Rep. Thomas Massie Asks Followers to Weigh in on January 3 House Speaker Election in X Poll – Results are BRUTAL for Mike Johnson

Gateway Pundit ^ | December 25, 2024 | Jordan Conradson

[Macho MAGA Man]

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) posted a poll on X early Wednesday morning, asking users on the platform if failed House Speaker Mike Johnson should be reelected to serve another term as Speaker on January 3, 2025.

Poll respondents, most of whom are likely Republican voters, overwhelmingly called for Johnson to be removed from leadership.

This comes after Mike Johnson caved and made a backroom deal with Democrats late Friday on a government funding bill, which President Trump previously made several demands for. Trump’s orders were not followed after Johnson’s betrayal.

..... Snip.....

Massie asked X users if members should vote for Mike Johnson or "someone else." You can take the poll below:

As of writing, more than 106,000 responded to the poll, with over 93% saying the House should elect "someone else" as Speaker.

[Macho MAGA Man]

According to the poll results, Mike Johnson is in serious trouble 😵‍💫

[Singermom]

Make MASSIE do it since he thinks it is so easy

[Rustybucket]

Who cares if you ask people from a select group, never been asked anything, yet I/we are the constituents. Meaningless inquiries by set up/controlled participants, are meaningful meaningless...

[rdcbn1]

Never underestimate the Republicans capability to seize defeat from the jaws of victory

[bigbob]

I don’t hear anyone claiming it’s an easy job, just that Johnson isn’t very good at it.

[JSM_Liberty]

There is no representative called “someone else”. If he wants to replace Johnson he should come up with an actual alternative.

[Singermom]

Nobody else seems to want it and Massie is the biggest complainer.

[Political Junkie Too]

Johnson didn't have to make the deal with the Democrats. He could have shut down the government until January 3 when the Republicans take control of Congress.

In December 1995, the government shut down for 21 days.

In 2013, the government shut down for 16 days.

In December 2018, the government shut down for 35 days.

There was no reason for Johnson to make the deal when there was less than two weeks before Republicans were in charge of Congress. They could have sent a budget bill to Biden and dare him to veto it.

-PJ

[BigEdLB]

Give it to Elon until Jan 20. Get DJT in then figure out details

[Bruce Campbells Chin]

Nobody else seems to want it and Massie is the biggest complainer.

Oh, I think there are others who want it. The problem is that most others in the House don't want them.

[dljordan]

He’s a turncoat. A reacher across the aisle. We need a speaker who will take a ball bat to the Dems heads.

[Phlyer]

He [Johnson] could have shut down the government. . .

Yes, and that's what I would have done. However, there are two problems with that. First, every time there was a shutdown (as you listed), the Republicans were 'blamed' for it and lost seats. The Republicans are more afraid of a shutdown and losing swing voters than of losing their base voters. After all, who else are they going to vote for? And of course, there are a lot of Republicans who are DIABLO (Democrate In All But Label Only) who wanted all that pork. They also needed to be shown that the couldn't get away with their backroom deals. Second . . .

They could have sent a budget bill to Biden and dare him to veto it.

Actually, no. They never would have gotten a 'good' bill through the Senate. So the government would have shut down, the Republicans would be blamed, and lose seats (or so they are afraid).

However, what Johnson did wrong was to agree to all the pork in the 1500 page continuing resolution. I have not read the 187 page bill, but apparently it's a lot better. And so it is possible that Johnson 'won' through a strategy that required the Dhimms to go along with the revised bill. Once the pork (including a huge raise for Congress) in the original bill was revealed, the Dhimms had to accept something less. Yet they might have 'negotiated' until a shutdown if Johnson was strong to begin with. They play very convoluted games in DC.

Which is a lot of the problem. I think Johnson should have allowed the government to be shut down (which is a misnomer because it doesn't really) and work hard to blame the Dhimms. After all, the next Congress is already selected so he'd have two years to work on that 'blame-the-Dhimms' message.

[mosaicwolf]

Johnson plays with a beach ball while the dems play with a hard ball.

[mosaicwolf]

Johnson plays with a beach ball while the dems play with a hard ball.

[Soul of the South]

I agree with you. For a Republican the Speaker’s job is almost impossible given the GOP members of Congress have no unifying political philosophy, unlike the Democrats who are committed socialist/communist, centralized government, internationalists. The Republican conference is divided between strong conservatives, moderate to liberal traditional liberals, and pretend conservatives who are really Democrats in sheep’s clothing. While Democrat party leaders in the house rule with an iron fist, a Republican Speaker or minority leader’s job is bring together a caucus in which individual members are free to act without repercussions.

Compared to GOP establishment Speakers preceding him (Dennis Hastert, John Boehner, Paul Ryan, and Kevin McCarthy) Mike Johnson has done about the best job possible given the hand he has been dealt. He has a razor thin majority and very little coercive power over individual members. Some of his members are from swing districts and are more afraid of moderate to liberal voters in their own districts than the Speaker. Some members ideologically oppose Trump and/or the MAGA movement. Some members are beholden to a few key donors whose control of campaign money will influence decisions. Finally some members are being extorted by journalist, intelligence agencies, sexual partners, and even foreign governments. With a working majority of less than an handful, and an opposition party that votes against you in unison, it is virtually impossible for the GOP Speaker to force the outcome of every vote.

No matter who is House Speaker, Trump is not going to win on every issue in the House of Representatives with a margin of a few votes. With a 40 vote majority the Speaker would have enough support to determine the outcome of every vote but that isn’t the hand Johnson is playing.

Trump is a dealmaker. He understands playing board and he seems to support Johnson. Conservatives should remember Trump’s negotiations involve making outrageous demands he knows the other side won’t agree to. By doing so, he ultimately gets most of what he really wants.

Many conservatives also forget Trump had great difficulty with Paul Ryan as Speaker, but after Ryan was gone Trump and McCarthy had a good working relationship.

Massie is unlikely to do any better leading the House than Johnson given the slim GOP majority. As long as Trump can work with the Speaker, and the Speaker is largely committed to Trump’s agenda, keeping Johnson as Speaker is better for the party’s image with the public than once again changing the leadership.

In dealing with Congress, Thune in the Senate will be more of a thorn in Trump’s side than Johnson as Speaker.

[frank ballenger]

Stories today say the Dems are looking forward to a loophole for Donald Trump to not be confirmed or inaugurated. Hypocrites accused Trump of that for Biden coming in after the stolen election.

If the there is no House Speaker by that time they would delay the transition, even for months or years. Vote after vote without a Speaker to lead the House.

Hope this is dystopian science fiction.

Newsweek (not Asimov’s Science Fiction Magazine)—

Republicans Fear Speaker Battle Means They ‘Can’t Certify the Election’
Updated Dec 25, 2024 at 12:17 PM EST

https://www.newsweek.com/republicans-fear-speaker-battle-cant-certify-election-2005510

[tennmountainman]

Does not really matter who we want. It’s who Trump is comfortable with.

[digger48]

The Constitution has remedies for that if they try to delay inauguration

[frank ballenger]

Let’s hope so.

[digger48]

Either way, Joe is out at noon on January 20th

If Trump isn’t sworn in, being most senior Senator, Chuck Grassley would be President Pro Tem, IIRC