96 Comments
User's avatar
Tai's avatar

People like Jim Jordan is the reason I will not be voting for ANY republicans again in the foreseeable future.

Expand full comment
knowltok's avatar

I'd actually say, the broad support for Jim Jordan among the vast majority of Republicans is why I will not be voting for any republicans again in the foreseeable future. Democrats have their fringies as well as their criminals. They aren't pushing them to be leadership of this country. In fact, recently I've seen them being called on to shut up / resign.

Expand full comment
Robert Jaffee's avatar

Agreed. I have equal disdain for both political parties, yet republicans have taken misconduct, corruption and stupidity to new levels, never seen before in my lifetime.

My god, making Gym boy speaker is like making a serial bank robber manager of the bank; a bank he robbed six times before. It’s asinine!...:)

Expand full comment
Media Maverick's avatar

Equal disdain? Really? That’s troubling given just how off base the GOP is these days.

Expand full comment
Robert Jaffee's avatar

I mean against party itself. Clearly, the republicans have devolved into something else.

Expand full comment
Old Chemist 11's avatar

Specifically, a cult. A few years ago I used the word figuratively, but after the reaction to 1/6/21, I use it literally.

Expand full comment
James M Brennan's avatar

It doesn't even square with his statement. Perhaps he'll revise his comment.

Expand full comment
Robert Jaffee's avatar

It makes sense. I have no love for either party, but despise the people in the Republican Party. Party’s are the machine.

That said, I still vote for the democrats, and always will. Hope this helps.

Expand full comment
James M Brennan's avatar

It's a wording thing (which is what I kind of figured). Thanks for the clarification!

Expand full comment
Jeff S.'s avatar

Oh, that is because we Democrats have gotten the memo that our new theme song is "Move Bitch" by Ludacris. Anyone who is becoming problematic, we play the song for them.

Expand full comment
Blanche Axton's avatar

These are either the dumbest or the most amoral people on the planet. It's staggering to me....not surprising, sadly.......

Expand full comment
Scott Cooper's avatar

Why not both?

Really, the GOP has been taken over by the worst of the worst of American society. They're all neo-confederates hellbent on bringing down the Federal Government, they just differ in a matter of style.

Expand full comment
Blanche Axton's avatar

Absolutely could be both.

Expand full comment
Robert Jaffee's avatar

You mean immoral. Amoral is not knowing or understanding the consequences of your actions; like a baby or the earth. Otherwise, I agree..:)

Expand full comment
Hortense's avatar

Another definition of amoral: unconcerned with the rightness or wrongness of something. I can't tell if they simply don't care about the impact of their actions or if they actively don't care about them.

Still, the term moral, with no prefixes, does not apply to the House GOP.

Expand full comment
Blanche Axton's avatar

Yeah....I could have used either or both words. My suspicion is they don't care. Some are dumb enough and self entitled enough to think that if they want it then it must be "moral"........see the Evangelicals......

Expand full comment
Robert Jaffee's avatar

Agreed..:)

Expand full comment
Alondra's avatar

But where's the claim of fraudulent election? You know, some members intended to vote for Jordan, but their minds were switched by an Italian satellite? And they didn't even know it, that's how slick the operation was. Or, more reasonably, the Dems have a secret and sinister mist they spray around that turns real freedom lovers into woke weaklings. Once Gym gets it all figured out and gets elected, he will call for an investigation. /:

Expand full comment
Erisian's avatar

"Once Gym gets it all figured out and gets elected, he will call for an investigation."

-----

And it will be just as successful as Jordan's and Gosar's impeachment inquiries.

fnord

Expand full comment
Adam's avatar

They could easily be both.

Expand full comment
Paul G's avatar

You took the words right out of my mouth.

Expand full comment
Oldandintheway's avatar

For 20 years they have been greedy, and focused on widening the wealth gap while they fought against the Communists who supported Medicaid and Social Security . Then Trump showed them they could do more than that. They could destroy things, not make laws, not follow laws, call people names, incite violence, and do disgraceful things in movie theaters. They have become the definition of trash. You wouldn't want them in the government, in your neighborhood, or leave them alone with your child. But there they are, on TV with Hannity.

Expand full comment
Hortense's avatar

I always wonder how these people deal with situations in their personal lives? How much bullying, threatening and name calling is done when they don't get their way? To me, how you interact with people in public life is rather similar to how you do that in your personal life. I would not want to be anywhere near these guys. They are too foul.

Expand full comment
John P's avatar

Well, as evidenced by some of their colleagues saying "do you know who I am?" to 'the help' it is pretty obvious. Judge people by how they treat those who they are not required to treat well. In this case, it's a bunch of dbags with too much power, and a strong case of Dunning-Kruger.

Expand full comment
Hortense's avatar

Voting for Jordan is the House GOP version of "The beatings will stop once morale improves." I will accept Bacon's and Diaz-Balart's objections based on process. It seems to be the least that they can do, but is it enough? Reward the behavior you want or get the behavior you reward.

Expand full comment
Christine's avatar

And such weak reasoning! But I’ll take it.

Expand full comment
Al Brown's avatar

"You’ve likely seen a lot of the holdouts described as “moderates.” An overwhelming majority of them are nothing of the sort and their ideological views are almost identical. Where they differ is their temperament and tactics."

The best brief, clarifying description of the mis-labeled "normies" that I've seen yet, anywhere. Thanks, Joe.

Expand full comment
Susan Linehan's avatar

I'm not sure I agree. Their ideology may be shared--actually, either party's ideology is broadly shared by its representatives and voters. The devil is in the details. If the "normies" are indeed committed to process, they might still consider bipartisanism part of "process." The whole POINT of a bipartisan approach is that you give up some of your ideological position for a particular purpose of getting something done. That's why the country has been able to survive as long as it has.

Expand full comment
John P's avatar

Ya reading the "I would never want a Democrat!" parts made me cringe. I'm not a lifelong Democrat, but I currently lean in their direction as the "not actively insane" party. Sure they annoy me (frequently), but Jeffries isn't an idiot and he's vocally open to bipartisan approach to the speaker, ex: unity speaker.

This level of no holds barred, never compromise with a D, etc. language has all the hallmarks of the authoritarian impulse that runs through the GOP.

Expand full comment
Kathy Balles's avatar

I hear these people speak and think “Give it time, and they’ll be ready to just line me up with other Democrats and just shoot us.”

Expand full comment
PEB's avatar

Exactly it's like our own little Hamas right here in the USA.

Expand full comment
Susan Linehan's avatar

I've been a Democrat most of my life, but I have voted for Republicans, particularly those with good environmental policies==Dan Evans (who won for governor) and John Spellman (who lost the governor race to Dixy Lee Ray, who annoyed the hell out of me from the get go.) Oh, those dear dead days when someone in the normally opposing party actually had policies you could agree with on issues you cared about

Expand full comment
Al Brown's avatar

I think that you underestimate the danger that these people represent. They're not the principled conservatives who voted to impeach Trump after the insurrection: those people, with two exceptions, were purged at the midterms. These are the election deniers or worse; they just have better manners.

Expand full comment
Susan Linehan's avatar

possibly. But what is the alternative?

Expand full comment
Al Brown's avatar

The best we could probably hope for would be a Republican who will keep his or her promises, who's willing to fund the government through 2025, including aid to Ukraine and Israel, at current levels. and to revoke the one-person Motion to Vacate the Chair rule. If s/he were also willing to drop the bogus impeachment and "weaponization of government" inquiries and at least fund a lot of additional Border Patrol agents and immigration judges to get the border under control that would be fantastic, but now I'm really wishcasting.

Expand full comment
Susan Linehan's avatar

That's what I'd hope for, too.

Expand full comment
John P's avatar

Think that was meant for Susan, but got sent to me. Either way, I'm with you Al: these people (ex: Jordan, etc.) are dangerous, authoritarian, anti-democracy types. Pretty much the entire GOP decided to go along to get along and threw out any semblance of principles.

There's what 1-2 members who have openly stated Biden beat Trump in 2020? It bodes ill. Foxes controlling the henhouse.

Expand full comment
Al Brown's avatar

Yes, it was -- and that's how it shows up on my screen, sorry. *sigh!* I like Substack, but ... 😂

We're on the same page. I considered myself a Republican, or at least Republican-adjacent, until one year to the day after GWB lied to get us into the unnecessary war in Iraq. That was as long as I gave him to prove his "weapons of mass destruction" claims, and I've never voted for a Republican for President again after he didn't.

Like you, I think that when the Republicans say "I don't like (name) very much, but I'd NEVER vote for a Democrat!" They're telling us who they really are, and we should believe them.

Expand full comment
Colleen Kochivar-Baker's avatar

WAPO has a breakdown of the twenty and the only one that actually shares Jordan's 'conservatism' is Ken Buck. Most of the rest skew to the center right with six of them in Biden districts. It's an interesting breakdown.

Expand full comment
John P's avatar

Let's hope the 6 hold, they'll all lose their seats if they go along with this. Then again, if they don't go along with it, they'll get primaried and probably lose in the general.

In one scenario (scenario A), the GOP keeps house seats. In the other, they win the Pyrrhic victory and lose the seats...then again, a lot of these people seem to not care about winning elections and would rather just overrule them if they don't like the results.

Expand full comment
TW Falcon's avatar

Maybe we should stop calling them normies and instead refer to them as Vichy Republicans, as someone suggested a while back. That's really what they are.

Expand full comment
Thomas Curren's avatar

Excellent coverage of a dysfunctional situation! Thank you..a valuable addition to the Bulwark brand!

Expand full comment
Laura's avatar

It has been said that only Jordan can tame the Crazy Caucus (my label for them). The question is not whether he can but whether he will. I believe he will give them everything they desire. What is his motivate to, dare I say it, reach across the aisle, compromise, not let his freak flag fly? The man cannot even admit that Donald Trump lost the last election. He has no decency and, like the Golden Calf he worships, he has no morale compass. And he would be in line for the Presidency should some idiot decide to be a MAGA hero.

Expand full comment
JLyon's avatar

Why would he tame something he helped create? He rewards their behavior - it makes no damn sense for those voting for him to think he will quell their behavior when he instigates and celebrates it!

Expand full comment
Jan's avatar

Speaker cannot be Jordan. If Jordan becomes Speaker, he will shut down the Government. Republicans will be responsible for crashing and burning the US legislatively, militarily, economically, socially. This message should be a central message of Republicans and Democrats and any news organizations that care about a democratic future for the US.

Expand full comment
Bruce Brittain's avatar

There are simply no more "Profiles in Courage" candidates left in the republican caucus. The concept of "taking one for the good of the country" applies only to Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger.

Expand full comment
Jan's avatar

You are correct!

Expand full comment
John P's avatar

I'm not sure it'll work for the average voter though. I hold a low opinion of 'low info' voters, mostly because I've been involved in politics for quite a bit of my life. Lots of people see both parties as dysfunctional messes ruining their lives, and will probably just blame Biden.

Hell, that's the cynical strategy of the MAGA types - draw moral equivalence between Trump and Biden (the tactics of authoritarians).

The last time a government shutdown played poorly for the GOP was during Obama's presidency. Those days seem long past. The MAGA types are too zealous to care, and you know their supporters will not budge even if the leopard eats their face. I'm with JVL that this will not hurt them and could actively harm Biden (unfortunately). We're a mess of a country.

Expand full comment
Jan's avatar

If the attitude is that it isn’t worth trying, then we’ve already lost.

There are many Democrats who just need information and encouragement. At least that’s what I found when I knocked doors for local candidates in 2020 and 2022. And I have a friend who does phone banking and she has good luck doing that.

Expand full comment
John P's avatar

I could argue half the country is lost in more ways than one. Mind you, I'm coming at this as an ex-GOP "moderate" (like Tim) who is happily part of the big tent Democratic coalition now cause ya know, I enjoy democracy.

My cynicism derives from that and seeing just how effective some of these scare tactics / disinformation tactics are with huge swaths of the population and getting them to vote against their own betterment. Then again, your comment gives me some hope, especially with disengaged Democratic-leaning voters. Let's hope we can convince them (and some of the suburban ex-GOP types) to turn out!

Expand full comment
Jan's avatar

It’s a tough time for those of us who are supporting democracy. Giving up is what those who want to destroy democracy want us to do. Kara Swisher, in a chat with Charlie Sykes last night said that there is a large silent group out there who is fed up with the Republican Party behavior. Because of the disinformation hubbub, they just might need a little guidance.

Expand full comment
Amanda's avatar

"Jordan has been in Congress since 2007. Not once during the past 16 years has any of the legislation he’s sponsored become law."

Wow.

Expand full comment
DJ's avatar

Reminds me of when Stephen Colbert interviewed Lynn Westmoreland, who had never sponsored a bill except for one requiring the Ten Commandments in every classroom. “In a do-nothing Congress, is it accurate to say you’re the do-nothingest?”

https://www.cc.com/video/tlf8t3/the-colbert-report-better-know-a-district-georgia-s-8th-lynn-westmoreland

Expand full comment
Jan's avatar

How do you spell “LOSER”.

Expand full comment
Amanda's avatar

I don't know. Ask me Thursday.

Expand full comment
Hortense's avatar

Makes one wonder just what kind of laws is he sponsoring.

Expand full comment
GlenD's avatar

Unconstitutional ones is my guess.

Expand full comment
Victoria Brown's avatar

Great post, Joe! Just NO to Gym Jordan!

Expand full comment
TomD's avatar

If the need is for twisting and contorting, call a wrestler!

Expand full comment
Amanda's avatar

I'm curious how much fear of physical violence (from crazed MAGAnauts, egged on by lunatic politicians and cynical journalists) is a factor in these decisions?

That issue has come up before during other votes, and there's plenty of bare-faced bullying (of the nonphysical kind) going on in this vote. How serious of a threat is it considered in the speaker vote?

Expand full comment
Colleen Kochivar-Baker's avatar

I would think the threat vector for House members is considerably lower than those for certain judges and prosecutors involved with Trump. Trump, not Jordan, is the focus of the MAGA crazies. Diaz-Balart from Florida is Cuban and he had quite the take on Jordan's tactics and why they won't work on him.

Expand full comment
Amanda's avatar

I can't cite a source (and I could be wrong), but I could swear that this has come up for House members too, enough to be significant. Sorry I can't be more concrete.

I will be curious to see how Diaz-Balart votes in future rounds. Personally I wasn't all that reassured by what he said. It seemed a bit vague and loophole-filled to me (but that's very subjective and again I could be wrong). And remember he also said he'd never vote for a Democrat under any circumstances -- which of course you can't expect him to, but it was interesting that he felt the need to emphasize that.

Anyway, just the mildest suspicion from someone who does not have a strong instinct for this stuff.

All power to the hold-outs and may they keep it up!

Expand full comment
Jane in NC's avatar

Gym Jordan isn't just an election denier, he's a sexual assault denier. Outside of Donald Trump, it's hard to imagine anyone with as empty a moral tank as Gym Jordan. If the republicans are stupid enough to make him speaker, they can kiss the house majority good-bye next year, and hopefully for years to come. And they'll deserve it.

Expand full comment
Bruce Brittain's avatar

House republicans are not afraid of Jim Jordan. They're afraid of Sean Hannity

Expand full comment
John_E's avatar

A whole bunch of 'party before country' a-holes

Expand full comment
Sharon Rossy's avatar

One of the most loathsome creatures ever. He makes my skin crawl.

Expand full comment