Will their serial inability to elect a Speaker cost the GOP The House?

[Wrestleknownothing]

Congressional Republicans seem hell bent on demonstrating their inability to complete the most basic administrative functions of government, never mind competently doing the people's business. Will their teen-like addiction to drama cost them with voters?

Is there and unintended consequence at the ballot box causing moderate voters to walk away from Republican candidates?

[Plasmodium]

This is what their constituents asked for and this is what we got.  They may lose some peripheral support but the base is very happy with this outcome.

[mspart]

Generally this may be true.   As long as there is no speaker, there is no legislating going on.    No legislating is a good thing.   I generally think this way.   But not being able to come together on a speaker is not a good thing.  What is the big deal about speaker?   Just vote them in and get on with it.   Would this drive me to vote D?   No, it would not.  

mspart

[TitleIX is ripe for reform]

There are some good folks behind this disruption, and I'm cheering for 'em.   I'm not disagreeing with the gist of anyone's posts on this thread thus far, by the way.   Instead I'm happy that folks are taking seriously the importance of electing leaders of the House (etc.) who have a vision that's far better than merely going along to get along.   Republican V.P. candidate Paul Ryan disappointed the heck out of me, and millions of other fiscal conservatives.   He talked a big game and then flip-flopped.   The U.S.A. can't afford more of it.    

 

[Offthemat]

I don’t think it’s as big a deal as some are trying to make it.  It’s democracy.  

[TitleIX is ripe for reform]

I'm skeptical of Lauren Boebert's re-election prospects though... and the GOP's lead in the House is already even more thin than her willingness to behave discreetly. 



  I'm not really referring to her theater behavior, either.   It's the walking out on four kids after the family helped her get where she is  antic that particularly rubs me the wrong way.    And the theater antics admittedly didn't help them or her ex.   

https://www.businessinsider.com/lauren-boebert-adam-frisch-fundraising-millions-colorado-rematch-2023-10

Edited October 18, 2023 by TitleIX is ripe for reform

[WrestlingRasta]

I believe they lose the house, but I don’t think it will have to do with the speaker vote. 

[Wrestleknownothing]

7 minutes ago, mspart said:

Generally this may be true.   As long as there is no speaker, there is no legislating going on.    No legislating is a good thing.   I generally think this way.   But not being able to come together on a speaker is not a good thing.  What is the big deal about speaker?   Just vote them in and get on with it.   Would this drive me to vote D?   No, it would not.  

mspart

Historically, I have been of the same view. Less action from the government costs me less money.

The new dynamic now, though, is the silliness that is very serious of the debt limit and voting to fund the government. All it does is create unnecessary drama and cost tax payers money. It is all very Dwight Schrute Doomsday Device-y.

 

[Offthemat]

If it leads to CRs and ‘omnibus’ bills then it doesn’t matter a bit.  

[VakAttack]

For many, government grinding to a halt is a feature, not a bug.  They claim government doesn't work, then they go and break it, and then point at the government and say "see, it doesn't work."

[WrestlingRasta]

There is always a need for legislating and governing.  Times change, people change, things change……democracy changes.  And each day…..shit happens. 
 

Legislating and governing is not automatically synonymous with “big government”

[TitleIX is ripe for reform]

Entrepreneurs prefer not to have to keep watching their backs for changing legislation on a weekly basis.  They have enough to worry about.   It's part of why so many have left California (where the state legislature meets year 'round) for states where the state legislature meets just a few months every year, or even every other year (such as Virginia or Texas).   If there's a sudden need for new legislation on something, a special session can be called.   

The lobbying class likes for the legislature always to be in session, though.   Washington D.C.'s chock full of beltway bandits, eager to collude with the Uniparty (as Matt Gaetz calls 'em).   

[VakAttack]

Just now, TitleIX is ripe for reform said:

Entrepreneurs prefer not to have to keep watching their backs for changing legislation on a weekly basis.  They have enough to worry about.   It's part of why so many have left California (where the state legislature meets year 'round) for states where the state legislature meets just a few months every year, or even every other year (such as Virginia or Texas).   If there's a sudden need for new legislation on something, a special session can be called.   

The lobbying class likes for the legislature always to be in session, though.   Washington D.C.'s chock full of beltway bandits, eager to collude with the Uniparty (as Matt Gaetz calls 'em).   

Yes, as history has told us, if you leave the rich and powerful unchecked, they will rain glory and riches on the poors and exploitable.

[WrestlingRasta]

1 minute ago, TitleIX is ripe for reform said:

Entrepreneurs prefer not to have to keep watching their backs for changing legislation on a weekly basis.  They have enough to worry about.   It's part of why so many have left California (where the state legislature meets year 'round) for states where the state legislature meets just a few months every year, or even every other year (such as Virginia or Texas).   If there's a sudden need for new legislation on something, a special session can be called.   

The lobbying class likes for the legislature always to be in session, though.   Washington D.C.'s chock full of beltway bandits, eager to collude with the Uniparty (as Matt Gaetz calls 'em).   

I didn’t say ALL legislation is needed, I said there is always a need. 
 

Totally agree with your second paragraph. 

[TitleIX is ripe for reform]

4 minutes ago, VakAttack said:

Yes, as history has told us, if you leave the rich and powerful unchecked, they will rain glory and riches on the poors and exploitable.

Courts can help keep others policed year 'round.   So can the media.   So can boycotting groups.   That said, legislatures sometimes let good legislative bills die because time runs out, and it's disappointing.   But nobody's safe when the legislature's in session.   It's relatively good to have time away from that threat so one can focus on being productive.   It's not a perfect system though, admittedly.  

[Plasmodium]

If you don't like where you are inaction will not help you.

[TitleIX is ripe for reform]

There's a saying, though, that many problems are on the road ahead, but some will roll into the ditch before you reach 'em.   

[mspart]

40 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

There is always a need for legislating and governing.  Times change, people change, things change……democracy changes.  And each day…..shit happens. 
 

Legislating and governing is not automatically synonymous with “big government”

If they legislated and governed appropriately, you are correct.

mspart