House Speaker election/circus/all ages carnival - ongoing coverage

Page 79 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
29,849
30,619
136
Why did the Dems accept the 2 tier CR?
Maga Mike did not have the R votes to pass it by himself.
He bought his gimmick bill directly onto the floor bypassing procedure but he needed 2/3 of the House to vote yes.

Why did the Dems give him a lifeline?
They all could let the procedural vote fail by just voting Present. it would to give them political cover without directly voting against the bill
His big concession was it was a clean bill from a funding perspective. The parts that expire first are generally considered easier to pass anyway.
 
Nov 17, 2019
13,297
7,878
136
Dems want to get things done.

'Pubs want to sit on the roof screaming and flinging pooh.


Marauding Monkeys Bring Fear to Historic Indian Tourist Haven ...


Wildlife Background with Monkeys and Baby Monkey on Roof Top. Image for ...
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
72,812
33,817
136
His big concession was it was a clean bill from a funding perspective. The parts that expire first are generally considered easier to pass anyway.
The bolded could become a problem. The Dems need to insist that any future CRs fund the entire government. The staggered end dates are dumb but if the Reps insist on them, the military budget and the other government functions that the Reps pretend to care about have to be the first to expire.

The budget is always a compromise. The staggered end dates provide an opening for the Reps to weasel out of the deals they agree to.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,934
55,287
136
I'm telling you there is absolutely no way that the Rs finish their appropriations bills ever let alone by Jan/Feb. Johnson will have to move for another clean CR and we'll see if that one costs him the job as memory of the last speaker election debacle fades.

I do like how the whole idea of simply passing appropriations that can win a majority of the legislative body’s support is not even considered. It’s just CRs until they can secure some imaginary party only bill in the future.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
17,365
16,634
146
I do like how the whole idea of simply passing appropriations that can win a majority of the legislative body’s support is not even considered. It’s just CRs until they can secure some imaginary party only bill in the future.
A bill that Democrats support gets you voted out. A bill that either magas or 'normal Republicans' support gets you left out in the cold by the other group. Quite the Sophie's choice.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,934
55,287
136
A bill that Democrats support gets you voted out. A bill that either magas or 'normal Republicans' support gets you left out in the cold by the other group. Quite the Sophie's choice.
As always I think the risk is a primary challenge. Johnson could (if he wanted to) make a deal with Democrats to fund the government and do lots of other things that command large majority support in the House in exchange for Democrats promising to back him if the crazies try to oust him, but seems likely to me that means his congressional term ends January 1st, 2025.
 

JEDI

Lifer
Sep 25, 2001
29,391
2,738
126
I'm telling you there is absolutely no way that the Rs finish their appropriations bills ever let alone by Jan/Feb. Johnson will have to move for another clean CR and we'll see if that one costs him the job as memory of the last speaker election debacle fades.

1) Wait what??
Just a day after Repubs passed a clean (but stupid 2tier) CR they do this to one of the tiers and not even let it on the floor to debate?

Ahh yes, warming up the butter for the popcorn.

2) Also, MTG says it's hypocrisy to kick out McCarthy for requiring Dem help for a CR but giving Maga Mike a pass for doing exactly the same thing.
That's rich from mtg bitching about hypocrisy. :rolleyes:

3) And speaking of McCarthy, a fellow R claimed McCarthy elbowed him in the kidney then ran away like a bully. He said he would have given chase to return the favor if not for McCarthy's $17M/yr security detail.

Wow, former Speakers have expensive perks.

And the best part: McCarthy denies it. He said if he elbowed him, he would know about it because he would be on the floor.
In other words, Puffing up his chest and saying my dick is bigger than yours like 2 immature kids in a school yard.

So much more public in fighting since Maga Mike took over compared to McCarthy.

If this continues, I need to order another dump truck sized bag of popcorn from Costco before Thanksgiving. :p
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Leeea and hal2kilo

Indus

Lifer
May 11, 2002
15,964
11,107
136
1) Wait what??
Just a day after Repubs passed a clean (but stupid 2tier) CR they do this to one of the tiers and not even let it on the floor to debate?

Ahh yes, warming up the butter for the popcorn.

2) Also, MTG says it's hypocrisy to kick out McCarthy for requiring Dem help for a CR but giving Maga Mike a pass for doing exactly the same thing.
That's rich from mtg bitching about hypocrisy. :rolleyes:

3) And speaking of McCarthy, a fellow R claimed McCarthy elbowed him in the kidney then ran away like a bully. He said he would have given chase to return the favor if not for McCarthy's $17M/yr security detail.

Wow, former Speakers have expensive perks.

And the best part: McCarthy denies it. He said if he elbowed him, he would know about it because he would be on the floor.
In other words, Puffing up his chest and saying my dick is bigger than yours like 2 immature kids in a school yard.

So much more public in fighting since Maga Mike took over compared to McCarthy.

If this continues, I need to order another dump truck sized bag of popcorn from Costco before Thanksgiving. :p
Dump truck and pop corn do not go together. Just say you need an entire semi trailer filled with popcorn before Thanksgiving.
 

JEDI

Lifer
Sep 25, 2001
29,391
2,738
126
Looks like someone said the quiet part out loud. :tearsofjoy:

Newsweek - Chip Roy Furiously Tears Into Fellow Republicans

Campaign group Republicans Against Trump also shared a clip and wrote: "Republican Congressman Chip Roy just gave Democrats their best campaign ad for 2024."

Brian Williams, a surgeon and a Democrat who is running for Congress in Texas, said: "Never thought I'd say this... but if you agree with Chip Roy, make a contribution to our campaign to help flip Congress and put Republicans leadership out of their misery."


can't wait to see that campaign ad
:sweatsmile:
 

manly

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
13,258
4,033
136
Campaign group Republicans Against Trump also shared a clip and wrote: "Republican Congressman Chip Roy just gave Democrats their best campaign ad for 2024."

Brian Williams, a surgeon and a Democrat who is running for Congress in Texas, said: "Never thought I'd say this... but if you agree with Chip Roy, make a contribution to our campaign to help flip Congress and put Republicans leadership out of their misery."


can't wait to see that campaign ad
:sweatsmile:
Not like it matters. Texas will just re-elect the same cretins to Congress.
 
Dec 10, 2005
28,625
13,721
136
Or it's as fake as he is! ( A replica to make himself appear high class when he's not).
It could be real. Given a congress person's salary (and the potential wealth they may have before running), owning a nice watch is not out of the realm of possibilities. It's not like he is driving a Ferrari. I wouldn't do it myself, but it isn't really abnormal.

It's just extremely odd to claim to be "unbanked" when you're the white GOP Speaker of the House.
 

NWRMidnight

Diamond Member
Jun 18, 2001
3,563
3,081
136
It could be real. Given a congress person's salary (and the potential wealth they may have before running), owning a nice watch is not out of the realm of possibilities. It's not like he is driving a Ferrari. I wouldn't do it myself, but it isn't really abnormal.

It's just extremely odd to claim to be "unbanked" when you're the white GOP Speaker of the House.
Owning a Rolex that if real, costing $15k to $45k, is like owning a Ferrari as far as watches go, specially at the salary level of a congresman. The price depends on which model of the Rolex Deep Sea he is wearing. That is not in the normal realm of watches for someone who makes $175k a year. It's very abnormal as $175k isn't really that much money now days. How many people do you know that spends 10% to 25% of their annual salary on a watch? If it's the top end one for $45k, is equivilent to what someone in that salary range would normally spend on a car.

 
Last edited:

pmv

Lifer
May 30, 2008
15,142
10,039
136
Owning a Rolex that if real, costing $15k to $45k, is like owning a Ferrari as far as watches go, specially at the salary level of a congresman. The price depends on which model of the Rolex Deep Sea he is wearing. That is not in the normal realm of watches for someone who makes $175k a year. It's very abnormal as $175k isn't really that much money now days. How many people do you know that spends 10% to 25% of their annual salary on a watch? If it's the top end one for $45k, is equivilent to what someone in that salary range would normally spend on a car.


Owning a _real_ Rolex is even more of a statement of wealth than owning a Ferrari, it seems to me, because a Ferrari is not a small item that can be easily mislaid or even more easily stolen.

It's saying not only are you rich enough to own such an unnecessary expensive item, but you are rich enough to be OK with the risk that it could be taken from you by a thug with a $20 knife.

Most of all though it just makes one wonder if he paid for it with suitcases of $ bills.

It might not be a real one, though. Maybe George Santos sold it to him?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NWRMidnight
Dec 10, 2005
28,625
13,721
136
Owning a Rolex that if real, costing $15k to $45k, is like owning a Ferrari as far as watches go, specially at the salary level of a congresman. The price depends on which model of the Rolex Deep Sea he is wearing. That is not in the normal realm of watches for someone who makes $175k a year. It's very abnormal as $175k isn't really that much money now days. How many people do you know that spends 10% to 25% of their annual salary on a watch? If it's the top end one for $45k, is equivilent to what someone in that salary range would normally spend on a car.

I don't personally know anyone that would do this, but anecdotes and all...

Some older people though are steeped in an era of owning a nice watch that could cost anywhere from $5k-$50k. Given he was born in the early 70s and worked in private law practice before being in Congress, I doubt he was some pauper that only had his congressional salary to work on, and maybe he was one of those people who wanted a nice watch...

As for X could get stolen as a reason to not own something - that's a specious argument.

I hate to defend this SOTH, but there are so many better things to criticize him for than just owning a nice watch. If anything, the watch just plays in with the whole "not having a bank account" - like, is he just stuffing money under his mattress and paying cash for it?
 

pmv

Lifer
May 30, 2008
15,142
10,039
136
I don't personally know anyone that would do this, but anecdotes and all...

Some older people though are steeped in an era of owning a nice watch that could cost anywhere from $5k-$50k. Given he was born in the early 70s and worked in private law practice before being in Congress, I doubt he was some pauper that only had his congressional salary to work on, and maybe he was one of those people who wanted a nice watch...

As for X could get stolen as a reason to not own something - that's a specious argument.

I hate to defend this SOTH, but there are so many better things to criticize him for than just owning a nice watch. If anything, the watch just plays in with the whole "not having a bank account" - like, is he just stuffing money under his mattress and paying cash for it?


I don't buy any of that.

Not sure what you mean by "some older people". Seems he's younger than me (and probably than most people here)!

The _only_ reason why you'd own something as flashy as a Rolex is to show off your wealth and status. The fact that it could easily be stolen is very relevant - as it implies there must be a counterweighing reason for risking carrying such a invitation-to-theft around with you. The obvious such reason is as a display of status.

I feel nervous enough going out-and-about with my old ipod - the idea of carrying around something that someone could mug you for and run off with, that costs as much as the value of some people's houses, seems entirely mad to me. You wouldn't take that risk unless it was important to you to engage in some sort of status-display.

And, yeah, clearly the puzzle is, how the hell does he pay for ultra-expensive status-goods like that watch without a bank account?

Edit - of course, it's quite possible it's all moot as it might not even be such a watch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NWRMidnight