>

McCarthy has no intention of working with Democrats.   His hate caucus won't let him, he's their puppet now.
I don’t believe that any meaningful legislation will get passed because if it does that means it passes through the Senate. If it has a chance to pass the Senate McCarthy didn’t go far enough to the right. Then with the new rules only one member of congress can call a confidence vote to boot McCarthy. With the holdouts not putting forward an actual candidate and just wanting to screw McCarthy for personal gain, expect that with every bill, every rule, every committee. McCarthy sold his soul and his shoes to become speaker, but in the end the only thing he has is the title, he is a prisoner of the far right. And I don’t think anything will get done beside vendetta investigations and cherry picked evidence, which ( in my opinion ) might actually help the Democrats in 2024 when the public sees that the Republicans don’t want to legislate
Edit: I wanted to thank everyone who commented and who I replied to for engaging in a wonderful conversation. It has been a long time since I had a legitimate discussion with multiple points of views where no one attacked each other personally. When I joined this subreddit I was scared to comment or post anything out of fear but everyone in this discussion has made me more confident to share my opinion >

I think you summed it up well. We’re looking at two years of hearing about Hunter Biden’s laptop >

Don't forget impeachment after impeachment out of spite. >

It won’t be simply out of spite. It will be used as a defense for Trumps actions and to make impeachment less appealing to the public in the future. It’s essentially completing their projection.
They falsely claimed Trump was impeached purely for political reason. Then they’ll impeach Biden over nothing but political reasons. Then, when Democrats say “this is purely political”, they’ll try to “both sides” the issue. Republican mouth breathers will keep spam “Its (D)ifferent” because Republicans are generally too stupid to realize that there actually are differences. >

Yup, it’ll be a complete mess. Dems and leftists in general will have to say “this is a political witch hunt,” which is exactly what the right wants them to say. Then they can screech about hypocrisy and all that. But if the Rs actually go through with trying to impeach Biden, it genuinely will be purely political and out of spite. Unfortunately the headlines and talking heads will have a field day with calling Dems hypocrites. >

Exactly. Which, while I don’t want to be rude, is only possible because the people that support the GOP are incredibly stupid and/or knowingly acting in bad faith. If their supporters were mildly intelligent or honest they wouldn’t be able to successfully use that strategy >

Ehh.. I wouldn't say that's the only reason. Dems persued Trump for Russiagate for so long, ignoring provable crimes like all the money he was taking before and after the election from foreign governments (directly buying policy see; Israel embassy shift, Yemen vetos etc). 
I would say Dems kinda have it coming. To clarify, I'm meaning the inability to defend without getting labelled as hypocritical, not the impeachment claims itself, they will likely be petty and irrelevant. >

Nothing you’re saying makes sense though. The investigation into the very real Russian interference in our elections was made while the Republican Donald Trump was in office. The Republican Attorney General Jeff Sessions hired the Republican Robert Mueller to lead the investigation.
Calling it “Democrats” is just either a lie or a moronic statement made out of pure ignorance of the facts. Not only that, but that’s entirely irrelevant to the two impeachments.
I can certainly appreciate the clever attempt at “both sides” but when the facts don’t agree with your false claims it just makes you look foolish. >

You need to come back to reality buddy >

M’kay sweetie.
When you’re ready to come to the adults table and talk like a normal person you can try to enter the conversation again. >

Since the five holdouts and the Freedom Caucus extracted the concession where one member can call for a vote of no confidence, McCarthy is hobbled and he'll never be able to work with the Democrats.  The reason is the extreme wing of the Republicans consider compromise is criminal and any legislation with the Democrats is treason. 
If McCarthy tried, they'd call to vote him out. >

What does this vote of no confidence mean?    
For instance, could a bill come to the floor that some GOP type doesn't like.  This GOP person could trigger this no confidence mechanism and thus they are back to electing a new speaker?
I heard that these rules can't be rescinded in this session-- meaning that if a new GOP speaker is identified, they would still need to live with these existing rules plus any more they agreed to.
Could a Dem also leverage this single person no confidence mechanism or..? >


I heard that these rules can't be rescinded in this session

I don't know the laws/rules but I do know that outside of a very tiny number of things (like impeachment), the Constitution gives each chamber full authority to decide for themselves how to govern themselves. So I'd think that a majority could decide the rules about making rules. >

True, they can change the rules mid session, but that would mean either the maga holdouts fall in line, or Dems cross the isle.  
Dems gain nothing for bailing out McCarthy, and what are the odds the maga crown comes to reason? >


Dems gain nothing for bailing out McCarthy

Don't they keep the MAGA crowd from being able to have power if they bail him out? >

If McCarthy was in any way sane or serious, maybe.  Boehner was an ideologue obstructionist willing to put party above country, but he was also an institutionalist who worked his way through the party.  
Ryan was to the right of him.  But still a technocrat, or at least he wanted to be.  
McCarthy is two steps out from Boehner who was already too far out to trust.  
If the candidate for speaker didn't vote to impeach trump they are beyond trustworthy. That's like 3 reps at this point. >

There is absolutely no chance that his caucus  allows him to do anything that would pass the Senate. We are at the point where they’re probably going to shut down the government multiple times and cost American taxpayers billions of dollars and threaten global prosperity and security. 
The leadership of China and Putin are both laughing with joy at what Republicans are about to do.
Kevin McCarthy’s humiliation has just started and the woman who needed four attempt to complete her GED and an obvious pedophile will led the charge to humiliate him over and over and over again. >

One real concern is the federal debt ceiling, which Congress has to pass legislation to raise by this summer, otherwise the US defaults on the national debt. The Freedom Caucus might very well see defaulting on the national debt as a positive, as they could try to blame the economic disaster on Biden and lessen trust in the federal government. >

The real danger is that half the country votes for a party which has a base which overall thinks shutting down the government if good actually and has no ability to have anyone explain otherwise. >

Including a lot of their troglodyte voters who are dependent on nonessential government functions and even some who are among the very same federal employees that would be laid off. >

There is some misunderstanding as to the extent of the opposition to McCarthy (or more specifically to traditional "Chamber of Commerce" Republicanism). It's not just the six, or even the 21. Another 40 or so of the so-called Freedom Caucus did not oppose McCarthy only because they were already satisfied that McCarthy would not stand in the way of the House investigating Hunter Biden's penis and all the other noble work they have in mind to serve the American people.
There are another 100 or so House members who are so extreme they would not be recognized as mainstream by Classic Conservatives. These folks also didn't oppose McCarthy only because don't see him as any formidable obstacle, and the moment they do: he is gone.
So the huge majority of the House detests or tolerates McCarthy, but there are few real tipping points that would provoke confrontation with McCarthy until September. He has lied to both sides about the Rules package and that will provoke some unhappiness next week, but that will pass. And committee assignments will be a bit bloody, but I think you'll see a pretty united House after that: they're all going to be a happy pack of investigators! No significant legislation will be forthcoming; that's not where they are. >


I don't think the House is passing a budget that isn't DOA

If the budget doesn't pass then government shuts down and millions of federal employees stop getting paychecks. This will cause a catastrophe and knowing the freedom caucus they'll use it to hold the bill hostage, but the public will blame them and so hopefully it will backfire greatly and force the other Republicans to work with Democrats. >

Except that after the freedom caucus causes this catastrophe, half of the public will still blame Biden. >

Half the public will blame Biden if they wake up constipated tomorrow. >

TBF I blamed him for being constipated today. >

It taking fifteen ballots and publicly begging Lauren Boebert and Matt Gaetz to save him demonstrate that no, he cannot be an effective leader. >

If McCarthy tries to work with Democrats all it takes is one of those crazies to call for his head. McCarthy is a Speaker in name only. He gets to enjoy a nice office and balcony and that’s it. He might as well stay on the balcony because the crazy caucus is in charge now. >

But won't it take a majority to remove him? If Mccarthy works with the dems, then the FC calls a re vote -- you need ALL 212 dems plus FC to remove him.
I.e. if he's working with the dems some wouldn't vote him out bc his replacement might be even worse >

How likely are a bunch of these new rules to be actually put into place? Don’t they have to be voted on? I would imagine their are some Republicans that aren’t going to go along with rewarded the Gaetz gang benefitting from their tantrum. >

The failed to pass a rules package last night and suspended it until Monday. It feels extremely clear to me that they don’t have the votes to pass a rules package that the holdouts will agree to, so the chaos is far from over. >

I don’t think the adjournment to vote on the Rules is a failure.  By the time Jeffries did his speech and McCarthy did his and did his oath, it was almost 2:00 am.  Some had thier children with them to be there for pics at oaths.  It doesn’t seem unreasonable to put that off until Monday >

I can't imagine anything more boring as a kid than being dragged to something like that. >

I've known all kinds of diplobrats, children of politicians and people in roles that aren't too different from politicians, and I once was one of those myself.
You get used to this kind of crap very early in life and you learn to roll with it. I feel sorry for the ones whose political families are Christian religions fanatics because I bet every second of their lives are controlled by fanatics. But relatively normal kids will get lots of opportunities to let their hair down a bit and misbehave a little while authority figures turn a blind eye. International school experiences can be pretty eye opening. You can put up with wearing a suit and sitting through hours of square patriotic music once in a while as long as the privileges keep flowing