Originally published at: Jim Jordan pops back into the speaker race like a mole underneath a mallet | Boing Boing
…
2 Likes
20 Likes
More like a turd than don’t disappear even if you flushed already three times
18 Likes
If he’s interested in serving Congress, he can start by detailing the conversations he had with TFG on Jan 6.
16 Likes
Why are we attacking people’s moles with mallets?!
1 Like
they are gonna be mad, mad, mad, and blame democrats for not helping to get jimmy elected.
5 Likes
That’s one of Trumps obsessions, it it not?
6 Likes
Freedom Caucus: “We can do better than that: We got a guy who’s all those things, AND an insurrectionist!”
9 Likes
Great, now I gotta Google this new asshole:
TL:DR; Awful in most of the same ways as all his Republican colleagues (anti-choice, anti-LGBTQ etc) but not an active insurrectionist or a Putin toady and I didn’t see any indication he personally facilitated a bunch of sex abuse so I guess I’d have to classify him as “less horrible than Jim Jordan.”
7 Likes
This is a bar earthworms can clear with ease. Sadly, with the current makeup of the GQP, “not an insurrectionist or sex offender” might be the best we can hope for. Yet another reason to VOTE THE BASTICHES OUT!!
13 Likes
Probably the only important difference between the two from a legislative standpoint is that Scott supports military aid to Ukraine and Jordan actively wants Putin to win.
5 Likes
6 Likes
As of 4:03 on 10/13, you can pause your Google quest. For now.
Edit: A Twitter post (not the WaPo), says the vote was Jordan - 124, Scott - 81. So, maybe don’t close that google tab just yet. It feels unlikely he gets enough to win the job.
2 Likes
7 Likes
A WaPo update at 4:55:
So not close for almost an hour.
7 Likes
nothing accomplished and now they’re slinking off for the weekend. whee.
> UPDATE: Friday, Oct 13, 2023 · 1:52:03 PM PDT · Joan McCarter
They’re not just calling it a day, they’re taking the weekend, which isn’t a huge surprise. Stick around for the Jeffries press conference in a few minutes, though.
5 Likes
He can afford to lose 5. Math is not my strong suite, but 56>5 is a true statement. This isn’t ending any time soon, and the Chaos Caucus has a real chance to get what they want after all.
4 Likes
It’s like they didn’t learn anything from a couple of days ago when they “selected” Scalise. They did the exact same thing today, and then prematurely celebrated Jordan’s selection when he had the same problem Scalise did. I don’t know what they think they’re accomplishing with these votes. They’re making themselves look even more incompetent every day, and that’s saying something.
4, actually. If he loses 5 votes, he can’t get 217. Remember, there are 2 vacancies in the House right now.
10 Likes
Hopefully soon to be 3, but that won’t be soon enough.
8 Likes
Yeah, although then he would only need 216 votes. Of course, they’d also then be starting with only 220 Republicans, so they could still only lose 4 votes. I guess it wouldn’t change the math.
6 Likes
