sat out or voted Present, then McCarthy wouldn't have had to negotiate everything away to the insurrectionists to get their damn votes.

They're on the Rules Committee now? ffs

Help me understand.

[Nictuku]

1. Why should Democrats bail out McCarthy?

McCarthy should step down. Republicans should put forward someone who has 218 votes (whether all Republican, or a mix of Republican and Democrats)

[Nictuku]

6. Thinking about this a little more

.... it would be interesting to see, if Democrats did back McCarthy, wouldn't that be the kiss of death for McCarthy - where he wouldn't get any R votes?

That might have been interesting.

[Marcus IM]

23. I never suggested that Dems back McC. n/t

[Samrob]

61. McCarthy would rather be owned by insurrectionists than Dems. He didn't want Dem deal. nt

[MLAA]

2. Let them stew in their own mess.

The more crazy things they try like cutting social security the better for us. Of course there is certainly risk they will do the country great harm. I say let them show their true colors as a party led by Gaetz and Boebert with Kevin as a figure head.

[Marcus IM]

45. Yep. But, aren't we all going to have to stew with them? n/t

[Nictuku]

62. Dems benefit from the 1 Rep can call to vote him out

... They should do it every day!!

[dem4decades]

3. The farm would have been given away anyway, why should the Democrats help them?

[PortTack]

9. Nailed it!

[Marcus IM]

19. Seems to me the insurrectionists have even more power than they would have had.

Even McCarthy didn't want to have to give them so much power at first.

[karynnj]

34. Their power is and was real and continues for the next 2 years

McCarthy needs to either make sure he gets almost all Republicans on any bill that he wants to pass OR McCarthy has to support a bill with genuine bipartisan support. If McCarthy thinks success is being popular with the right, he might be able to pass right wing bills that can not pass the Senate. If he wants to actually pass legislation is has to be bipartisan.

[Marcus IM]

47. I understand. Thanks.

[dflprincess]

4. Why didn't 6 sane Republicans see what was happening & join Democrats in voting for Jefferies

Why, why, why?

McCarthy could never be trusted and if he didn't make his deal with the Insurrectionist Caucus this week, he'd make them the next time.
It was not up to the Democrats to bail the Republicans out of their mess.

[Mr.Bill]

14. Because if they did

wingnuts would probably be shooting at their houses right now while their families were inside.

[dflprincess]

28. There is that

and I'm not sure there are 6 sane Republicans.

[RockRaven]

5. Because McCarthy would have to "give away the farm" to get the rules package passed, unless

you think Dems should have rolled over and given him everything he wanted there too.

And then the next thing (debt ceiling, whatever), help him do it his way, etc.

And the next one, and the next one. Why bother being Democrats at all? Why don't we all just join his party?

[Marcus IM]

37. I said nowhere that Dems should roll over, just strategised to not give McC so much pressure to ...

... hand over so much to the insurrectionist 20.

[cilla4progress]

7. I don't think cutting SS and women's freedoms

is going to work like they think it is.

Seniors and women are two of the biggest voting blocs!

[PortTack]

17. Exactly! This is nothing more than a political football

They never once made any real effort to cut SS and MC when they had a trifecta. They are doing this thinking they can campaign forever on the fact that President Biden and the Dems were the ones that cut social programs. Nothing more…nothing less.

It would be political death for the Dems and President Biden to go along with this. It isn’t going to happen.

Just as in the past, this will not end well for the gqp!

[UTUSN]

8. ?! - to save wingnuts?! - uh...

[Hermit-The-Prog]

10. How many more times will this be asked?

[durablend]

11. Seriously!

[BumRushDaShow]

13. THIS 👆👆👆

[Marcus IM]

32. Excuse me. I've been at work, not glued to DU. Apologies for the offence. n/t

[Hekate]

51. It was your implied assumption that Dem leadership is both stupid (unprepared) & all-powerful

To quote you: “Why, why, why?” would you think that?

Other than that, no offense taken.

[Marcus IM]

52. OK. I removed it. Sorry for the outrage I created.

Too many "expert" talking heads in my head I guess.

[CoopersDad]

12. The concessions weaken them, we want them weakened, the alternative...

...caving so that Kevin kept all the power would only make them stronger.

Now they'll be in more disarray.

It's not ideal, it's better than helping him win early.

[News Junkie]

36. They'd be more split if McCarthy dealt with Democrats

and gave them concessions. Much of the right would freak. If there are going to be conditions moving forward, I'd rather they pull left.

[CoopersDad]

56. We don't know if they did or didn't try.

Kevin could have told them to screw off.

[Claustrum]

15. You act like republicans would have taken democrat's offer even if we gave it......

Regardless of the concessions, they were going to try to impeach Biden, hearing on Hunter, kill the IRS and DoJ....

[Marcus IM]

22. I act like??? I'm asking a question? wtf?

[Claustrum]

25. Sorry. I don't mean it offensively.

But this has been asked many times. And each one of these types of questions assumes that republicans are going to work with democrats in good faith, which at least in the last 10-15 years, has shown that it hasn't been the case. They were never going to work with democrats. They were going to negotiate with the crazy right wings rather than democrats.

[Marcus IM]

30. Thanks. I haven't been glued to DU. Been working. n/t

[Walleye]

16. It's Kevin got six votes from Democrats, he would lose all of his Republican votes

[Marcus IM]

24. I never suggested that Dems back McC. n/t

[Walleye]

27. Well I think if he made any kind of deal with Democrats

[Marcus IM]

31. I suggested neither. Just lowering the vote threshold so McC wouldn't have to make deals w/the 20.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

18. When opponent is making mistakes, don't stop them. . . . nt

[PortTack]

21. ☝️☝️☝️☝️☝️☝️

[tritsofme]

20. Because that was never a real option. McCarthy would lose 100+ Republicans

if he made a deal with Democrats.

[Marcus IM]

26. Wasn't suggesting a deal. Just lowering the threshold so McC wouldn't have to give away any power ..

... to insurrectionists.

[mcar]

29. Huh?

Why is anyone blaming Dems for this train wreck?

[Marcus IM]

33. Just suggesting that a different strategy could have worked in our favor.

Of course, I am wrong according to the responses.

BUT, I NEVER suggested making a deal with McC.

[LenaBaby61]

35. The problems began way back that lead to this nazi cluster-fuck in the house tonight.

The DCCC dropped the ball big time. But then again, maybe it was meant for more Independents, women and youth to see just how hideous this party of nazis, treason, pedios, groomers, of wanting little girls to have daddy's incest baby IS.

Oh, and jack ass Mario Cuomo had a hand to plan in this also. You'll see why. There was NO reason for Nadler to be challenged by Malloney. See why both ended up going against each other thanks to those re-drawn district maps there in NY.

[Marcus IM]

39. So, you're saying it is the Dems fault.

Just what peeps are accusing me of here.

Of course, I didn't. Was imply suggesting a different strategy to more isolate the insurrectionist 20.

[LenaBaby61]

53. NO, what I'm saying is that it shouldn't have come down to this ....

Dems losing those seats in NY which they shouldn't have lost is the culprit.

The State Supreme court judge who threw out those maps was a right-winged judge, and guess WHO appointed him.

[moose65]

49. That must have been some trick...

considering that Mario Cuomo has been dead for 8 years.

If you're going to call someone a jackass, at least get their name right.

[LenaBaby61]

55. I made a mistake, I mean his SON.

[Karma13612]

38. Wait, what?????

Why would we want to cooperate with the McCarthy debacle? Either way, these 20 far-right MAGA members are going to throw hand grenades and napalm even with all the concessions. I understand that you thought that by minimizing the concessions, that McCarthy would have negotiating power later. No, now he has zero left. So once the job of legislating actually starts, he is going to have a terrible time trying to get anything done. The stuff he wants to do is mostly just vindictive crap like investigating Democrats.

When it comes to the debt ceiling, it is going to be a fire fight regardless of who is Speaker.

We don’t negotiate with terrorists.

[Marcus IM]

42. I wasn't suggesting making a deal nor cooperating/negotiating with them. Clearly.

Aside from that, thanks for the response. (y)

[Omnipresent]

40. Relax, McCarthy is as good as his word.

He has no intention of honoring any one of their demands, especially the one about a single member calling for a vote to oust a sitting Speaker.

House Republicans are suckers for being conned, just ask tfg.

[Marcus IM]

43. From your lips ... n/t

[tanyev]

41. Because McCarthy giving the farm away was always going to happen at some point.

There is no reality where McCarthy stands up to the insurrectionists.

[onenote]

48. Stand up to them? He's one of them?

When did he ever break with them?

[tanyev]

65. Um, that's why I said there's NO reality where he stands up to them.

[onenote]

44. So you think that who is on the rules committee

Will make a difference? That the rest of the Republican caucus suddenly were going to become enamored of bipartisanship and work with Democrats , give up their stated agenda of investigations, IRS spending roll back, holding the debt ceiling hostage, etc etc

[Marcus IM]

50. I guess we'll see. n/t

[Hekate]

58. Past is prologue. #1 There are no "moderate" Republicans left. #2 The GOP has a hard-right agenda

…which includes shutting the government down if they don’t get their way, virtually defunding the Pentagon so they won’t be able to help Ukraine, and a host of other goodies.

Their hard-right agenda further includes impeaching President Joe Biden, perpetually dragging Hunter Biden through the mud over his laptop that was stolen and hacked, and raking Ashley Biden over the coals over her stolen diary. Really sounds like getting down to “the people’s business” amirite?

My comments, by the way, are based on public records and statements by Republicans regarding what they plan to do with their majority in the current Congress. Their ability to do all this, like their ability to dole out committee assignments and chair seats, is because they have a majority in the House.

Certain Repubs want to be chair of Rules and other extremely powerful committees — and they will be, because that’s the rules. They have the majority. They are lusting for revenge, not governance. They want to burn the institution down.

There is no compromise to be had, not any more — and it’s not the fault of anyone but the GOP. Our people, the Dems, are doing very well so far by sticking together. Pelosi schooled them well, and Jeffries will do well holding the line, and they will do the best they can over the next 2 horrible years. They are prepared. They have concrete plans — and none of what they are doing or will do involves magical thinking.

[Fullduplexxx]

46. They were very clear about not wanting dems help

Get used to it it's gonna be ugly

[WarGamer]

54. There's a reason why that's not done...

What if DEMS take the House and have a competitive run for Speaker?

Are you OK with 200 GOP'ers voting en bloc with 20 DEMS to affect the DEM Speaker race?

Nope. Stay out of it.

Let the bat shit crazy be bat shit crazy.

[maxrandb]

57. Yes, this shitshow is all the Dems fault

JFC!!!

No, this post deserves a "JFC ON A TRAILER-HITCH" response.

Why didn't Dems stop Donnie Dipshit from being inaugurated?

Why didn't Dems do this?

Why didn't Dems do that?

And folks wonder why we lose elections.

I swear, this is like giving Superman a Kryptonite necklace, and then complaining that he couldn't stop the speeding train.

[betsuni]

59. +1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000THANKYOU

[yardwork]

69. It is very dull, isn't it?

[Ms. Toad]

60. Since far too many on our side of the aisle are just as interested in owning the Republicans

as they are in owning the libs.

I'm with you - I wish we had done what we could to work toward a less, rather than more, disastrous speaker of the house.

Having a completely disastrous speaker of the house, who owes his election to that position, is not "their" problem - it is a problem for all of us.

[yardwork]

68. What less disastrous option might we have had?

Somehow I feel that our Democratic leadership understands the situation very well and made the right choice. Clearly, the Democratic caucus was highly organized!

McCarthy is disastrous for the Republicans. He comes out of this in a very weak position. In contrast with say, Nancy Pelosi, he failed to consolidate various factions in his caucus. Nobody trusts him. He will have a lot of problems, and that's good for the Democrats and good for the American people.

[onenote]

63. What farm did he give away? How would McCarthy speakership be any different?

Do you really think he would be a beneficent, bi-partisan minded speaker? He and the rest of the Republican caucus have voted in lockstep against the Democrats time and time and time again. Before the last Congress ended, he already had announced the repub agenda: pointless investigations, attempts to roll back IRS spending, social security "reform," linking the debt ceiling to spending cuts, and on and on.

Please tell me how it would have been different if he had been elected speaker without making "concessions" to the crazies -- concessions that ultimately don't mean a damn thing when it comes to the policy objectives of the republicans, on which McCarthy is in full alignment with the crazies.

[Claustrum]

67. Thank you.

This has been my thought all along. I know the MSM seems to want to enlarge the impact of the "concessions". But I couldn't think of anything that the "concession" would lead to a different agenda. It's still the same impeach Biden, hearings on Hunter, kill the IRS and DoJ, etc.

Maybe the crazies will have a bigger role and their voices would get louder. But the overall agenda wasn't ever going to change. The debt ceiling is going to be a problem regardless of his "concessions".

[Kennah]

64. What could Kevin be trusted to do? His own party members don't trust him.

[ismnotwasm]

66. No.