Just Thinking... Two current House Republicans that Dems might be willing to consider backing

[FemDemERA]

Dan Newhouse (Washington's 4th District) and David Valadao (California's 22nd District).

Both of these voted to impeach Trump, survived primaries against far-right Trumpians, are from Blue states and have to deal with a fairly large contingent of Democratic voters in their district, so although they talk and vote the Republican line, they also seem to be a bit more willing to actually do their job.

Newhouse has been around awhile. There are pockets of his district that are becoming more blue, almost purple. He has to be aware of that and could be part of why he felt he could withstand a vote to impeach and still win his district.

I think Valadoa is in a lean Democratic district. Not sure how new he is, or much about him, other than he voted to impeach.

Both seem to be above the fray and willing to at least work for a functioning government. And they voted to impeach, so I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt that they want a democracy and a Congress that works.

There are some Repubs who wouldn't vote for them, but maybe there are some Dems who would? They have to be better than the names I'm seeing on the news....

[Ocelot II]

1. I don't think Dems should back any of them. Let them deal with their own mess.

[anciano]

2. Agreed.....

they made this toy, let them play with it.

[femmedem]

4. But their mess is everyone's mess.

I'm about as partisan as they get, but only as a tool to improve our country. If the Republicans completely implode there's going to be a lot of collateral damage.

[quakerboy]

9. And if they don't implode

There will be even more collateral damage.

[honest.abe]

24. Not necessarily.

If we can work a deal with a few moderates to elect a moderate as the op suggested then at least short term we can overt a disaster.

[honest.abe]

22. +1

Totally agree.

[wnylib]

12. I'd agree except for the fact that we face another potential shutdown

in November if the House leadership problem is not resolved.

Regarding the candidates suggested in the OP, Republicans would not support either one of them.

[honest.abe]

23. Yep.. that's the conundrum

There will be huge negative repercussions to all of us if these idiots totally implode even though most of us would love to see them implode.

[ZonkerHarris]

3. Holy **** no! Democrats do not vote for any Republican to be speaker of the house, ever!

Never never never never never never never never never never
I keep seeing posts on this site where our members are suggesting Democrats vote for Republicans for the speaker of the House.
People need to get a clue.
learn how this works.
We never vote for the enemy to give them something.
You can vote to take something away like we did to Kevin mccarthy

[honest.abe]

25. House Dems were considering saving McCarthy.

If he agreed to some concessions.

[ZonkerHarris]

39. and yet it never happened.

It was very unlikely anyway. The ship completely sailed after mccarthy attacked Democrats over the government shutdown and tried to blame it on them on the Sunday shows
Besides I think Hakeem Jeffries knows better than to try to make a deal with a man who lies and doesn't keep his word

[honest.abe]

40. I am just pointing out that our Dem House members were considering it.

That's all.

[onenote]

5. No repubs would vote for them

Last edited Thu Oct 5, 2023, 10:39 PM - Edit history (1)

Ten repubs voted to impeach trump. Those two are the only ones still in the House. They're toxic.

[patphil]

6. I think it's far better to nominate a strong Democratic to run against them.

If they're going to vote Republican anyway, we don't have anything to lose by running against them, or whoever ends up winning the Republican Primary. If the state has a strong Democratic presence, we might actually win one of them

[LeftInTX]

34. This is about Speaker of the House.

[FemDemERA]

7. Wow, I didn't even think I would get a response, LOL!

I've never started a thread before! Part of me feels the way many of you do, but then I think about the work to be done and I really do believe it is better if we work across the aisle when possible. I understand why we didn't "save" McCarthy, but I also don't want Trump waltzing into the Capital and somehow ending up with the gavel, or Jordan, or some other complete fascist/insurrectionist sycophant and those are the only ones I know of that have at least a little backbone.

It's wishful thinking anyway on my part since they haven't stepped up, but I guess no more fantastic than Liz or Adam.

In any case, I appreciate you all responding. I love the DU!

[LiberaBlueDem]

8. The numbers

of 220 repubs there are 130 magats in the house and 90 repubs who voted for the CR

there are 215 Dems, so Dems alone can't get the speaker

But if 3 repubs vote for the Dems choice we can have the speaker

Since the Dems are united our 215 votes will determine who is the speaker because the repub magats will only accept a magat.

So of the 90 non-magats there could be the three who do vote for a Dem speaker or an acceptable repub.

Welcome to DU, it's fun,eh?

[FemDemERA]

10. LOL, and then there are those "present" votes

Wasn't that how McCarthy got there finally? Those voting "present" reduced the number he needed to get over the hump?

I just don't see anyone crossing over to vote for a Dem? My only guess would be someone like those two, but I worry it's just fantasy thinking with this Congress. If they won't cross over and we won't cross over, it's just chaos and banging our heads against a wall as we watch them blow it all up. That's not good for the country, or the watching world.



I have no answers, only questions... and trying to keep the trust, hoping our Dem leaders have a good plan.

[wnylib]

13. Republicans would not ever vote for the two that you suggested in the OP.

They would consider them traitors, liberal, and therefore, pariahs.

[honest.abe]

27. We only need a few Rs if all Dems voted yea.

Right?

[onenote]

29. You're looking for unicorns

Republican members of Congress who would vote to make a Democrat speaker don't exist. And, for that matter, Democrats that would vote for a Republican candidate for speaker also don't exist.

[honest.abe]

31. I was suggesting voting for a moderate Republican.

I think that’s the thread discussion here.

House Dems were considering voting for McCarthy with concessions.

[onenote]

35. a moderate republican wouldn't get enough repub votes

for the Democrats to elect that person speaker.

[honest.abe]

36. How many would we need? Maybe 10 or so?

Seems possible.

[onenote]

37. It may seem possible, but as a practical reality it is not.

You underestimate the party loyalty component.

[honest.abe]

38. Yes you are probably right but..

Maybe not a true moderate but someone just enough moderate to pass a reasonable budget but still be hardcore conservative enough to be acceptable to the majority Rs.

[onenote]

42. The repubs aren't interested in a reasonable budget

That includes anyone who might be considered a "moderate". Anything that comes out of the house would be unacceptable to the Senate Democrats.

[honest.abe]

43. Well somehow we got deal ceiling raised and temporay budget passed with these same House members.

I think there are enough non-crazies to pass something reasonable. They have self interests that will be impacted if the government is shutdown long term.

[blogslug]

11. My guess is, whatever republican they offer for a vote, majority Democrats will vote "No"

If they actually nominate that orange bastard, then all the Democrats will vote "Hell No"

[onenote]

32. You're almost right. All Democrats will vote no for ANY Republican candidate.

There were 15 ballots for speaker in January. Eight or nine different repubs received votes. Not one of those votes came from a Democrat.

The Democrats will nominate Jeffries and will vote unanimously for him. And no Republicans will vote for him. Ever.

[femmedem]

17. I agree that this was an instance when working with the majority of Rs would have been better.

We had two options:

Option 1: The Democrats join the majority of Republicans and vote against removing McCarthy. Maybe it would have built a bridge to future bipartisanship, prevented a shutdown, and increased the odds of providing future aid to Ukraine. Or maybe it wouldn't have--but in the eyes of most Americans and some Republican elected officials, we would have clearly put country before party.

or Option 2, which is where we are now: We end up with Jim Jordan as speaker, and every time we complain about him the response will be, "So why didn't you save McCarthy?"

A belated welcome to DU!

[EndlessWire]

14. NO.

Wouldn't vote for a Repub to be dogcatcher. Look, if someone like say, Adam Schiff, came up and explained it differently, then maybe. Just a maybe. But, I don't see any reason to vote one of them in.

Let a few of them vote for one of our guys. We're screwed, anyway.

[redqueen]

15. I don't know why Dems would bother to join that circus

Maybe if the candidate agreed to make rule changes , but that seems unlikely considering the state of that side of the aisle.

[Voltaire2]

16. Or 3 republicans can vote for the Democrat.

[Shrek]

18. That's kind of what I was thinking

Nominate one of the Blue Dogs and it wouldn't take many Republican votes for a Democrat to become Speaker.

There may be some in Biden-leaning districts who could go for that over one of the crazies from their own side.

[Just_Vote_Dem]

19. I like that n/t

[honest.abe]

28. Those 3 Rs would need 24 x 7 security.

I just dont see it happening. Their careers as politicians would be over unless they switched parties.

[onenote]

33. See post #29

[TxGuitar]

20. No

No support for any Rs. Zero zilch nada

[Wounded Bear]

21. Electing a "moderate" republican speaker won't fix the problem...

the hardliners will still throw sand in the gears and otherwise gum up the works.

[honest.abe]

26. Well we got the debt ceiling and short term funding passed recently.

The idiot hardliners were not able to stop that.

[LeftInTX]

30. The ball is in the Republican's court. They aren't gonna nominate someone who will work with Dems

The odds are slim that we aren't gonna get a hardliner like Scalise or Jordan.

Even if a moderate is nominated, he probably wouldn't get enough votes, even with the Dems support. If for some reason, there is a good chance that person could win with Democratic support, then I think Dems should cross the line. But the odds are low that this would happen. Speaker is gonna be from their "base".....

[brooklynite]

41. And why would five Republicans support either of them?

This is not a "whomever gets the most votes" election. The Speaker must get an absolute majority (currently 217 votes).