Or, is he just nuts?
Specifically: Does Moulton lead a block of Democrats pledged to vote for Kevin McCarthy (R-Cal.) to be the next Speaker of the House of Representatives?
That seems incredible to me, yet it is the only way the following statement (Washington Post, emphasis added) makes sense:
Pelosi has dismissed Moulton’s challenge and insists she has the votes.
“I will be speaker of the House no matter what he says,” she said Wednesday.
“She’s wrong,” Moulton fired back Thursday. “We have the votes.”
“Have the votes” for what?
Helping the GOP steal back the House, presumably in return for promises and goodies, would be the grossest act of political betrayal in my lifetime.
Even using this as a threat would be beyond the pale.
So what is Moulton’s endgame?
Here are the numbers.
Nancy Pelosi is unopposed for speaker and is widely supported.
Even if she were opposed, Pelosi has already got the votes she needs in the caucus to face McCarthy, who only commands a minority of votes (200-odd).
More than 25 Democrats (math a little fuzzy due to undecided races) could abstain from the vote (to fulfill campaign pledges not to vote for scary Nancy Pelosi) and she would still prevail in the contest.
But it would only take 13 or 14 turncoats to throw the race to the Republicans.
If you are having trouble making sense of this, welcome to the club.
I can’t imagine we have this many party betrayers, but if they manage to actually get behind an alternative candidate on a floor vote and deprive Pelosi of a majority things could get interesting. Unfortunately, I don’t believe the House has a rule saying that a second ballot must only include the top two candidates from the first ballot. There have been occasions historically in which it took several ballots to settle on a Speaker.
You’re making things up from thin air. Moulton’s Raiders are threatening to withhold their votes on the floor and NOT cast their votes for a GOP Speaker. Pelosi supporters are distorting the situation to fire up activists against the #fivewhiteguys
I’m supportive of bring pressure on Pelosi and her team to shake it up and show the party and the country we are retooling for the challenges ahead and not looking in the rearview mirror. Practically speaking Pelosi is a look and the only leverage is to drop a Steny Hoyer for new blood. So Moulton and crew have to bargain and bluff to get a concession (a concession I firmly believe is good for the Party).
If Pelosi stiffs this effort, I have no problem watching this group hold back enough votes to where Pelosi wins by only one vote. Yes, if they hold back enough votes that the GOP elects a speaker, that is a mile over the line and everyone of them should be purged from the party. But they won’t. They may not be you version of perfect progressives, but don’t demonize them like conservatives are so good at. In the end they will do the right thing–make sure we have a Dem speaker. But I fully support playing hardball with the Democratic leadership in the house.
I am just speculating.
But my point is that unless there’s a deal like this, Moulton’s statements are full of crap, and his threats are empty.
Note he needs twice as many abstentions as McCarthy votes to pose a threat.
Do you really think there are 30 Dems willing to stake out a position this extreme at the start of their first majority in 12 years?
Pelosi can afford to give a pass to some of those who made not voting for her a campaign promise.
But she will be the Speaker. She can make life pretty miserable for those who gratuitously give her the middle finger.
“We have the votes.” Do do what? Grandstand in the press?
PS It’s not up to Pelosi to mount an insurgency against Stoyer. If that’s what Moulton wants, let him do so.
But Stoyer is much closer to Moulton ideologically. And in other ways too, of course, Including the ways it’s starting to look like this is really about.
As someone who has also used click-bait headlines to grab attention, I won’t chastised to hard about your self-admitted speculative headline.
You seem to be in agreement with me that a “deal” that clearly sends a signal that the Dems are moving ahead with a transitional leadership plan. If so, you don’t get a deal if you don’t apply leverage. I’m comfortable using as much leverage (and potential embarrassment) up to the one vote required to elect a Democratic Speaker, presumably Pelosi. That’s raw politics. Anything over that (resulting in a GOP Speaker) is completely unacceptable and requires a primarying of all involved.
Bottom line is our country has been thirsty for new leadership for decades. An estimated 6 t0 9 million voted for “hope and Change” in 2012 and to”Make America Great” in 2016.
Conservatives have shown America who their new leadership consist of: Trump and his sycophants. Our party is basically run and represented by a geriatrocracy of Pelosi, Biden, Hoyer, Clinton, Sanders, Clyburn and johnny-come-lately Bloomberg. Democratic need to send a signal to America as to who our new leaders are. Showing a transition plan in the House is happening is very important.
I doubt it’s very important (showing transition plan etc.), but it would be a plus.
I just don’t think the moment of the Cult of the Speaker’s Personality has arrived, Gingrich and Ryan’s parliamentary model to the contrary.
Other people than the Speaker can present an articulate public face, and do.
At this point, the House Leadership is the closest to having a voice for the Democratic party, until we have a nominee.
That’s fine. That’s not what Moulton is doing. A new direction would be great but Moulton wants to return us to conservative policies and dealmaking.
What concession do you think Moulton is pushing for that would be good for the Party? Or the Country?
The “concession” of showing America the the Democratic Party is transitioning to new leadership. This will create an even more stark and favorable contrast to the “new” leadership of the GOP: Trump and his sycophants. Right now we have created the optics of a geriatrocracy not sure how to react to these reactionaries. I think that’s putting country first. I also think it’s putting the Party first, but in these times. that is not my priority.
I think that’s just ageist rubbish. Words like “geriatrocacy” are ageist dog-whistles as offensive as Trumpist references to “Pocahontas”.
If there are ideas to champion, then talk about those ideas and their proponents.
Or let’s not, because there aren’t. There just are not.
That’s fine too. I agree with you that there aren’t any substantive alternative ideas and therefore no proponents to talk about them.
You think Moulton is a patriot, then?
OK, it’s a point of view.
Of course Moulton is a patriot. John McCain was too. I just never want(ed) either one in a position of power.
Lots of noise on Twitter about primarying Moulton.
That is all that it will be. He saved the seat from going Republican and the district does not have any Democrats prominent enough or willing enough to challenge him.
Also the premise of the OP is like a lot of noise on Twitter. Pelos has a Democratic challenger, Marcia Fudge, and the idea would be to deny Pelosi a win on the first ballot or the caucus vote to pressure her to withdraw. Hoyer and Cyburn have already said they would throw their hats in the ring if this happened. Then it’s a free for all.
This is exactly the kind of generational shakeup that the Pelosi opponents want. Fudge is equally progressive (lies about her LGBT record notwithstanding) and a well known member of the CBC which is eager to elect one of their own speaker (some say she might be a stand in for Clyburn).
The above scenario is still a crazy and stupid thing to do after winning the majority back, but let us not invent crazier and stupid things to oppose when the reality in front of us is bad enough.
The “lies” about her LGBT record come from Lambda Legal, so let’s just say she made some enemies.
This is the kind of circular firing squad that made me nervous about unseating Mike Capuano. In my view, “generational shakeup” is far too generous.
We are at war, and this amounts to fragging our most competent leader.
She’s 66.
Who is 66? Ms. Fudge? Nancy Pelosi is 78.
How would we react if we were talking about the percentage of “black” blood of the candidate? How would it go down if the attackers said “Ms. Pelosi is too Catholic” (or Protestant, or Muslim, or Jewish)?
I’m really DONE with the ageist “generational change” dog-whistle. Please stop.
I’m not sure who yet, but this cabal deserves primaries for the stunt they are pulling if they follow through all the way to the House floor. I don’t assume Moulton saved the seat for the party and if Fudge is the only other candidate one of them will get the majority of the caucus and become the Dem candidate for Speaker.
Fudge, Moulton’s maybe afterthought, is still not actually running.
So no, Pelosi does not have a Democratic challenger for Speaker.
Jconway, your comment “He [Moulton} saved the seat from going Republican and the district does not have any Democrats prominent enough or willing enough to challenge him” is preposterous.
Let’s start with the fact that Mushy Moulton considered running against a genuine progressive, John Tierney, two years before he finally did run. He did not start down that road because he wanted to save the seat for progressives or Democrats. He was just another entitled white guy who was tacking right. He waited two years before jumping into the race when Patrice’s problems put John in jeopardy (N.B. at the time I was a close friend of both JT and Patrice).
Your retro evaluation of those elections are devoid of any personal knowledge.. And even if you believe those myths, they miss the obvious conclusion. Moulton came out of no political background except a shit-ton of privilege and money, yet he defeated a great progressive MC.
Yet now you declare nobody can beat Moulton. You supported his run against Tierney after the fact; you supported Moulton’s run against Pelosi in 2016 for no obvious reason except his ambition convinced a lot of people to oppose her because of the fact that she is a tough smart progressive woman; and now you are declaring him invulnerable to a grassroots challenge. I have three words for you: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
It is a good idea for people who have no real experience in elections to declare two years in advance that they can pick election winners.
Oops, typo: “It is NOT a good idea for people who have no real experience in elections to declare two years in advance that they can pick election winners.”
Is this a lie?
If it’s true, why would Moulton support it?
A primary challenge will be decided by the Dems in his district, not by people and bots on Twitter.
Primaries are generally good, nobody should get a free pass, but I am not sure that those voters are ready for a generational shift in that district. Attacking a political leader for being old and a woman might be a crowd-pleaser there.
Seth needs to get his head out of his ass.
“Tell Seth Moulton We Stand With Nancy Pelosi”
Monday, Nov. 19th, 6:30PM, Amesbury Town Hall.
5:30, not 6:30.
Charlie Pierce (always worth a read) has similar concerns:
His column
Pierce nails it. As I have written on BMG in the past, let a challenger rise to run against Hoyer, the worst of the House leadership, if progressive House members want to put somebody in leadership, they should choose, not Moulton and his #FiveWhiteGuys
I must say I am not a Nancy Pelosi fan, and I agree that she has not done enough to develop future leaders in the caucus. While Nancy prevailed over this blue wave, she has been house leader through the erosion of her majority.
That said, I have tremendous faith in my Representative, Katherine Clark. I don’t have much faith in Moulton (see Question 2, 2016) and I think he is a Massachusetts version of Andrew Cuomo. When he aligned with Rep. Lynch on the anti-Pelosi war, with no compelling message or strategy, it makes me think of Pelosi in more positive terms.
If she is re-elected speaker, she needs a majority leader who is really good with the media, that is front-and-center as a party leader, and she needs to empower younger and more progressive leaders in the Democratic caucus. In that context, I think Pelosi must be elected speaker with a minimum of controversy, and we need to get to the business of governance and accountability of the actions of the executive branch.
I got eviscerated up thread for threading the needling, but I do think there is a valid concern that this team cannot stay in place forever. That said, if my other post endorsing Pelosi was unclear, it is the height of idiocy to start this new majority with a circular firing squad that will not produce the change we need. I do think we just need to wait and see what happens. My bet is that Pelosi has the votes and Moulton wants to get on TV.
The same axiom that applies to challenging Pelosi applies to primarying local Democrats as well: you cannot beat somebody with nobody.
I hope that you return to the kind of commentary you offered in an earlier time, when you spoke of policies, actions, and proposals that you supported or opposed. I criticized you upthread because of the phrase “generational shakeup”.
Barack Obama won the presidency because he was — far and away — the best person for the job. He was a far better choice than Ms. Clinton and every other candidate in 2008.
In my view, this team can and should stay on the field until a better team is on the bench waiting to start. I think we agree on that.
When this team leaves the field, it will be because the replacements perform better, not because the replacements are newer or younger (or more “diverse”). I hope we agree on that.
Anti-Pelosi letter garners 16 signatures; 14 men including MA Reps Seth Moulton and Stephen Lynch and 2 women — Rep. Marcia Fudge (D-OH), mulling a challenge to Leader Pelosi, was NOT a signatory.
Last night in a packed townhall, Seth Mouton compared ousting Nancy Pelosi to ousting Margaret Thatcher.
Keep digging, Seth.
Say it aint so, Seth Moulton. Did you really compare ousting progressive Leader Pelosi to ousting reactionary cretin Thatcher?
On this issue you are you are morally, intellectually and politically tone deaf.
He’s just another Republican pretending to be a Democrat.
He is also actively betraying our party as it prepares to take over leadership. Make no mistake, he is attacking from the right of Ms. Pelosi and advancing the Trumpist agenda.
My read of him is that he is a DLCer, but certainly not a Trumpist.
I didn’t say he was a Trumpist. I said he is advancing the Trumpist agenda.
He’s betraying our party.
If he’s building a wall and banning Muslims from entering this country I missed that.
@ building a wall and banning muslims:
There you go again. It isn’t necessary to emulate the very worst behavior of a villain to be villainous.
Mr. Moulton is betraying our leadership. He is attacking our leadership from the right just as our voters have decisively said they want the government to move left.
The attacks on Ms. Pelosi were a central part of the Trumpists failed campaign tactics of 2018, just as the attacks on Ms. Clinton were central part of their successful campaign of 2016.
Mr. Moulton is repeating, encouraging, and building on those scurrilous attacks against Ms. Pelosi. He is repeating a central Trumpist talking point weeks after the Trumpists lost the 2018 election.
That’s what I meant when I said he is advancing the Trumpist agenda — because he is.
I think that Trumpist is an extreme term that comes nowhere close to applying here.
I hear he got a lot of pushback at that town hall. As for the Thatcher reference IIRC her fellow Tories who arranged for her ouster as PM didn’t exactly endear themselves to the British public.
Leader Pelosi just announced her intention to restore House Administration Subcommittee on Elections and name Congresswoman Marcia Fudge as Chair.
So I guess she’s out as a potential challenger.
Marcia Fudge has endorsed Leader Pelosi for Speaker.
My conspiracy theory for today: This letter is a ploy by Pelosi to unite the party behind her and avoid a challenge from the left.
I suggest you read more about Mr. Moulton and his cabal (emphasis mine):
Anybody who says they don’t like Ms. Pelosi’s ties to big donors (or to real estate) should be absolutely repelled by Mr. Moulton.
No fancy bank-shots or 3-d political chess masterminded by Ms. Pelosi is needed to understand what’s happening. A right-leaning band of amoral men has been bought by corporate money, and that corporate money is now asking for results.