‘It’s Not a Threat. It’s Being on the Damn Team.’

Republican infighting over Kevin McCarthy’s speakership bid shows no signs of stopping.

By
55
Rep. Don Bacon (Photo By Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

Moderate GOP Rep. Don Bacon has a warning for the handful of Republicans threatening to derail House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy’s speakership bid: Vote for McCarthy, or he’ll shore up votes from moderate Democrats to elect a centrist instead. 

But at least one member of the House Freedom Caucus is already calling what he thinks is Bacon’s bluff. “That’s a deliberate, orchestrated disinformation campaign. I don’t think there’s any truth and veracity to that whatsoever,” Rep. Bob Good, one of a handful of potential no-votes on McCarthy, told The Dispatch Wednesday. “I’d like to know what Republicans will vote with what Democrats first.”

The comments show just how fractious the House GOP conference is heading into the January 3 speakership vote.

Bacon, co-chair of the centrist GOP Main Street Caucus and member of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus, says conversations are underway with “several” members of the New Democrat Coalition and the Problem Solvers Caucus who have “discussed a willingness to work together on this” should the speakership vote go multiple rounds.

Start a Free Trial
Get every newsletter and all of The Dispatch. Support quality, fact-based journalism. Get Started ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
55
By
Comments (55)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Dhsavidge1

    When will our parties stop with the team bullhockey? There is one team: U.S.A.

    Collapse
  2. Ron.Warrick

    I don’t belong to any organized political party. I’m a Republican.

    Collapse
  3. Wes.Bridges

    Not a particular fan of McCarthy, but who else?

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Mister D

      IMO he has shown himself unworthy of the reigns of power. I'd rather roll the dice on drawing a name out of a fishbowl than vote for someone I know is unfit for the position.

      Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Bill Nelson

    Nothing mentioned about McCarthy’s comments on Jan. 6.

    Collapse
  5. Wragenm

    What is the Freedom Caucus endgame? I do not believe moderate R's will vote for Biggs. They have no choice but to support McCarthy.

    Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Lbrtylvr

    I've known that DB since he was a lowly intern and a narcissistic, authoritarian Young Republican, and nobody is more deserving to lose the speakership in a humiliating fashion, but I do hate that it is the Kook Caucus that will be responsible for it if it happens.

    Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    Rlritt

    "For example, any centrist Democrat who voted for a Republican speaker—even a middle-of-the-road “Fred Upton type” Bacon has previously floated—would immediately risk being primaried next cycle. "

    No, they wouldn't. Why would they be primaried? There has to be a speaker. It will be a Republican, so most Democrats would want a reasonable and honest Republican.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Scarlette Tarte

      Yes, and voting for a moderate Republican would actually be accepted by Democratic voters as a win.

      I suspect it's actually the other way round...any Republican who votes moderate today is in danger of being primaried by a whackdoodle far rightie like MTG.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Rlritt

        I believe you're right.

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Bill Nelson

          Both sides are right. Why did Sinema leave the party?

          Collapse
          1. Retired Prosecutor

            She knew she was about to get successfully primaried by a progressive.

            Collapse
          2. Avatar photo
            Rlritt

            I think she did it to be important. When the Senate was evenly split the Democrats needed her vote. She could negotiate to get what she wanted. Now she is just not that important because there is a Democratic majority. As an Independent, she is saying you can't count on my vote. She becomes important.

            Collapse
    2. Libertyforallusa2

      Because voters are idiots. And the attack ads write themselves, "x voted for a REPUBLICAN as speaker!"

      Doesn't matter that a Republican was going to win. That's nuance, and nuance doesn't win elections.

      Collapse
    3. Avatar photo
      2sequoia

      I agree with you.

      Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    DougAz

    Speaker McCarthy is just a weak pathetically useless and morally bankrupt man.

    He has zero leadership skills. Zero agenda and policy ideas.

    He's an unattached oar on fragile wooden boat that is leaking down the Riviera of empty headed Trumpism

    Collapse
    1. Andrw4488

      I don't want to agree with you because McCarthy is a bit of a pinata, but I don't like him.
      But he will be speaker. This is a bit of a non-story.
      Except he did put out a bit of an agenda but it is no contract with America

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        DougAz

        Did you mean..contract "with" or "on" America vis a vis one depraved Newt Gingrich..the man of hate?

        Collapse
        1. Andrw4488

          I don't agree w/ your characterization. I'd agree that Gingrich himself ended up being a fairly loathsome character. I think he divorced a wife on her deathbed for $$ reasons or worse
          But where the CWA is concerned, he put forward what he intended to do. You are welcome to disagree with his ideas, but at least he put them out there

          Collapse
          1. Avatar photo
            DougAz

            Fair

            Collapse
  9. CatoTheElder

    There’s a key idea that hasn’t been enough talked about here, or elsewhere, as far as I’ve seen, though it’s obliquely indicated above. It’s a simple extension of the idea of getting people to vote “present” or to abstain. If enough moderate Dems vote Present/Abstain, then the number of GOP members necessary to qualify as a winning majority drops. Thus, centrist/moderate Dems wouldn’t have to vote FOR McCarthy, they’d just have to NOT vote against him. If they can be persuaded that the choice to be presented after a McCarthy fall from grace would be worse for themselves and the Democratic Party, it’s possible that enough could be moved to vote as described, paving the way for at least something like a functioning House, with, if not the least objectionable Speaker imaginable, at least “the devil they know”, instead of one they don’t.

    If this comes to pass, the Freedom Caucus members would find themselves potentially more and more sidelined, as reasonable/more moderate GOP members might be willing to work with a few Dems to whom they owe a small favor, and the Speaker, who also owes some centrist Dems a favor or two, might be willing to give a bit here or there instead of being adamantly partisan. If that could be managed so as to produce results generally popular with voters on one side and not terribly objectionable on the other, we might—gasp!—see a return to willingness to make reasonable deals—that is, compromise.

    Half a loaf of store-bought bread is better than a shopping bag full of rocks.

    Collapse
    1. Zvikes

      I highly doubt you'd get that many Dems to help McCarthy. Why? If the Republican party is going to make fools of themselves, why would the Dems get in their way and prevent them? For a real moderate speaker? Sure. But for McCarthy? Nah. Especially since I doubt McCarthy would then sideline the Freedom Caucus even if this happened. McCarthy would have to make some promises he'd never actually make since then he'd for sure be primaried.

      Collapse
      1. CatoTheElder

        But, as I said, there’s often a perceived advantage to dealing with the devil one knows, as opposed to an unknown. Politics is sometimes, generally by the pragmatic sort, called “the art of the possible”. Everyone wants the best deal they can get. The Freedom Caucus is willing to piss in everyone’s cornflakes to try to get what they want, which is upsetting the apple cart. For those that actually want apples—some apples, any apples, even if they’re not entirely sure they like them apples—the scenario is one of trying to find some allies for the moment, perhaps at significant cost, to stave off something possibly quite worse. You argue that the Dems and McCarthy would never do what might need to be done, but without presenting your ideas of what happens next.

        I think this is one possible scenario, at least as likely as some others. But I don’t pretend to know what’s going to happen, in spite of claims that this sort of thing happens all the time, it always ends up the same, blah, blah, blah. That’s the sort of thing people said about Trump winning the nomination in ‘16–ain’t gonna happen, no way, etc. Until he kept winning primaries.

        It’s always “ain’t no way” right up until it happens.

        Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      Eston

      I had the same thought reading the article. In fact, if 25 or so reasonable/moderate Democrats voted "present," they could give McCarthy enough of a majority to sideline the Republican Idiots Caucus, and allow McCarthy to keep those people off committees, avoid pointless "impeachment" votes, and the like.

      Maybe the quid pro quo for the Dems would be McCarthy agreeing to use "normal order" again -- assuming anyone there can still remember what that was.

      ... What kind of rocks are you talking about? Unobtainium?

      Collapse
  10. Ebgibbs

    Wasn't the situation the same in 2015 or so-- Boehner to Ryan and then until Pelosi was sworn in? Didn't it seem then like no one really wanted the job of being the Republican Speaker? Maybe someone who follows this more closely and isn't experiencing deja vu now, can explain all that to me. Somebody has to be Speaker of the House. It's third in succession. Someone will be Speaker. It would be great if it wasn't someone who hasn't already forfeited the trust of the American people by demonstrating a propensity to pander to the extremes, and can actually do the job. If continuing dysfunction is the goal here I guess we'll survive the next two years but it would be nice if we could actually address the immigration system, inflation, and social security in contexts other than election campaigns.

    Collapse
Load More