The Republican Speaker of the House Battle
A few weeks ago we witnessed a first in American political history, a Speaker of the House has been canned. In the aftermath of this historic event, we have had a clown show of epic proportions taking place in the cradle of democracy.
Who will be the first Speaker of the House to follow the historic shit canning of Kevin McCarthy, the pride of Bakersfield, CA? The first out of the gate was Steve Scalise who begged his fellow Republicans for the chance to become Speaker and a Pinada at the same time. Thankfully he was saved from this humiliation as he was rejected by the ultra-far-right wacko's.
Next up is Jim Benghazi Jordan, he of useless and pointless investigations whose main attribute is screaming and hollering while conducting losing investigations. (he is quite good at pounding the table to no avail). Currently, Jimmy is begging his fellow right-wingers for their vote. There was a report this AM that there are twenty ''hard no's'' against Jimmy. It doesn't look good for him at this point, but it's a clown show so anything is possible. If he is rejected the cradle of democracy will be drifting in the wind with no solution in sight, and the clown show will continue unabated.
Secretly, a behind-the-door meeting has been taking place between Dems and Republicans in an attempt to solve this historic problem and return the US to some form of sanity which may be a stretch at this point. The King Makers have settled on a new candidate to break the logjam. Compared with the current crop is light years ahead in both intelligence and political savvy.
If Jimmy is rejected this is your new candidate
Tags
Who is online
277 visitors
An epic election with far-ranging consequences.
more like an epic rwnj shit show...
apparently it's an ongoing series now...
The Democrats are all lined up to raise huge reelection campaign donations with slogans like, "there are no more moderate Republicans" if they cave to Jordan. They will also tout his noncompliance with the Jan 6th committee and his continued commitment to keep his head up Trumps rectum. While this will only bring sneers from the Jordan populist base, it WILL energize Democrats to vote and probably swing a few moderate independents. I'm not certain running further to the right is the way to win more Republican voters.
3rd quarter fund raising has Biden at $71 million more than Trump, Desantis and Haley combined.
That's interesting. I'll be checking in on some House races next year. I'm expecting the Dems to claim the House after this dysfunction barring any last minute craziness.
We should be hearing the results of the first floor vote any time now. They are taking attendance. Jordan is not expected to reach 217 in the first vote. Rumors had 20 hold-outs still this morning.
That is hilarious, I don't see where there is any difference now than then.
Jay Leno JayWalking: Civics Test - YouTube
Dems are off to a rough start losing Governor of Louisiana.
I concur. That's not the best foot to start out on, but they had to know keeping that seat was a long shot in a state that went for Trump by 20%.
but, but, what about...
The Democratic Governor has been in office since 2016.
When I have a free day, I'll teach you about elections.
That's a typically ridiculous attempt to deflect.
This thread is supposed to be about the process of electing the next Speaker of the House.
No thanx.
Yeah? So? What's your point here other than deflection?
just to point out that votes for President are different than other votes.
What does that have to do with House speaker?
Please don't.
OMG--- that's shocking! Quelle surprise! Could you explain further how that's so?
(Asking for a friend)
What makes you think the Dems will "Cave" to Jordan?
The Dems won't. The Republicans were looking to, but rumor news seems to indicate too many hold out still. We'll see later today.
I'm not certain running further to the right is the way to win more Republican voters.
I usually don't watch this sort of thing but today I did watch most of it.
One of my main take-a-ways was how many Republicans really don't like Jordan. (And I believe he is one of the more extreme Republicans. (Is he one of the Republicans that still hasn't admitted that "the election was NOT stolen?)
One of my main take-a-ways is how many Republicans don't like each other. That conference has issues that are manifesting now.
He is. He's a co-founding member of the Freedom Caucus.
Jim Jordan colluded with a traitor. If he gets put in a high office like Speaker Of The House it will be a disgraceful day for the United States.
Oh, he's also a known conspiracy monger.
Not to mention he has shown contempt for the same Congress he is a member of.
And Democrats colluded with Matt Gaetz to put him in power.
Job well done!
They are the masters of lacking the intelligence or foresight to understand the consequences of their actions.
Just like they are shocked to learn that taking in thousands of illegal aliens and offering them sanctuary costs money.
oh yeah, the dysfunction within the republican party's civil war is entirely the fault of democrats...
You know they are following the Trump narrative, blame someone else for your own stupid mistakes.
You have to wonder who they are blaming for Steve Scalise's loss, I bet it will be Nancy Pelosi and if Jimmy gets defeated today it will be Dog's fault.
meh, you really can't expect trumpsters to be able to function in our form of gov't...
Good point!
Matt Gaetz has sooooooo much power now and its all due to the Democrats!
(Who knew?)
OMG-- I didn't know that! That's terrible!
Could you explain how they did it?
(If you can't-- could you at least provide a link to back it up?)
I want Dog! And I want Cat for the position next to House Speaker!
I'm with you, Trout.
cat looks a lot more trustworthy than maga moron jordan...
She is
And she's a Republican. All cats are Republicans...or Libertarians. Change my mind
felines are autocats...
Well here we go: Hakeem Jeffries vs. Jim Jordan for Speaker.
Too bad our partisan-entrenched Congress cannot work together. The GOP has nobody to offer (best they have is Jordan???) so the sensible path forward is with Jeffries. But ... no ... partisanship creates irrational behavior yet again.
Looks like Jordan is screwed on the first vote already.
Yes. The GOP is not in lockstep.
I'll skip the obvious joke ...
I would laugh for days if 4 moderate Republicans switched parties. It's not going to happen, but it would be funny.
there would be a maga stampede to vacate the chair...
Yes, but it would be funny watching them do it. The Dem would need 6 for a majority. The Republicans still have 20 hold outs.
if I could remove all logic, reason, and sense of patriotism from my brain, I could make a prediction. whatever happens after this debacle, you know the rules to vacate the chair will change. they'll pull that ladder up behind them...
Of course. The promise to get the gavel was baffling. I said he wouldn't last the year, though he did last longer than I thought he would.
not me. more graphic violence please...
As mentioned I watched most it.
I knew he wouldn't win, but for most of it Jeffries vote was either equal to, or above the total for Jordan! (And of course that's in a Republican majority House). Considered how this keeps playing out I wonder: can Republicans be that stupid-- they can't even elect a speaker when they have a majority.
Actually I don't think is just stupidity. It must be something else....
(But-- what is it?)
Dysfunction based on a radical minority of Trump sycophants coupled with a razor thin majority (due to Trump).
If there is enough pressure to get the government operating again, especially in light of both domestic and international reasons, is it possible that enough Republicans might get McCarthy to take the job again, hoping that there could be enough Democratic support to elect him. However, the Democrats might just be happy to allow the Republicans to make themselves so inept and useless that next year they will find themselves totally decimated. But then, I guess that assumes that most American voters have a brain in their heads.
Anger. There are enough members in the conference that fundamentally disagree on how to govern. There are the populists like Jordan and hard right wingers like Scalise and moderate members like those in the Governance Caucus. As TiG says, arguments between those groups breads dysfunction when they don't have enough members to push one agenda over another.
No. The Dems don't like McCarthy at all. More likely if this doesn't resolve today some in the House may try to empower the Speaker Pro Tem to call legislation, but some feel that would also be unconstitutional so I'm not sure that would even fly. It might, but it would be extraordinary.
Jeffries: 212, Jordan: 200, Others: 20, Not Vote: 1
What a mess.
The Dems all voted for Jeffries. The 20 others were Republicans.
Yup
Most commentators were surprised at the 20-- it was much, much higher than predicted.
The next speaker of the house and a fine example of bi-partisanship.
Hail to the Speaker: Level-headed, with all four paws on the ground. A vast improvement over the Kevin, Steve and Jimmy.
K
meh, at least the knuckle dragger faction of the GOP didn't nominate trump. the current ass-kissing contest is confusing republicans.
That Dog has my vote. Now all they need is a bird-- maybe a Canary or Parakeet?
That way we can have both a woofer and a tweeter.
American voters have in fact voted dogs and goats into official governing positions, so your suggestion isn't as far-fetched as it appears.
I've heard rumors that if there is another vote today it could be worse than this last one.
EDIT: CSPAN is reporting another vote will happen today.
Another vote is a waste of time, DOG is the new house speaker and as his first comment to congress he has promised that Jewish Space Lasers will be conficated and confined to the Dog House.
And then he'll growl and pee on Rep Santo's leg...
“…confined to the Dog House.”
…and when the eventual ‘speaker’ yells ‘Heel’…they’ll all assume the position, thinking that was actually their name.
I'd rather Dog take a chunk out of his leg....
Or...maybe he'll start humping Santos leg!
The Ds need 5 Rs to cross the aisle and Jeffries will be elected Speaker.
The Rs need 17 to move to Jordan.
The math favors Jeffries, but the politics makes that a nearly impossible achievement.
Sadly, that is probably true, T,G.
I don't think Jeffries could actually be Speaker, but these aren't normal times so as far as I can tell anything is possible if this drags on much further. None of this is going unnoticed by voters though. There will be repercussions in some of districts up for re-election.
those are the people that democrats should be offering a deal. maga scum will primary them anyway....
At first I viewed all this nonsense in a negative light-- its not good for the country.
But there is a possible benefit from the idiocy of some of these Republicans-- they may lose the next election by a really wide margin.
they've got too much ground to make up with the voters, they'll be in full campaign mode after the holidays, and they'll be forced to defend the leader of the party's courtroom theatrics at every campaign stop.
For sure those are those 'informal' back room talks we've been hearing about.
I agree. This is the part of politics that pisses me off.
It's more than possible. We'll see. It will also be interesting to see where Republicans spend their money next year and who get's primaried too.
It wouldn't happen, but wouldn't it be great if the Republican controlled House would elect Jeffries as Speaker?
(The only thing better than that would be for the Santos to win the Republican presidential primary!)
No. Santos should be in jail.
I think Jeffries is probably the best (within reach) choice the House has for Speaker right now.
No. Santos should be in jail.
Actually I totally agree. I was just joking (which I'm beginning to realize is not a good idea here. I've been gone from NT for a fairly long time, but I am slowly re-learning what's acceptable and what isn't.)
I think Jeffries is probably the best (within reach) choice the House has for Speaker right now.
I agree. Except for the part about it being in reach. (I just can't seeing him winning in a Republican controlled House (well, unless the Republicans keep acting like fools, keep attacking each other in which case Jeffries could win!
Jeffries is possible given it takes only 5 to cross the aisle. If the shit keeps hitting the fan, we could see a historic move like that.
Santos can be his own "Worst Lady".
David Joyce is the leader of the Republican moderate Governance Caucus and has backing within both parties, just not with Republican Leadership. It just hasn't been in the front page news but I've heard some talk around the edges.
I'm also hearing more this morning of McHenry as Speaker.
Just give everyone a Bingo card and pull the little balls from the cage, who ever gets Bingo first is the new speaker.
It might approach that.
It may increase the odds of getting a competent speaker than letting them decide.
No wonder the once Grand Old Party of Abraham Lincoln is now known merely as "the gop"? They actually lowered their own case...
For some strange reason its almost like they want to lose....
One of my favourite quotes (which I've posted before):
Suppose I was an idiot. And suppose I was a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.
-Samuel Langhorne Clemens
Trump called Jim Jordan "a fantastic young man" today.
Jim Jordan is 59 years old.
Some of trump's recent comment are worse than usual. I wonder if he's getting senile? Or maybe its just the stress of so many indictments...and maybe he's finally started to realize he may not be able to weasel his way out like he used to do.?
So Jordan is 18 years younger. Is 59 the new 45?
I don't think Jordan has ever even supported any decent legislation.
How many ballots will it take for Jordan to realize that...
Raskin floats Liz Cheney, Mitt Romney, Angus King as consensus speaker options
Yes, Cheney, Romney, and King are excellent choices for Speaker. But the dysfunctional GOP has moved away from the GOP of old.
Both Cheney & Romney are not Trump supporters, So IMO very few Republicans would vote for them. Angus King is an Independent (unless he became a Democrat?) He's a moderate (whatever that means!) but I think he's much too progressive for most Republicans (?)
So IMO very few Republicans would vote for them.
Actually now that I think about it one of them might make it-- each of them would get some Democratic votes and perhaps lose some Democratic votes-- and each of them would probably get some Republican votes and lose some Republican votes.
But that might get one of them to win!
Indeed, the root of the dysfunction within the GOP.
True. But while they are a minority in the current gooop-- I mean Gop!-- there are few moderate Republicans.
Yeah, but I doubt there are enough left to vote for Cheney, Romney, King or anyone else (e.g. Hutchinson) who could taken on the role as a competent adult seeking to do what is best for the nation.
No.
The only Speaker in modern history to lose the house twice? i would think democrats would be happy the loser is gone.
It looks a bit tense in the House this morning...
I'm sure it will get more tense as the day wears on.
The day, the week... lol!
I can do without all the Dems cheering during that speech.
Tom Cole called Jim Jordan "an honorable man". Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!
Liar.
We pay federal taxes to fund a government of elected Republican buffoons who can’t understand that if an internal Jordan vs. Scalise competition results in Scalise, and he ultimately cannot close the deal, then running Jordan is an exercise in futility. Your tax dollars at work.
A minute ago? Playing games?
Any other random words you’d like to string together?
Only two, but I can't say them.
You have all done a nice job here.
Five sensible Republicans could end this by voting for Jeffries...
Five sensible democrats could end this by voting for the party that has the majority in the house.
Jeffries is substantially better for the nation than Jordan. We need to rid Congress of Trump sycophants.
For Jordan?! ROFL. You think it’s sensible for some democrats to vote FOR an election denying QAnon nut job?!
Hakim is a partisan hack, like members of both sides, they voted to create this Chaos, The democrats should not get rewarded for causing this.
As far as I am concerned, any member of Congress who supports Trump, given all that Trump has done, is too irresponsible, irrational and unpatriotic to hold office.
Exactly right.
I think the democrats helped cause this and are not going to get rewarded for it. Democrats are the masters of sticking their heads up their asses and then complaining it is dark.
Of course you do, but any congress member who supports Palestine's attempted genocide of Israel should get to stay.
A partisan hack that received more votes than the best Republicans have to offer in a Republican majority House.
Helped? How? By not changing their intentions to deny two openly hostile imbeciles the opportunity to be second in line for the presidency? Maybe five should do that and recite “THANK YOU SIR MAY I HAVE ANOTHER” after their vote.
So Democrats are so in lockstep every single one votes the party line.
Quite a moment to be proud of.........
Your jealousy is obvious.
Thanks for the daily reminder Reagan was and continues to be correct.
You see that a lot with people who are mentally challenged, when one starts to laugh they all laugh without understanding why, democrats are like that.
When it comes to QAnon election denying nutjobs every single democrat is crystal clear in their understanding.
Reagan was and continues to be correct
Apparently you have forgotten that today’s conservatives would find Reagan to be a far left radical.
Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.
- Ronald Reagan
This is why Democrats are so tightly united against the highly fractured farce that the right has become.
Democrats love election denying nut jobs. They put them on the j6 committee.
Funny thing there--his words ring as true today as they did he first said them. There is absolutely no need for you to continue to prove him right, however.
But hey--nice deflection!
Better than most, anyway!
Yep, and anyone that voted for Trump, given all that Trump has done, is too irresponsible, irrational and unpatriotic to vote. S/
Pot kettle.
Okay, I'll bite.
What have you imagined I am deflecting from?
No, that is not what I wrote and have never written. I do not blame people for voting for Trump in 2016 (not so generous with 2020). I am writing about the 2024 vote.
I write about those who would vote for Trump NOW given all that we know. In particular, those who would vote for a traitor who attempted to steal a US presidential election (the only time in our history) as sitting PotUS, abusing his influence and using coercion, fraud, lies, suborning his own V.P. to commit an unconstitutional act, and inciting his supporters.
And in my prior comment I was talking about members of Congress.
This is not about a vote for a party-- its about voting for an individual.
Yes, Krishna, but in America these days divisive partisan politics rules the day. If it did not, I would think that Liz Cheney would make a perfect Speaker of the House, and has already proven her bipartisanship, but can she do that if she is not an elected member of Congress? I guess the problem is there are still too many Trump sheep who are lawmakers.
O could be wrong but I believe I've read that aa Speaker can be elected who is not even a member of the House (?).
However I don't think would have a chance of being elected-- many Republicans hate her because she is too hones and many Democrats wouldn't like her because she is too conservative!!
True
Yes but Reagan only has one more year in office till Sanctimonious is elected by a landslide.
And anyway-- do bears shit in the woods?
We couldn't find that many sensible Democrats, alas.
Why are you looking for Democrats?
Is it colder in the winter or in the mountains?
Five sensible Democrats could have voted for McCarthy and we would not be where we are now. Seems maybe it was more important for them to point and say how dysfunctional the Republicans are instead of keeping the guy that just went across the aisle to keep the government running. If Jordon ends up as the guy they should all be kicking themselves in the ass, they could have helped prevent this
Of course. Party politics is so much more important to them than actually governing the country for The People.
Considering how much money it takes these days to run for office, we have the worst government money can buy.
But, but, but...Jordan is the guy!
They had yet another vote-- behind closed doors-- and Jordan won! (He was voted biggest fool in the Republocratic Party!
So yes-- you are correct. JORDAN IS "THE GUY'!
There's the second vote this week....
Jeffries will NOT be Speaker in a Republican majority House. It would be career suicide for any Republican to vote for him and the Democrats know that. The idea is to hold out for a moderate Republican option the Republicans get behind. Then some Dems may cross isle to get it done.
It's time to elect DOG who is ready willing and far more able than Jim Jordan.
Will Dog call for an impeachment vote? Hahahaha!
Cat backs him up
She's a troublemaker
Dog & Cat should run for President and VP.
Don't give them ideas. LOL
There are some Republicans that would be perfectly acceptable traditional Republican leaders. None of them wants this job, because they know the far right loons will sabotage them. Hence we are left with Jim Jordan taking bullets for the team. I think they actually should make Trump speaker just for the sheer train wreck entertainment value.
I am sure this was tongue-in-cheek, but I want to just note that Trump should never be given access to any power of any kind.
The idea that the Democrats are responsible (because they dont want a traitor 2nd in line to the presidency) is one of the craziest things Ive heard in a while.
I found this article I thought interesting...
That's interesting.
Does McHenry even want to be the Speaker? I know he's publicly stated he doesn't want the position but who really knows what is said in those back rooms.
He does say no, but there are a lot of new articles online right now talking about expanding McHenry's power as Pro Tem until a Speaker is picked OR the current government funding is expired on Nov 17th.
Yeah, I saw those and I think it would be a good idea so that the House could start doing the business of the country. And McHenry would still just be temporary in that position. I like that he's a fiscal conservative yet is open to bipartisanship actions.
Did you catch Adam Schiff trying to make hay from this? He was so quick to try to point out just how bad it would be if Jordan was made the Speaker.. What a moron, saying the Speaker would preside over the counting of electoral votes. How quickly, when trying to score points, they forget simple facts.
Yeah, that's dumb. Though he may be thinking since Jordan supported the 'fake elector' idea he could, as Speaker, have an impact on the proceedings if tried again. It's still sounds dumb. Schiff is just trying to raise money from partisans as they seem to always want to do.
There is a plus side to this. There will be no unnecessary spending (like sending billions to Ukraine) or any declarations of war. That must have the democrats fuming.
It dosn't have me fuming at all. We are also sending billions to Israel in case you hadn't noticed.
I don't recall mentioned you. So, what's your point?
You must have a very short memory your comment was:
Being a member of the Democratic party, that would include me. It's fairly simple but if you don't have a legitimate response I guess trying to blind people with bullshit is go-to response for you.
That's the point, Jeremy.
You went though all that to say....nothing.
Oh, I did point out that you cannot accept what you wrote and try to BS your way around it.
That is evident to anyone who can read but if you insist on being incorrigible that is up to you.
Maybe in your head.
You should quit digging when you're in a deep hole, as I stated it's there for everyone to see. Perhaps you should look up the meaning of incorrigible.
Cheers
They last time Congress declared war was WWII.
Do you "blame" the Democrats for that?
certainly he does, it totally alienated the neo-nazi segment of the GOP for decades...
So you're a mind reader now. Quick, what am I thinking now!
... maga roulette, you leave 1 chamber empty, but you have to pull the trigger twice to win...
Yeah, you fucked that up too.
You are not thinking.
Jordan remains in the race for Speaker this morning while his opposition within the conference are saying he'll continue to lose votes until he drops out.
I haven't heard when the next vote will take place yet, but one is expected today.
Jordan has dropped out (for now) and will back McHenry for an expansion of powers to the Speaker pro Tem until January. I think this is a good move as it was expected that Jordan would continue to lose votes.
Interesting. Now the question is - is the plan to empower McHenry Constitutionally legal? If so, I might be the best way forward.
EDIT: With a vote of the House they can formally make him Speaker Pro Tempore.
Here are the powers. copy/paste didn't work -
There isn't much McHenry can do and any expansion of these powers moves us into legally gray areas -
functions that are within the scope of authority of a Speaker pro
tempore are calling the House to order, making various announcements,
answering parliamentary inquiries, putting the question, counting for
a quorum, ruling on points of order, and designating another Speaker
pro tempore. Deschler Ch 6 Sec. Sec. 9, 10. When the Office of Speaker
is vacant, the Member acting as Speaker pro tempore under rule I
section 8(b) may exercise such authorities of the Office as may be
necessary and appropriate pending the election of a Speaker or Speaker
pro tempore.
The authority of a Speaker pro tempore to exercise certain powers
depends on whether he is designated, designated and approved, or
elected. The powers of a designated Speaker pro tempore, compared with
those of an elected Speaker pro tempore, are relatively limited.
Deschler Ch 6 Sec. Sec. 10, 14.
Absent unanimous consent or specific House approval, a designated
Speaker pro tempore may not:
Administer the oath of office to a Member-elect. Deschler Ch 6
Sec. 12.8.
Announce appointments made by the Speaker pursuant to law. 96-
1, Jan. 31, 1979, p 1511.
Appoint conferees or make appointments of additional
conferees. Deschler Ch 6 Sec. Sec. 12.9, 12.10.
Appoint Members to attend a funeral. Deschler Ch 6 Sec. 12.14.
Spread upon the Journal a veto message from the President.
Deschler Ch 6 Sec. 12.11.
By contrast, an elected Speaker pro tempore may, for example,
appoint conferees, administer the oath of office to a Member-elect,
and preside at a joint session of Congress. Deschler Ch 6
Sec. Sec. 12.8, 14, 14.8.
Yep, and that is a loaded question.
Of course with the other side of that question, who would bring forth a court case for / against this? With the backdrop of the war in Ukraine and in Israel, and the simple issue that the current budget CR expires in less than 30 days, do the people against this sort of action want to tie up the issue with court challenges and further delay any action that the government can take that requires Congressional funding/approval?
I know there are plenty of idiots in Congress, but would they truly be willing to put their political future on the line for something like this? I can see any challenges to this backfiring on them come election time as it would definitely be used by their opponents.
It seems to have broad support, but it only takes one Congressional monkey to throw a wrench. The news involving the harassment of Jordan hold outs makes me think it's possible any one of those people could raise the question. I guess we'll see if they plan to do this today or tomorrow.
When Gaetz started this whole clusterfuck he said he didn't care if it cost him his seat. Remember some of the populist were sent in to shut down all spending. The issues in Israel do change that paradigm so I don't know how to answer that question. I'm always amazed at the amount of stupid we see every day from people who think they are smarter than everyone else.
Gaetz said he plans on running for governor of Florida since DeSantis will be termed out.
Truth or BS who knows his father said he will be running for the state senate he served some years in the state legislature previously.
Either way he still has access to underage party girls and coke.
Well this idea didn't last long - McHenry is too moderate for the Jim Jordan backers and they won't capitulate. During a conference meeting today -
House Republican: Jim Jordan team 'harassing our spouses'
I've read a number of articles on the harassment. Anonymously calls and texts to office staff and family members is unforgivable.
Yes, they are but in today's political climate not unexpected.
that's all part of the "normal political discourse" for republicans...
In fact they're de rigueur!
And now, this...
If Jim Jordan is Speaker, for however long, NOTHING THAT WILL BENEFIT a so-called "normal/average" American will be accomplished by Government. And be assured of … • Legislation to help Organized Wealth, • Political Revenge "Investigations", • Deference to Trump
In the meantime, I wish the American voters were intelligent enough to comprehend that the Republicans are not capable of governing America, since they are incapable of getting their own act together.
Jim Jordan Opts Out of Third Day of Public Humiliation
As of this morning he was talking of another vote this afternoon, but the rumors from his party opposition say he'll lose another 4 to 10 votes if he does. What would be fantastic is having the Dems nominate and vote for a moderate Republican like McHenry or Joyce and see if that vote goes through. They would only need 5 other Republicans to pass. It wouldn't happen, but then again there are no adults in the House these days.
I guess we will see if enough Republicans have received the adequate number of threats to congeal as one voice ... and they're still voting for Jordan. @!@ And down he goes again ... blame the Dems, blame the Dems ... blame the Dems and their sneaky commie submarine!
Jordan doesn't have the votes and the threats have backfired.
The Gods are commie's too!
Jordon might do worse today than in the previous two votes.
Maybe he should not have worn a jacket, he's hard to recognize wearing one.
He has no skills or the proper appearance for a Representative much less the Speaker.
Indeed he did. 25 Rs voting for someone else now.
I didn't see the voting this morning, but just caught up now.
There is already talk of another possible vote again today.
That would be insanity, right?
I've long equated populism with insanity.
Oh well, maybe it's time for spin the bottle. Where's Boehner, he should have an empty one.
Anyone who attributes that to Einstein should be taken out back and shot.
Gym "jacket-off"?
gee, it looks like the house doesn't want a pedophile enabling insurrectionist as speaker...
it got even worse afterwards in the back room with a secret ballot...
oh well, so much for the republican tradition of having an ohio SOTH involved with pedophilia...
From WaPo
Now we'll wait for Monday and see what plan F will be. By then it will be nearly 20 days without a Speaker of the House and 25 left to pass various spending bills.
From USA Today:
Multiple candidates immediately jumped into the speaker's race following Jordan's exit. They are:
Other candidates are still considering a speakership bid. They are:
Yep, just received and email from my Representative, Jack Bergman, and I immediately sent back a "Go for it".
He isn't my first choice, but he's not Jordan.
Per this list, every one of those seeking the speakership are either Trump supporters or they have not offered an endorsement:
I saw another list where only 2 of the candidates voted to certify the results of the 2020 election.
I met buck on a golf course before he ran for congress. nice enough guy, but then I found out he was a bible thumping attorney that owned a gun shop. talk about a 3 legged chair of a human.
The fact that you would vote for any republican...
The important question is whether he cheated.
Anybody who cheats at golf is scum of the earth.
I agree. I spent the first several years not keeping score when I played. I figured what's the point if you're shooting over 100 every round. it really pissed off my golf buddies for some reason. as I got better and when I had to play in company tournaments, I started to, but since I was never going to qualify for the PGA tour, so what...
Exactly, why mess with performance metrics when participation is what’s important.
I mentioned this once before here, but IMO its interesting so I'll repeat it.
One of my closest friend lives in Boca Raton, Florida. A short drive from Mar a Lago. She's an avid golfer-- and sometimes plays on the same golf course as Trump uses.
One day she happened to get a caddy who is Trump's caddy! They got to talking, and he confided in her that not only does Trump cheat at golf, but he's consistent-- he does so more than just about any golfer this caddy has worked for!
So let's get back to more important things now.
Travis and Taylor are officially a couple!
Let's hope he can protect her as well as her regular bodyguard (he just took a leave of absence from the job as he went off to fight for his country).
trump calls emmer a rino and he drops out of the speaker race... carry on with the maga shit show...
the political worship of an unamerican criminal traitor by the right wing in america is truly disgusting...
Seems we have a new speaker of the house, the perfect Republican, he is anti everything.
Except he is pro Trump. Just perfect for the current dysfunctional GOP.
A perfect model for the GOP.
This moron believes he has all the answers and that all the American people are excited for his far right agenda.
Getting rid of SS and medicare is very high on America's list. /s Him, trying to sell that to the American public is going to be interesting to say the least.
Time to cue up the leftist whining about the new Speaker.
Oops, too late.
Democrats could have had someone else, but refused.
Too bad now.
Are you happy with Johnson as Speaker of the House?
A Young Earth Creationist (meaning that he believes the universe was created 6,000 years ago and that biological evolution is a worldwide fraud) who supports Trump and helped support his Big Lie and is basically hard core against abortion, climate science, etc.?
I wasn't overly concerned with who is Speaker to begin with, recognizing how limited whatever power they have is.
I am just glad it is over.
If Democrats had wanted someone different, they could have had someone different.
Sounds good so far. One more question-- is he a "flat earther"? If so, then I would support him!
/sarcasm
its true. because obviously Democrats are smarter than Republicans, so that even though the Republicans have a majority in the House, the Dems will still have 100% control.
How could that be?
There's only one way-- as you implied, the Dems are smarter.
thank you for letting me know you didn't get it.
At this point, might as well be.
This choice of Speaker is that of the majority party. You clearly understand that party crossovers are basically political suicide and that few congresspersons have the integrity to compromise their political careers for a vote.
The Ds wanted Jeffries. The Rs have the majority and they pushed through Johnson.
Yet you still spin this as the fault of the Ds. Partisan crap.
Which is exactly why you never see anything but a party line vote from democrats. republicans aren't much better, but democrats voted in unison to side with Matt Gates, rather than show some level of integrity.
They voted against McCarthy. It was a stupid move, but portraying the Ds as being aligned (in unison with) Gates is clearly ridiculous spin.
Yes, I am aware of how things work.
I never said it was the Democrats' fault, stop inventing and assigning things to me that I don't say, that is intellectually dishonest.
You are not trying to fault the Ds with this?:
Correct, now you've got it.
They absolutely could have shown some integrity and not vote in unison. They could have also honored Pelosi's pledge, they chose to ignore that also, the are as culpable as Gates and the seven republicans that voted to change speakers without a plan to replace them, And if the dems or anyone thought Jeffries was going to be speaker they are dumber than Gates is.
Then you do not understand the meaning of your own words. You stated that the Ds had the ability to get someone different. So how in your mind can you fail to see that you are faulting the Ds for not getting someone different?
You expect too much from the current crop in Congress. It is all blind partisanship all the time.
Thus, bottom line, the majority party rules and when the majority party cannot keep its shit together, it is the majority party that is predominantly at fault.
I understand what I wrote just fine. If anyone is failing, it damn sure ain't me!
I am sure if you read what I wrote without attempting to invent things that simply aren't there, you will, too.
And if not, I'm good.
Gee, i seem to remember 10 republicans who voted to impeach trump, if only there were 7 democrats who had integrity we wouldn't have ended up here. So no, it's not blind partisanship all the time.
say, what do you mean inserting logic like that?
So 208 democrats vote together to throw the house into chaos, and it is primarily the republicans fault. Do you honestly think the democrat vote would have been any different no matter who the speaker was?
I really don't think the point is getting through.
Of course had Democrats not voted in total lockstep, most of this was avoidable.
So your argument is that it is not strictly blind partisanship all the time (in a prior Congress) so my point is not valid?
How about it is blind partisanship 'almost' all of the time?
Does that changing the power of my point?:
Bottom line, the majority party rules and when the majority party cannot keep its shit together, it is the majority party that is predominantly at fault.
So you fault the Ds for not voting in total lockstep.
it is unreasonable to expect integrity from some folk.
Now look here.
I am typing ordinary words that everyone here should understand.
Just read what I write, and it isn't necessary for you to tell me what I state or mean.
Just ignore the banality. It is beyond tiresome.
Yes, George, the GOP had the speakership. They have the majority. The Ds cannot do a damn thing to impact the speakership if the Rs had their shit together.
Why on Earth are you attempting to argue against this? It is obvious. The majority party has the hammer, it (in aggregate) rules.
My comment should have already answered that question. The Ds voted against having a GOP speaker. So unless there is a GOP speaker that they like, they will not support him/her.
The Ds clearly stated that they would not support McCarthy without concessions. McCarthy would not give concessions; they did not support him. Blind fucking partisanship at play with both parties and we saw the result.
But, regardless, the GOP has the majority and has the hammer and this is predominantly at fault for this fiasco. And the GOP is predominantly at fault for electing a Young Earth Creationist, Trump supporter, etc. as Speaker of the House.
The first part is mine.
And somehow you managed to twist that into me faulting the Dems for NOT voting in lockstep. How is beyond me.
this talking point could have come directly from the party of no personal responsibility. This could have never happened if democrats had an iota of integrity and didn’t support a scumbag like Matt Gaetz. They once again are going to be claiming like you are for them that they aren’t responsible for the unintended consequences of their actions.
Hey its easy pretending Democrats had no part in anything!
The Ds have culpability since the Rs fractured caucus opened a vulnerability. So you can fault the Ds for not doing a better job with that opportunity. That is fair.
But no matter what, the GOP is the majority; it holds the hammer. It can pick and hold whoever it wants as Speaker and the Ds cannot do a damn thing about it.
The Speaker fiasco happened only because the GOP (in particular, the House GOP) is dysfunctional.
It’s amazing isn’t it? The democrats vote 208 to zero to remove the speaker and then some say the don’t have culpability for the results of their actions.
I know, crazy, huh?
If the Democrats were in the majority and Pelosi was the Speaker when this occurred, how many republicans would have voted to keep her to "maintain stability"? How many republicans would have voted for any Democrat for Speaker? Not a single one, of course, but that doesn't stop the reactionary propagandists from pretending like the Democrats caused this situation. Fortunately, most normal people aren't stupid enough to believe the reactionaries' B.S. That doesn't stop them from constantly spewing it, though.
Indeed. Best to explain this to George, et.al.
Holy crap that comment clearly show that you aren’t reading the comments or actually understanding them. Nobody expects Democrats to vote for a republican speaker, we had a speaker already, to Quote you, most normal people aren’t stupid enough to not already know this, the point is that 208 pieces of shit Democrats voted with Matt Gaetz to remove the current speaker throwing the house into chaos, the amazing part is there are partisan hacks dumb enough to claim they aren’t responsible. Let me say it again, 208 democrats voted to remove an existing speaker! They are as big as pieces of shit as their buddy Gaetz is.
I think that anyone whose school classroom had a map like this on the wall is BOUND to think like a flat-earther:
That would be an exercise in futility, wouldn't it? It would certainly garner a bunch of double-talk, as you can see already. When they miss the point, they miss it by a mile.
Yes.
But I feel a little sorry for those who feel compelled to spin things in favor of the GOP. Just think of the cognitive dissonance involved in such an endeavor.
Gee, that would be kind of like pretending Democrats had zero to do with the Speaker being ousted
You need to stop leaping to the extremes (aka strawman claims) and instead focus on what people actually write.
Now, that IS rich!
Hmmm, I don't tell folks what they really meant or thought, I don't invent things and pretend other posters have stated what I invented, so I really am having a very hard time relating your post to me.
Then I will suggest that self-awareness would be helpful.
Hey, I'm willing if you are!
Let me know!
Hmm. You're much more compassionate than I am.
That they demonstrate in spades, daily.
Wow, pointing out that the democrats bare some responsibility for ousting an existing speaker by siding in with a piece of shit like Gaetz is spinning things to favor republicans? Talk about a cognitive dissonance, just blame Trump, that’s hilarious, partisan hackery at it’s finest.
Of course you are correct.
No, focusing on the Ds when the Rs are predominantly at fault is spinning things to favor the Rs.
Nobody is spinning.
What we are trying to get through is that had Democrats not voted en masse to remove the speaker, maybe things wouldn't have gone the way they did.
Yes, Republicans were not 100% united, so that's on them.
No shit, Texan. I have not suggested otherwise. Pay attention:
Spelling this out even more, the Ds certainly had a huge bargaining chip but they apparently could not find a way to use it with McCarthy and resorted to allowing the GOP push out their Speaker.
Now, assuming you read this finally, here is the balance of my comment:
Talk about spinning, let’s summarize shall we? McCarthy negotiated a cr with democrats, Gaetz get pissed with his 7 buddies that McCarthy negotiated a bipartisan spending deal.
So Gaetz being the little bitch brings onto the floor a motion to remove McCarthy and and all but 8 republicans vote to keep McCarthy and 208 democrats vote to remove the sitting speaker who just compromised with them and the republicans are primarily responsible. That is next level spinning to accuse others of spinning.
the entire democrat caucus voted for chaos, but because the republicans don’t vote like retarded lemmings like the democrats did they are at fault. That is next level fact twisting.
At this point, I have a feeling facts aren't going to matter.
You failed to show where I have spun anything.
You continue to speak in terms of parties, yet when it comes to assigning fault, you refuse to recognize that the GOP is the majority and holds the hammer ... because it has warring internal factions.
Now that is spin.
The reality is that we have two major parties. The partisanship is acute. The Ds will not vote for an R Speaker and the Rs will not vote for a D Speaker.
In a condition like that, the majority party has control. If it is unable to hold its Speaker because it does not have its shit together, then it predominantly is at fault. You fault the Ds for behaving like a partisan group when you know damn well that the Rs would do the same thing if the situation were reversed.
Neither party behaved well. I would have liked to see the Ds cooperate with the Rs and help them nullify the GOP faction that was fucking up the GOP caucus. But the two parties cannot seem to get past their blind partisanship to do so.
Thus, when assigning fault:
GOP is the majority, has the control, has primary fault
D is the minority, has a great bargaining chip due to GOP dysfunction, at fault for not using it responsibly
When you make post after post trying to suggest that the Ds are predominantly at fault, you are spinning like a top.
Might be interesting if Democrats take the House and The Squad gets a wild hair up their ass and pull something similar to Gaetz.
I'll bring the popcorn!
[Deleted]
Hopefully the new speaker learns the lesson that democrats taught the old speaker. Democrats in positions of authority have no honor or integrity and their “ word” is meaningless, I would tell the piece of crap Jeffries that no Democrat sponsored bill reaches the floor, no democrat amendment to a bill passes and no compromise with democrats in the house. The last speaker did and they stabbed him in the back.
Dang sure can't trust Democrats in the House
you know damn well that the Rs would do the same thing if the situation were reversed
The republicans wouldn’t vote with Tlaib or AOC or the little terrorist girls, if the wanted to replace a speaker who just negotiated a bipartisan bill, intelligent people know this, partisan hack deflect and spin.
i knew better than try to have a fact based discussion with you , back to ignoring your partisan crap.
Didn’t you get the memo? It’s the Republicans fault they don’t vote in mass like ignorant democrat lemmings.
I said facts weren't going to matter.
You think that you would see Rs defect from their caucus and vote to keep a D Speaker in office ... or vote to elect a D Speaker ... or not allow the Ds dysfunction to cause their Speakership to crumble? This is what you have resorted to now? That is not contemporary political reality, it is fantasy. You are ignoring the divisive partisanship at play today.
You also refuse to face some very basic facts:
One can assign fault to both parties but one cannot, being factual and logical, spin this situation as being predominantly the fault of the minority party. It is the GOP that is predominantly at fault. No amount of name-calling, piss and vinegar will change that fact.
Next time make sure you have facts and logic on your side.
Personally, I would hope Republicans would show more integrity than the Democrats just exhibited.
If they did not, that would be a legitimate reason to criticize them just like we are criticizing Democrats for.
You can hope until blue in the face, but there are certain factors in contemporary political reality that should be obvious.
Right now the Rs and the Ds are the Hatfields and the McCoys. They are utterly divisive and partisan. They are after short-term jabs and are not thinking about the future.
It is pathetic. But that is the nature of blind partisanship.
I stand by what I wrote.
It would be pitiful if Republicans pulled the same stunt as the Democrats did.
Perhaps partisanship is keeping some folks from recognizing exactly what the Democrats did.
An empty and pointless declaration.
It would be normal partisan politics in our current divisive, partisan political environment. Partisan politics is the antithesis of responsible, critical thinking. It yields suboptimal and often counterproductive results. You can pretend that the GOP is above it but that laughter you hear is not because of someone telling a funny joke.
Perhaps you are not reading what has been written.
What do you gain from such a comment? Better yet, what do you hope to accomplish?
Which is pitiful, thank you.
You know, if you guess enough times, you may eventually luck out and get what I said without insulting me.
I CLEARLY did not say the GOP was above doing the same crap Democrats just did.
It senseless to pretend I did.
That remark is tired, old, insulting, and false.
If the situation were reversed and the Ds were the majority, would the Rs be likely to do the same thing the Ds just did?
Yes.
Does that make it better somehow?
Maybe that is why I clearly stated this earlier:
And I was really hoping that you were reading the comments, too.
I did notice you avoided the questions I asked, so in the future please don't come at me with posts about me running from or avoiding answering questions.
Then it is pointless for you to argue with me if you agree that the Rs would likely do the same thing if the situation was reversed.
I had already responded to your hope comment and noted that it is not realistic.
Nope, does not work that way. You asking stupid questions does not give you a pass for running from thoughtful, probative questions. And I answer way too many of your stupid questions as it is.
I am not arguing with you. I had made that point a while back and then I just got through pointing it out to you again. Maybe the third time will be the charm.
Yes, and I responded.
Oh, but it will.
Then stop replying.
Sorry, that is not your decision to make.
One can always opt for the impasse feature.
Your points were valid and I agree with all but this last one.
Getting concessions and working bi-partisanly would have been the smart thing to do, but as you've pointed out it was a long shot at best. The political value of the Republicans being pulled even further to the right will galvanize Democratic voters and donors in the run up to next years election. It will also push moderate independents to vote against even more populism. No matter what the Dems win something.
Yeah, and that point was driven by me trying to reach some level of common ground with my interlocutors. The idea of course is to get them to recognize that I realize the Ds had opportunities to inject rationality into this process (in theory) that they did not pursue and that I was not arguing that this was 100% the fault of the Rs.
But, as you can observe, there is no reasoning with some people.
My concern is that the dysfunction (and sheer lunacy) of the current GOP (which I do not recognize anymore) will drive too much power to the Ds. And it is clear that many of those who support the GOP are too caught up in loyalty with the brand to realize that the party with the label "GOP" is not at all the party it used to be.
What do you consider Republicans being pulled right?
Are you aware of who they elected Speaker?
Yes, that doesn't answer my question.
State the answer you want and maybe one of us can provide it for you.
Do you not recognize Johnson as being significantly right of center?
Democrats have absolutely no business talking about any Speaker after ousting one.
I didn't make the claim, Evilone made the comment and you elected to respond, what is going to pull the Republicans to the right.
Judging from the lack of response to your question, perhaps the answer is left-wing imagination?
I gave you my answer. I suspect evilone would give you a similar answer.
Do you think Johnson is to the left, center, or to the right within the GOP?
Goosie asked his question 31 minutes ago. Give evilone some time. I am sure he does not wait by his keyboard all day for NT.
McCarthy (and Scalise and Emmer too) were as far to the right as one could go and keep some semblance of traditional Republican. Johnson (and Jordan) is a full on right wing populist and Trump ass kisser. That is a full jerk of the chain rightward.
yeah, I read.
Thought maybe since you decided to respond that you might have actually had an answer to the question.
I'll wait for who it was originally addressed to.
Johnson is not the questions. you make claims about right wing polices and loyalty with the brand, what are they. I am sure you had something in mind when you typed it.
I didn't realize Gaetz was a Democrat. They keep putting an R after his name on the news.
He isn't.
Very perceptive.
Johnson is the Speaker of the House. You do not see the significance of the House Republicans voting to make him Speaker???
Is it your opinion that the House Republicans elected a Speaker with whom they politically disagree?
Yeah OK, you don't like Johnson, tell me what this full jerk rightward is going to be?
Don't blame Johnson for the Democrats fucking themselves.
You have no answer to claims you make.
Where on God's green earth did you come up with that, or do you just enjoy making stuff up?
WTF does that mean. Johnson IS the Speaker of the House.
Do you think Johnson reflects the center of the GOP?
You keep dodging every question. That just makes it look as though you have not thought this through.
Not one single freaking thing.
Best to NOT make things personal. I made no comment about me.
Young Earth Creationists believe the universe is 6,000 years old, that biological evolution is a fraud, that scientists worldwide are pulling a con job with all dating methods, etc.
Trump's Big Lie was a con on the nation and Johnson was there supporting it.
Johnson is hard core on abortion, climate science, green energy, etc.
These have nothing to do with me. They are absolutes that reflect where Johnson stands ideologically.
Do you think Johnson is to the left, center, or to the right within the GOP?
We will see how much sway he really has as Speaker, but he:
It was Gaetz that put the motion on the floor, but you continue to blame Dems? Dems took advantage of the Republican power struggle. Moderates Republicans lost, not Dems.
Yes it sure was Gaetz.
But we all know that had not Democrats went along with Gaetz, much of this probably would never have happened.
As some Democrats are fond of saying, Republicans can't govern.
And now, it is clear that Democrats didn't want to legislate.
As I said, the Dems exploited the power play in the Republican Party. McCarthy is as much at fault as the Dems since he could have reached out for cross party help.
It's fully clear to anyone PAYING ATTENTION that neither party wants to legislate. It's also fully clear to anyone PAYING ATTENTION the partisan patsies on both sides keep cheering them on while pointing fingers at everyone else.
A pox on both houses...
That almost happened.
Yes and no. Had he done so he could easily have been primaried out of his seat.
Nice try! You inserted your foot in your mouth about some phantom rightwing "loyalty with the brand" bullshit that you can't explain. . Stop trying to change the subject to Johnson.
What is confusing you? Seems as though whatever I type just does not register.
'Loyalty to the brand' refers to GOP members who remain loyal to the GOP regardless of its changes. Do you, for example, see any difference between the GOP of today and that of Reagan in terms of competence, integrity, fiscal discipline, statesmanship, etc.? Compare men the likes of Bob Dole to the children occupying Congress today.
Rather than follow someone like Reagan, the GOP of today is rallying behind a pathological liar, narcissist, traitor who is the only PotUS who attempted to steal a US election through fraud, lies, coercion, inciting followers, and suborning his own V.P. to commit an unconstitutional act. And to top it off, he has 91 felony counts pending adjudication.
Those who comprised the GOP of Reagan would have ejected Trump in a heartbeat.
But recently we see the House Republicans elect as Speaker an individual who believes the universe is 6,000 years old, that the foundation of biology (evolution) is bullshit, that climate change is a worldwide conspiracy, that renewable energy is unimportant, that all forms of dating by science is wrong, etc. And this bozo has the added quality of being an avid Trump supporter who actually supported Trump's Big Lie con job.
If you cannot see the difference then I doubt anyone could open your eyes.
Bottom line, I can fully explain my positions. All I have seen from you is bullshit claims and deflection.
There was that so hard? If that were the case this whole speaker debacle wouldn't have taken place. The GOP contains many free thinker (to a fault) even though you don't like it. Don't tell me about how the Republican Party has changed. Look at the Democrats are they the party of Kennedy or even Clinton?
What do you think the Democrats are rallying around!
Not hard at all. The real question is why I must explain something multiple times and break it down in very simplistic terms.
No, the entire GOP caucus was loyal to the GOP brand and never considered voting for anyone other than a GOP member. Same with the D caucus. So brand loyalty is precisely why we had the Speaker debacle. Mathematically it would have been easy for a few Ds to side with the Rs or a few Rs side with the Ds to elect a speaker. No way did that happen; no way would that happen.
Where have I ever stated that I would not want to see free thinkers? Do you not have the very first clue of my positions? I am an anti-partisan. I would love to see no parties and have everyone think critically rather than follow the leader/brand. Get a clue before making such declarations.
Do you not see the change in the GOP?
You cannot answer a direct question without deflecting. Instead of deflecting because you have no rebuttal, first ensure you have a good argument to begin with.
Democrats sided with Matt gaetz to achieve this. Hope they are happy.
Nice to see you care so deeply for their feelings!
They will be when they rake in the campaign cash this will deliver.
If I had more faith in the American voters' intelligence I would think that the Republicans putting an extremist MAGA election-denying anti-abortionist creationist in charge of Congress would cause a landslide for the Democrats next election.
If they nominated anybody worth voting for, it would.
I bet America would advance by leaps and bounds if it didn't treat its politics like a football game.
That requires a level of intellectual effort most Americans simply lack either the capacity or willingness to invest.
Look at some of the moronic memes on this forum. Check out the blind, rabid defense or condemnation of Trump or Biden or De Santis or any other political figure. Almost no thought goes into any of that. It takes more work than most people are willing to invest or it takes more intelligence than they possess.
Good assessment, Jack. There really is a little good and a little bad in everyone and everything, It's best to maintain, as my avatar says, balance.
IMO there’s a strong probability the Dems will win— but not necessarily because of all those issues. If it’s a close race there’s one issue that will create a Democratic win: abortion.
I used to think Gen Z would really help the Dems are they are mostly leftists. I know a few personally. But they may not affect the election much as many are so far left most probably wouldn’t vote for Democratic candidates but rather waste their votes on far out leftist 3rd party candidates.
Also more than any other age group most of them are bothered a lot by Biden’s.
Also many Gen Z are just totally nuts in so many ways….
"Bothered a lot by Biden's" WHAT? age? attitude? VP pick? etc etc etc
My error! Thanks for pointing it out.
Very tired didn’t get enough sleep last night so a bit careless in my posting. They are really bothered by his age.
What was it about last night? I had the worst night I can remember as well. I don't think I was able to sleep more than a couple of hours.
I haven't checked lately, but I believe there's been an Eclipse lately, may Scorpio/Taurus axis. This is Astrological-- Eclipses can produce negative energies. and Scorpio can be nasty.
Full Moon
...and empty arms?