Our first-ever House speaker draft | FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast

The House of Representatives has officially been without a permanent speaker for 20 days. After Rep. Steve Scalise and Rep. Jim Jordan failed to get enough support, nine new Republican candidates have stepped forward to run for the speakership. In this installment of the 538 Politics podcast, the crew drafts teams of who they think is most likely to fill the position.
Then, Eurasia Group president Ian Bremmer joins Galen Druke to talk about why it has been so hard to get good, clear information about the war between Israel and Hamas. Last week, false reports that Israel had struck a hospital in Gaza City and killed hundreds spread online and across the mainstream media, leading to a breakdown in negotiations between President Biden and Arab leaders.
Website: fivethirtyeight...
Merch: fivethirtyeight...
Twitter: / fivethirtyeight
Facebook: / fivethirtyeight
Podcast: itunes.apple.c...

[@Batters56]

40:12 Mike Johnson gets a mention at 9th pick!

[@SumOverPaths]

I came back to check, because I honestly couldn't remember if anyone had picked him.

[@LC-sc3en]

Congrats to Jeff!

[@jackdelehanty]

Tia Mitchell is the best! She’s been one of my favorite reoccurring 538 guests since 2020.

[@stevenkerr6467]

I loved the homer first round draft pick

[@j.s.c.4355]

What I would really love to see is a coalition speaker. I agree that American politics won’t allow it, but can you imagine the street creds of any moderate politician at this point on either side who voted across the aisle just to get the house back on the job? I would love to see that precedent.

[@jameshayes-barber9340]

In what district is being a moderate not a liability in a primary?

[@jackgerig8910]

@@jameshayes-barber9340 Moderate democrats and swing district republicans rely on moderates to win, and some have beaten hard right primary challenges.

[@michaelsurratt1864]

​@@jackgerig8910Republicans don't give a s*** about whether or not their candidates electable they want compliance honestly a lot of them would probably rather see a Democrat when than a Republican vote for a Democrat

[@j.s.c.4355]

@@jameshayes-barber9340 In any district held by one party that voted for the other partparty in the presidential election. Valadeo’s district in the Central Valley of California is a perfect example. They mentioned him in this episode, and I would love to live in an America in which he became Speaker by bipartisan effort.

[@jameshayes-barber9340]

Frankly I think bipartisanism is overrated in the US. When a group of people is actively infringing on the rights of the people, working with them is not a virtue.@@j.s.c.4355

[@jtg2199]

Timestamps: 0:18 Intro 2:45 House Speaker Draft 46:06 Information Environment surrounding the War in Israel and Gaza

[@ricardorodriguez-padilla6338]

I think some of the rationale for Hakeem Jeffries having a higher probability of being elected Speaker than Byron Donalds is actually that the betting market’s over who’s likely to be the *next* elected Speaker, i.e. not just in this current situation, but rather that there’s a chance maybe no permanent Speaker is elected until 2025 (essentially the “no one” option of this draft), at which point maybe the Democrats could be the majority and elect Jeffries.

[@explrr22]

I'll go with McHenry... The argument resonates with me because on a tiny scale the same thing happened to me. Twice! I joined leadership in a Union local because membership wasn't representing me... But then got drafted as President. Wasn't really into the job, and was happy to pass it on when my term ended. A little while later the membership revolted and forced the new President out, and this time I was the only qualified candidate a majority really liked. It worked out well for members, I think, and looking back I valued the experience, but I didn't enjoy it at the time, and it hurt my career. So.... It's a possible dynamic.😄

[@MrSomervillen]

Leah had the best draft picks, but Tia was the most entertaining and thought-provoking! Keep having her on the pod!

[@ElementalNimbus]

And it was true, Jeff wins at 40:09 at his third pick. Grats.

[@fahfahfred]

Always a treat when Tia's on :)

[@IrishPlante]

I died on the Susan Cole pick initially but totally did the "well now that you mention it"

[@matts8021]

lol the cat at 40:58

[@uKovacs]

Those three lists are truly lawful, neutral, & chaotic and for the house mess, Tia's chaos picks are the most fitting.

[@phueal]

This could be the moment that you guys in America adopt the British convention for Speaker: rather than being a partisan lightning rod, you elect someone with a neutral personality and bigger commitment to the House rather than their party, who has broad support across both parties in the house. That person then resigns their party membership, and becomes a non-partisan member who's sole job is running the procedural aspect of the legislature and shepherding bills through. And all the major parties agree not to field candidates to challenge that person when it comes time for re-election. I'm sure it won't happen, but it would be a great solution to your current predicament.

[@LC-sc3en]

The position is supposed to be non partisan. It doesn't have to be a member of the majority party but it just sort of ends up that way probably since we both don't require the person to resign from their party and no one would trust that resignation to mean anything. Also, that person would no longer have party support to run for reelection so it would be kind of like declaring your political career over.

[@phueal]

@@LC-sc3en yep, the resignation is an important aspect! As is re-election. In the UK we have a convention that the major parties don’t field candidates in the speaker’s constituency for that reason, so they are essentially unopposed. That convention actually helps to ensure neutrality, because if a major party feels like the speaker is being partisan, they can (and very occasionally have) threaten to break the convention and run against them. Still, I think American politics is too polarised and venomous to allow for a “gentleman’s agreement” like that…

[@pokeswapsans4]

two things about Jeffries: their underrating the chance that "missvote" scenario happens and B. that the speaker ship vote takes so long that it's still not decided AFTER the republican primaries, but still BEFORE the general. in that scenario voting for Jeffries as a Biden district republican actually makes a lot of sense.

[@Barista.Nathan]

So far, the "straight shooter pick" is the only one that's an absolute certainty not to happen as Tom Emmer is no longer a candidate having been rejected by the Republican caucus.

[@PhiltheMoko]

Yep, Jeff picking Mike Johnson as the 9th pick, the current nominee, apparently getting a vote on the floor Wednesday afternoon

[@jennifers7412]

Not often you get a party colonoscopy.

[@kevinw4267]

I am a single issue voter. I support whoever support military aids to Ukraine

[@kevinw4267]

@@RealEuropeanPatriot how’s the 3 day special military operation going, Ivan? Why aren’t you in the frontline?

[@macmay3042]

Looks like Geoff is about to get it.

[@benjaminmajeski140]

As a moderate Republican I’m livid that we even have to be in this situation, McCarthey was doing a damn fine job.

[@westbrook348]

More likely than them finding a candidate for Speaker tolerable enough to get sufficient votes: new voting system to determine the speaker. Approval or STAR voting would completely solve the problem. But then what would we have to talk about?

[@carmaigdeforest7284]

is this where we vote for "who won the draft?" if so, please count this comment as a vote for Tia Mitchell. I agree that "No one" is the most likely IRL, but I enjoyed her arguments for her other picks as well.

[@PhiltheMoko]

I thought Ian Bremmer was really insightful in pointing to the cause of so much of our current polarisation being the failure of government in general to look after the welfare of the most of us

[@veggiet2009]

We need an approval vote or instant runoff for this

[@iainchalmers3943]

Keep coming back to this as nominees come and go to see what was thought at the time

[@0o0ification]

How long until voters start recalling their Representatives?

[@michaeloconnor5680]

What “dumpster fire” the GOP has become since 2016….

[@peterflom6878]

I dream Hakeem

[@macmay3042]

How many rounds until we get to nominee Santos?

[@singm9403]

I think something like switching over to a ranked-choice style of voting would be helpful, but don't know if it is permitted.

[@johnchessant3012]

yeah I think Tia won the draft by virtue of picking "no one". I think this goes on until a few days/hours before the govt shutdown deadline

[@rfhurt1]

No one will get to 217. None of the Trumpistas for sure.

[@ashtonjgraves]

Tia won because her list was based around on one winning. My list: 1. No one 2. McHenry 3. McCarthy 4. Hern 5. Emmer

[@shiplesp]

Any mistrust in authorities I feel is a response to the skepticism I feel that such organizations are not influenced by the corporate and industry support they receive. How can we trust that the CDC, for instance (just one organization among many), is making decisions and setting policy based on the public good and not the benefit those actions might have on its corporate sponsors and partners? Financial conflicts of interest must be much more transparent and those making the decisions must be free from them if they want more trust from me.

[@nicebluejay]

man i really hate matt gaetz

[@macmay3042]

What chaos would ensue if someone whose last name was Present ran for speaker someday?

[@Julia-McGann]

I can see a scenario where McHenry becomes the actual speaker after all the other nominees fail.

[@NotCapitalist]

Always love ending a podcast with an old man shaking his fist at clouds

[@1fareast14]

But he's not wrong, and when people are scrambling for info, the known caveats about Twitter and tiktok go out the window

[@joshuahillerup4290]

I don't understand why the House can't pass bills with a temporary Speaker

[@vanadyan1674]

The Constitution really isn't that long, it's worth a read.

[@AllenMorris3]

It's in the rules, or at least not in the rules.

[@paradoxmo]

@@vanadyan1674 it’s really not in the constitution, it’s house rules. McHenry’s interpretation is that because he wasn’t voted in as speaker, he isn’t the constitutionally named speaker, and thus the house rules that specify what a speaker can do don’t apply to him.

[@joshuahillerup4290]

@@paradoxmo so why is he even called a Speaker?

[@swang30]

House rules, back when things were normal. So that there's a duly elected speaker and people can't challenge a passed law for having not crossed Is and dotted Ts. Now, they don't have the votes to change the rules.

[@udsting]

It's going to be none of them lol

[@PeloquinDavid]

You Americans are hamstrung by the idea that a Speaker MUST be the most politically powerful office of a legislative body. This is a strange notion to those of us from countries with a Westminster parliamentary tradition (speaking as a Canadian in my case, but you'd get much the same read from a Brit, Aussie or Kiwi). (It should even be strange to Americans who understand how the Senate works - and even more so would work if it didn't have those weird "filibuster"-type rules...) That the Speakership is a constitutional office high up the line of succession has a lot to do with it, for sure, but the idea of a more or less "neutral" Speakership - i.e. just an arbiter for the rules adopted by the House rather than someone who actually controls its agenda - is/ought to be one of the ways out of this crisis. Never in a million years would a Westminster Speakership election trigger the kind of crazy crisis we see in Washington these days. In our system too, electing a Speaker is the first order of business when any legislature first meets (and when a Speaker dies, resigns or is removed). But because the Speaker is effectively a functionary with minimal discretion in applying the rules - and control over the House's agenda rests (as in the US Senate) with the leader of the majority in the House (where such a majority exists) - you'd NEVER fail to elect a Speaker. THEN you immediately move on to the business of adopting priority legislation by using that majority (or negotiating one with opposition parties, if no single party had a majority, to force the legislation through the House and into the "Upper" House for their consideration. We Westminster types have a useful concept - that of a "working majority" (i.e. one that commands a big enough majority to let the occasional disgruntled member or ten to let off steam without compromising the ability of the majority party to force things through) - that you really need to come to terms with. When the majority leader doesn't wield a working majority - as the badly divided House GOP CLEARLY does not - they're effectively in a minority position and HAVE to find votes - OR ABSTENTIONS! - from the opposition side of the House to get ANYTHING done. In the current circumstances, it is pointless to talk about how many "Democrat votes" it will take to elect a Speaker. It's also NOT about setting up a "coalition government": outside of wartime, Westminster systems almost never have such governments. The real question is what it will take to get the Democrats to ACQUIESCE to the election of a Speaker by a majority vote of the GOP conference (e.g. by voting "Present" as a block or by arranging for enough Democrats to do so to ensure election of an acceptable Speaker on acceptable terms - including any rule changes required to, say, strip the nut case caucus of its excessive control over the House's agenda).

[@michaelprovenza7575]

I think people are underestimating how hungry McCarthy is for the gavel he could totally make a deal with Dems giving them whatever they want and keeping 20-30 Rs out of personal loyalty. Another likely coalition Speaker could be Liz Cheney which would be Dems huge FU to Trump.

[@specialnewb9821]

He has broken every deal he ever made with Democrats from Biden on down. What would make them trust him enough?

[@derpmansderpyskin]

I think you guys are underestimating the odds of a coalition candidate, especially if this race goes on for two more weeks (or longer). At a certain point, a Republican in a purple district has to be more worried about the general election than the primary. Every day that goes by, the pressure to get someone, anyone, in the speaker's chair gets higher & higher. Frankly, if the "nobody" option comes to pass, and the speaker's chair is still empty months from now, I can't imagine very many house Republicans will keep their jobs come the next election. As Galen said, even today, house Reps are underwater among their own party, let alone with the general electorate, and let alone what the situation will be like two weeks (or longer) from now. Everyone recognizes this is a disaster, and you only need a handful of Republicans to switch. Voting in favor of Trump's impeachment was FAR more dangerous politically for Republicans, and despite that, there were still TEN Republicans who voted to impeach! Not to mention the four who abstained. Strictly speaking, Dems only need five Republican votes to get their candidate elected, if they can unify behind that candidate. And if they did unify, it would be a super good look for them. I mean, electing a speaker from a minority position in the house? Could you get any more competent? Obviously I don't think it's very likely, but I also don't think you can rule it out. After all, this whole election has literally never happened before.

[@Eldeecue]

If you getfive Republicans to vote for Jeffries or ANY democrat.....it will come along with the announcement that they're switching parties. There _are_, very much, at least five GOP Reps in the House who could survive this. It's still unlikely, though.

[@SublimeWanderers]

I don't know if there's a significant number of people who actually think Republicans woild cross the aisle for Jeffries. I think people want to believe it's possible, because it would be nice to have a government with some bipartisanship among the sane members left in the Republican party. So, we convince ourselves.

[@glenncalkins4764]

Tia has the most esoteric, and therefore best list

[@ryancameron5676]

first few picks were called “hipster” but that was just a nice way of saying bad

[@orangehairbrain8733]

A bipartisan choice for speaker is the only choice. Are there not 5 Republicans who are not idiots ?

[@Eldeecue]

The number needs to be, like, 15 or more, though. If you're part of a group of even ten Republicans who "conspired with the Marxist/Radical Democrats", you're gonna get primaried out in 2024, guaranteed.

[@johnrains2339]

Matt Gaetz seems to be backing Emmer. Why? Because Donalds is also vying for Florida Governor

[@AllenMorris3]

But then what happens on November 11th?

[@vanadyan1674]

The end of the modern day Republican party.

[@vanadyan1674]

They should all have spent another year in college.

[@ampPLrant]

What does "no one" mean? How long? Will the republicans really leave the house paralyzed until the next election? I think there is some part here I don't understand.

[@lukeedwards7677]

We have an honestly unprecedented situation in Congress, so don't count out that they could keep arguing about this until the elections if they aren't straight up recalled beforehand...

[@andreasfroby]

Same question. And wont mean government will be shut down for over a year. They bipartisan pick is imossible and they dont any if their draft pick have any good chance

[@ampPLrant]

I kinda think some number of reps might eventually decide it's worth destroying their political career to end the dead lock. I don't know what side of the isle or who if anyone, i don't know the world enough. But i think as the pressure mounts there will be pressure to do it.

[@matrixstuff3512]

Nobody picked Lix Cheney?

[@ckq]

It's Tom Emmer most likely

[@tompatterson1548]

Hakeem Jeffries because the GOP's gonna have 6 people vote present.

[@SolaceEasy]

Nine entrants is eight too many. My choice is one of the non-voting members from the island territories. I think they are all Republican leaning.

[@SolaceEasy]

I vote Leah / McCarthy.

[@jaeckex6214]

Interesting idea though! Heard they were somewhat moderate aswell, so if a democrat in a swing district wanted to increase his moderate cred, they could make a deal with leadership to vote for them, under threat of another motion to vacate if certain bills aren't passed. Idk, I just think the prospect of a coalition government has been underestimated in this draft, and a Territory-Republican could be one way to do it.

[@dallasmiddleton7694]

Tia

[@davidtrindle6473]

Just flip a coin! But if it comes up gym jordan, keep flipping

[@BenCragg1]

I think the USA lost this draft

[@michaelrae9599]

I think any Never Trumper that comes up should get the dem vote. Ds need yo stop enjoying it and be the adult in the room.

[@RehenNodrog]

Not without some major concessions. They didn't create this problem and it's not their problem to fix. Matt Gaetz and his crowd don't want any actual power, they just want to cast their protest votes and score easy political wins with their base, with no consequences. They want others to be "the adults in the room" and actually govern, so they get to say they never caved and kept fighting. The Republican party has been enabling that for years, and now Democrats are essentially being asked to do the same thing.

[@robertharris1748]

Are there any actual Never Trumpers in Congress? Sure they mentioned the Republicans from California and Washington who voted to impeach, but I bet they aren't full-fledged Never Trumpers (as I understand the term). Either way it doesn't matter. Anyone who is voted in with the help of the Dems is immediately poisoned by the fact. (As McCarthy's ouster after Dems helped pass the Continuing Resolution showed).

[@awkrewen]

If dems get involved they need promises of the bills that will be brought to the floor before Nov 11th. They will be required to vote not only in the speaker but help with every motion to vacate that is brought forward. I think you underestimate how childish the Republican party can be.

[@michaelrae9599]

@@awkrewen that was never going to happen with McCartney, why should they demand it now. Which is better, getting the Congress cog back in the Government machine, or keeping this going longer with wars in Ukraine and Israel.

[@Samhain4evr13]

Tia