Will the removal of McCarthy increase or decrease the chances of continued funding of US government?

[andym]

McCarthy's last major act was to strike a deal with Democrats to continue funding the government for 45 days. That is the action that prompted Gaetz and colleagues to remove him,

Now it is likely that McCarthy believed that Democrats would consider that reason enough to not participate in his removal. He considered wrongly. He almost certainly would have had to strike a deal, officially or under the table to avoid Democrats voting against him.

The very big question remains is whether Congress will actually vote to continue to fund the government in about 6 weeks. Obviously it will depend on who becomes Speaker (for example one congressman says he will nominate Trump), but there is now likely to be even more bad blood between the current Republican leadership and Democrats-- evidence for this is the demand to remove Pelosi and Stoyer from their offices.

So we are asking the question based on your best guess of what will happen.

If you vote for decreasing the chance of funding, do you think that voting to remove McCarthy was a tactical error as a government shutdown will hurt the economy or a necessary political action to weaken Republicans ?

37 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	The removal of McCarthy increases the chance of continued funding of the government
	0 (0%)
	The removal of McCarthy decreases the chance of continued funding of the government
	30 (81%)
	The removal of McCarthy does not affect the continued funding of the government
	7 (19%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[Recycle_Guru]

1. no change. hostage takers and deal makers are still in olace

and no way they take over a month to install new speaker

[pfitz59]

2. The time wasted selecting a new asshole to 'lead' the House

should be spent wrangling a budget deal. My guess the Senate will drop a proposal which will slide through at the 11th hour. Or else we're screwed.

[Wounded Bear]

3. Sorry, but I suspect this is bad news for the budget negotiations...

repubs hate to do that anyway, and the fact that they are basically leaderless doesn't help IMO.

Too many of them just want to burn it down.

[jcgoldie]

4. they were already leaderless

That's what got us here.

[Torchlight]

5. Same monkeys, same circus. Carny-barkers trading hats won't effect much.

I've seen zero measure of anything becoming more or less workable.

[Shipwack]

6. Less chance. As weird as it sounds...

McCarthy might have been the most reasonable person that could get elected. When push came to shove, for whatever reason, he decided to pass the continuing resolution with the help of Democrats.

Unless the next speaker has enough savvy to stipulate that 10 (or whatever) votes are needed to start throwing them out, McCarthy is a warning.

The next person to wield the gavel will probably have no hesitation to shut down the government. Only Koolaide drinkers need apply.

[emulatorloo]

7. Most Republicans voted to save McCarthy. I doubt the Gym Jordan crazy types will get enough votes

to become speaker. I guess time will tell.

[usonian]

8. Forget McCarthy. His budget "solution" would eliminate the FBI, NATO and stores opening on Sunday.

He already nuked Ukraine Aid in a way that has to be undone.

Biden and Jeffries will outsmart the bunch.

[Emile]

9. Tell the congressional Republicans your concerns. They are

the ones to blame.

[andym]

10. Many Republicans want to shut down the government.

They are certainly unconcerned and would be unconcerned about being told of fears of the consequences of a government shutdown. Certainly they get the blame, but keeping the government open is important to many Americans, including those who are most vulnerable. Democrats have to do what's best, as they are actually concerned about governing responsibly.