Republican Rep. Jim Jordan failed again Wednesday on a crucial second ballot to become House speaker, but the hard-fighting ally of Donald Trump showed no signs of dropping out despite losing support from even more of his GOP colleagues.

Next steps were highly uncertain as angry, frustrated Republicans looked at other options. A bipartisan group of lawmakers floated an extraordinary plan — to give the interim speaker pro tempore, Rep. Patrick McHenry, R-N.C., more power to reopen the immobilized House and temporarily conduct routine business. But that seems doubtful, for now.

What was clear was that Jordan’s path to become House speaker was almost certainly lost. He was opposed by 22 Republicans, two more than he lost in first-round voting the day before. Many view the Ohio congressman as too extreme for a central seat of U.S. power and resented the harassing hardball tactics from Jordan’s allies for their votes. One lawmaker said they had received death threats.

  • Wilibus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    As someone that doesn’t understand US politics because I’m not American, I have a question.

    Is it possible that the defecting republicans and the Democrats could band together and elect a democrat as the speaker?

    • TheHarpyEagle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Possible, but highly unlikely. The holdouts are holdouts because they’re further right than the rest of the party, not because they in any way align with Democrats. The two worked together because it looked good to their bases; far right Republicans look like they’re making good on their promise of getting rid of “RINOs” and more moderate Republicans, and the Democrats look good next to an apparently fractured and unstable party.

      From here, though, the two differ greatly in what they want out of the speaker. Obviously Democrats want a Democrat speaker, and it would look bad to their base if they compromised to bring in a Republican. Plus, it doesn’t really hurt them to wait it out because they can’t do anything without the majority, anyway. The Freedom Caucus want a Republican who is further right and would likewise also look bad if they got rid of one moderate Republican just to bring in another one. They look better to their base if they remain obstinate and don’t give in (at least not without some major concessions).

    • redhorsejacket@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      It is possible, though improbable given the divisive political climate. To do so would be throwing away one of the primary advantages of holding a majority of the House. It would require a contingent of Republicans to essentially turn their backs on their party, likely forgoing any sort of financial aid for their reelection campaigns, and becoming persona non grata among their peers. If any group were to do so, they’d almost assuredly be frozen out of any committees they were on, and any legislation they proposed would be DOA. In short, it would almost certainly be political suicide.

      So yes, it is possible, but I don’t think it very likely.

    • Sconrad122@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes, but in about 5-6 months, Republicans will have to run against other Republicans in a primary to get their party’s nomination to run as an incumbent in the general election next November, and none of them want to go into that vote with their opponent able to say that they gave Democrats the Speaker seat because the Republican base that votes in the primary cares oodles more about tribalism than a functional government