The Politics of Fear Has Its Limits

What Jim Jordan’s sinking speakership bid tells us about one of Washington’s iron laws.

By
92
Rep. Jim Jordan, Republican nominee for speaker of the House, and Rep. Kevin McCarthy, talk on the House floor of the U.S. Capitol after a second ballot vote in which Jordan failed to receive enough votes to win the position on Wednesday, October 18, 2023. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

Audible gasps rang out in the House chamber Tuesday when Rep. Kay Granger of Texas cast her vote for speaker. The formidable, 80-year-old Republican with more than a quarter century of experience on Capitol Hill voted not for Rep. Jim Jordan like the vast majority of her GOP colleagues, but for the man Jordan’s allies had helped shunt aside: Majority Leader Steve Scalise.

Granger’s decision wasn’t a surprise because it was the decisive vote for the House GOP’s slim majority; she was only one of 20 Republicans on Tuesday—and 22 on Wednesday—to vote against Jordan and deny him the speakership. Her opposition to Jordan shocked her colleagues because of what it represented. As chair of the powerful Appropriations Committee, Granger might have been expected to align herself with a future speaker, who has considerable influence over both the committee process and the business brought to the House floor for votes. That she didn’t was a strong statement of no confidence in the party’s designee from a House veteran.

Shortly after Tuesday’s vote, The Dispatch asked Granger what Jordan would have to do to earn her support. “I’m not doing that,” the congresswoman replied, dismissively waving her hand before walking away.

The question might have been better posed to Jordan: What was he doing in order to get this critical leader in the conference on his side? A statement from Granger on Wednesday following Republicans’ second failed attempt to elect a new speaker hints at how Jordan and his allies have been approaching institutionalist holdouts like her.

You're out of free articles
Create an account to unlock 1 more articles
By signing up with your email, you agree to The Dispatch’s privacy policy and terms and conditions
Already have an account? Sign In
92
By
Comments (92)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Coyneric

    The chilling question remains: how many of constituents are cheering on him and the bullying tactics and death threats? Is rural Ohio really that full of so many monsters of ignorance and resentment?

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Ben Connelly

      Usually it’s a pretty small number of people who do most of them, just like a small number of people do most of the crimes.

      Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    Marc Frischhertz

    These people calling in death threats claim to be Christians. They claim to be “real” Americans. They claim to want to take the country back.

    We need a Remnant pod on this asap

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Ben Connelly

      Sanders supporters gave Hillary death threats. Death threats have been around for a while. Most of the time it’s a small number of fringe weirdos who do the majority of them and some of them think they’re being funny. Unless you know someone who made death threats, I doubt you know enough demographic information about them to allege that all of them claim to be Christians. No doubt, some do, but I have no idea how large a percentage that would be.

      Collapse
    2. Keith

      Seriously? No Christian would be making death threats. Not even a Christian Nationalist.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Kmregan7

        You’ve got to be kidding. Nothing prevents Christians from issuing death threats. Nothing prevented Christians from donning white masks and burning crosses, shunning women who had children out of wedlock. Burning witches. Hiding sexual abuse of children. Perpetrating sexual and physical abuse of children. Genocide.

        Collapse
  3. Jaybrown

    Mike Gallagher for Speaker.

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Scarlette Tarte

    Pat Riot called it. She said they would be able to elect no on, and would try to work a deal that allows the gavel banger in the seat right now, to stay in. And they will likely not mention it again, because they don't want to deal with it.

    If that's not in any way constitutional, the Dems should not go along with that. They should force the issue if they can, and demand they put someone up who can get a majority WITH EVERYONE VOTING, instead of just a 'republican only' speaker.

    Nothing would be better for this Congress than having a speaker smack dab in the middle. One able to work with both sides.

    Hey, a girl can dream, can't she?

    Collapse
  5. J. Everett Schubert

    Wonder what the vote total for Jim Jordan for Speaker would have been back in, say October 2007? The opinion of the 22 would have absolutely been the norm for most of them back then. My, how things have changed.

    Primaries. Damned primaries...

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Marc Frischhertz

      Gerrymandering

      Collapse
  6. Rch22

    What would happen to the presidential succession if there is no speaker, just an empowered McHenry? Constitutionally, I assume the presidency would go to the Senate pro tem if something happened to Biden and Harris, but I can't imagine Republicans going along with a President Patty Murray without a fight.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Nathanielmkeller

      If there's no speaker, there's no speaker, so Rs wouldn't have a leg to stand on...but then again, they didn't go along with President Joe Biden without a fight either.

      Collapse
  7. Philebus

    Kay Granger...good for her. Someone needs to take a stand.

    Collapse
  8. A

    I can't speak for everyone here in her district in Fort Worth, but Kay Granger made me proud to call her my Rep this week. I hope more join the 22 who voted against Jordan and those who already did stand their ground. It's about time this sect of the Republican Party dug in their heels, and I want more of it.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Erik.Kravets

      Please write to her and let her know.

      Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    Aylene Wright

    Welp, seems Jordan has given up on holding a third floor vote, and basically endorsed McHenry as temporary speaker until next January.

    Gotta admit, mixed feelings on the Sorta-Speaker McHenry outcome. It's a workaround. The speaker pro tem position is actually quite new, established post 9/11, meant as a fail safe in case the Speaker got taken out by terrorists, basically. (The ones with real bombs, not the metaphorical ones Jordan liked to throw.)

    Just seems to add to the trend towards Acting Secretaries that Trump often depended on. Biden seems headed towards an Acting FTC Commissioner. We basically have an Acting Junior Senator From California / Third Senator From Maryland.

    Although the House will need to vote to give McHenry additional powers, the overall trend seems to go further and further away, from our leaders actually being voted into their positions.

    I know that some strains of conservatism, including anti-populist TD types, are perfectly fine with that trend. But it troubles me.

    Collapse
    1. Scianti7

      It's so weird they don't just make him speaker!

      Collapse
    2. Pbeaupre3141

      I think your concerns are well-stated, and I would agree. If today weren't Thursday, 10/19. Today, on Thursday, 10/19, I am savoring that Jim Jordan/Matt Gaetz/MAGA are not getting directly rewarded for their illiberal, chaos-inducing, selfish behavior. It's difficult to imagine a more dangerous speaker, more opposed to American values, than Jim Jordan -- and that's if he were elected through a normal mechanism! But to elect him as a reward to the actions of the Chaos Caucus would be even worse.

      Tomorrow morning, I will awaken from my brief celebration and join you in your concerns.

      Collapse
  10. Kittcomm

    Jordan’s two faced approach, friendly in person while his associates play hardball, is a time honored tactic used by autocrats seeking power. Hitler was especially good at it.

    Collapse
    1. Scianti7

      Jordan wanted to be dictator, not a leader. Fortunately, we still don't do that in the U.S.A., at least for today.

      Collapse
Load More