Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Who will lead the Republicans?

c_09172010.gif

I'm guessing that a Republican takeover of Congress would lead to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker John Boehner. But according to Public Policy Polling, that would disappoint a lot of Republicans:

Usually it's the party that loses power whose voters want to clean house. The fact that GOP voters want new leaders even if they have a highly successful election cycle speaks to the disconnect between the voters fueling the Republicans' momentum this year and the party higher ups in Washington DC.

Only 21% of Republicans think the party should retain its current Congressional leadership if the party gains control with 57% saying it should be replaced.

When to comes to John Boehner and Mitch McConnell in particular the Republican base isn't too impressed either. Just 33% want Boehner to become Speaker with 34% saying it should be someone else and 33% unsure. For McConnell the numbers are even worse. Only 27% would like to see him as Majority Leader with 33% definitively wanting someone else and 40% not sure.

Are there any plausible alternative candidates in either chamber? I get the feeling McConnell is quite safe in the Senate, but would anyone attempt a coup in the House?

By Ezra Klein  |  September 17, 2010; 10:15 AM ET
Categories:  2010 Midterms , Polls  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Small-business bill passes -- but what's there to say about it?
Next: Elizabeth Warren and the government's talent crisis

Comments

what about Cantor in the House?

Posted by: visionbrkr | September 17, 2010 10:33 AM | Report abuse

Uh, hello, Eric Cantor is well known to want to be the first Jewish Speaker of the House. Just look at his new book, "Young Guns" and all the ridiculously glowing press it's getting. Oh my favorite line from the local TD glowing review is "Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., is considered one of the leading intellectuals in Congress." Wow, if Paul Ryan is a leading intellectual in Congress we're seriously up s*%# creek.

Posted by: scudderw | September 17, 2010 10:42 AM | Report abuse

I disagree about the senate; I think it's crystal clear that Jim DeMint wants to be the Repblican leader in the Senate.

Posted by: cinephile | September 17, 2010 10:52 AM | Report abuse

." Wow, if Paul Ryan is a leading intellectual in Congress we're seriously up s*%# creek.


well, that is just where we are.
and we appear to have no paddles.

"Young Guns"
can you believe it?
this is the world we are living in today.


Posted by: jkaren | September 17, 2010 10:52 AM | Report abuse

Finally something I can agree with the Tea Party on! I'd like to see the GOP ditch McConnell and Boehner too.

Posted by: redwards95 | September 17, 2010 10:55 AM | Report abuse

This blog basically verifies what most Americans understand, but the pundits don't.
The electorate is basically saying "if they are in, vote them out". The Tea Party aligns itself with the GOP because of traditional conservative views.

However, there are several repubs that need to go. This election is about taking the country back from a bunch of thug progressives and radical leftists. The people want representation that believes in the constitution and free enterprise, period. Party be damned.

Posted by: thehamptons1 | September 17, 2010 10:57 AM | Report abuse

This election is about taking the country back from a bunch of thug progressives and radical leftists. The people want representation that believes in the constitution and free enterprise, period. Party be damned.


and put it in the hands of dangerous extremist idealogues and at best, shallow, uncharitable, anti-intellectual, reactionary thinkers, and craven....afraid to stand up to the hateful and dangerous idealogues that rule their party with an iron fist.
when karl rove stars looking like a moderate....

if edward gibbon were alive today and blogging, i wonder what he would call his blog.

Posted by: jkaren | September 17, 2010 11:05 AM | Report abuse

This election is about taking the country back from a bunch of thug progressives and radical leftists. The people want representation that believes in the constitution and free enterprise, period. Party be damned.


and put it in the hands of dangerous extremist idealogues and at best, shallow, uncharitable, anti-intellectual, reactionary thinkers, and craven....afraid to stand up to the hateful and dangerous idealogues that rule their party with an iron fist.
when karl rove stars looking like a moderate....

if edward gibbon were alive today and blogging, i wonder what he would call his blog.

Posted by: jkaren | September 17, 2010 11:06 AM | Report abuse

"Wow, if Paul Ryan is a leading intellectual in Congress we're seriously up s*%# creek."

Of course Paul Ryan is one of the leading intellectuals - look at his competition!

Recall that Congress also has at least one guy who worried about adding a few thousand Marines to Guam, fearful the island would capsize, and the guy in charge of Ways and Means thought it a bright idea to dodge taxes. Both sides of the aisle have numerous examples of charlatans and fools.

I don't see how people who complain about the competence and intelligence of politicians still want to cede ever more control over their lives to them.

Posted by: justin84 | September 17, 2010 11:12 AM | Report abuse

how bout Senator Angle :-)

Posted by: visionbrkr | September 17, 2010 11:26 AM | Report abuse

"how bout Senator Angle :-)"


may you be cautioned against writing this.
it is best not to let the magical potency of words put their energy into the universe.

Posted by: jkaren | September 17, 2010 12:00 PM | Report abuse

jkaren,

oh come on now. First off it was a joke. Second off if conservatives fear progressives and their agenda and then when those fears come to bear (in the 2006 and 2008 election cycles) and the world doesn't come crashing down isn't there something to be said for being overly dramatic about the whole thing? When (not if but when) a Tea party candidate wins a general election and is seated as a US Senator or congressman or woman you really don't think the world's coming to an end.

unless its 2012 and that whole Mayan thing.


hmmm.

Posted by: visionbrkr | September 17, 2010 12:26 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, I think scudderw and cinephile have it right. Cantor's got a shot and the ambition to go after the job if he thinks there's a chance. DeMint has been riling up the Tea Party folks enough to make him a credible challenger to McConnell.

Posted by: MosBen | September 17, 2010 12:33 PM | Report abuse

What the voters want is irrelevant.

It is the congressional delegation that chooses the leadership, and they do so according to their own interests.

Harry Reid, for example, has done a credible job but you really rather have him over, say, Dick Durbin, Carl Levin or John Kerry?

He was picked in large part because other senators do not perceive him as a threat to their personal fiefdoms, not because he was likely to be the best at moving legislation through the Senate.

Posted by: pj_camp | September 17, 2010 12:51 PM | Report abuse

It won't be Cantor.

Posted by: mschol17 | September 17, 2010 1:30 PM | Report abuse

I'm so much looking forward to the marks made on the carpet when they drag Miz Nancy out of the Speaker's office that I don't much care who her replacement is.

Posted by: bgmma50 | September 17, 2010 1:39 PM | Report abuse

"oh come on now. First off it was a joke"

i know it was a joke:-)
but a scary one, nonetheless....as there is always a finite possibility.

" When (not if but when) a Tea party candidate wins a general election and is seated as a US Senator or congressman or woman you really don't think the world's coming to an end."

i think it could hasten its ending.

Posted by: jkaren | September 17, 2010 1:51 PM | Report abuse

bgmma50,

likewise I can't wait till (if the Republicans win) they get to pry the gave from her hands. i'm also waiting for other Dems to throw her under the bus. oh look, its started already!

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0910/42303.html

Posted by: visionbrkr | September 17, 2010 2:02 PM | Report abuse

jkaren,

if you really think that a single tea party candidate holding office hastens "the end" then you certainly have been duped just as bad as those on the far right manipulate people by calling certain Democrats socialists or nazis or whatever.

Posted by: visionbrkr | September 17, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

if you really think that a single tea party candidate holding office hastens "the end" then you certainly have been duped"

visionbrkr

i believe that one person..... even "one" person, can profoundly change the course of human events.
every act supports and sustains a chain of events.
every act of wisdom, good intention, social justice elevates the world a little bit, ensuring wellbeing and safekeeping.
one tea party person, one sarah palin...(.who is not even in the senate) can affect a chain of events, that could indeed, through changing a vote, changing a mind..... cause untold damage in the world, through a chain of events.
it just takes one person to change the world.
look at bush and the war in iraq....
there are thousands of examples.

Posted by: jkaren | September 17, 2010 2:28 PM | Report abuse

Don't mistake the lack of support for Boehner and McConnell as any sort of endorsement for the libs. Our problem with Boehner and McConnell is that they are not conservative enough. They are part of the establishment and part of the problem.

I would ideally like to see Michele Bachmann as Speaker and Sharron Angle, Marco Rubio, or Joe Miller as Majority Leader.

Posted by: jpav0923 | September 17, 2010 2:56 PM | Report abuse

"I would ideally like to see Michele Bachmann as Speaker and Sharron Angle, Marco Rubio, or Joe Miller as Majority Leader."


you see, visionbrkr, the end may be nearer than you think!

Posted by: jkaren | September 17, 2010 3:07 PM | Report abuse

jkaren,

and then like anything else if the pendulum swings too far one way it will swing back the other way. The current administration is where it is because GWB and the neo-cons went too far and the electorate spoke up. Now, the elctorate in general feels that the government is not addressing the needs of the people. If O'Donnell or Angle or Rubio go too far then the same fate will be theirs. They are no better, just different.

Posted by: visionbrkr | September 17, 2010 3:17 PM | Report abuse

jkaren,

Wouldn't it be nice if the government were limited enough that we wouldn't have to worry about a bozo leading the parade?

Wouldn't it be great if President Palin and Speaker Bachmann did little but provide great material for Daily Show episodes? We could all share in hearty laughter, content in the knowledge that they could do little to harm us!

Posted by: justin84 | September 17, 2010 3:59 PM | Report abuse

"I would ideally like to see Michele Bachmann as Speaker"

Even if you agree with all of her views (which would mark you as insane, by the way), do you really think she'd be an effective speaker? Really?

Posted by: thehersch | September 17, 2010 4:13 PM | Report abuse

Left out of the argument is the overwhelming majority of sitting members of both houses that have been playing by a 200 year old rulebook. Seniority matters in Congress even more than in a union. Asking for someone who has waited through multiple election cycles to abandon that idea just before it is their turn to lead is a fantasy.

Surely, nobody thinks we got our current leadership based on ability, in either party.

Posted by: OldUncleTom | September 17, 2010 5:54 PM | Report abuse

The recent, obviously coordinated attacks on Boehner are just laughable. You have to think that Axelrod, or someone in the administration, read the book 1984 and thought, hey, could we do this? The need for a hate figure is so strong with these people. Boehner takes the place occupied by Rush Limbaugh, Cheney, Bush, etc, as a person constantly, continuously denounced, not just for his policies but for his person, his looks, his very being. Like the hate figure Emanuel Goldstein in 1984. Should the republicans take the House, which is not a given, there will not be a revolt against him. In spite of Obama's every other speech mentioning him, he is not yet widely hated. It will take longer than a few weeks for that to happen. For now, people are just puzzled by the whole thing. Public sentiment must be directed toward hatred, and that hate must attach to a particular figure. That's the teaching of 1984; that's the practice of this administration.

Posted by: truck1 | September 17, 2010 6:47 PM | Report abuse

"Public sentiment must be directed toward hatred, and that hate must attach to a particular figure. That's the teaching of 1984; that's the practice of this administration."


the practice of this administration?
the reason you find president obama's words against boehner to be laughable, is because it is not in his nature, to fight with hate in his heart, or on his lips.
president obama is a gentleman and a gentle man.

i cannot say the same thing for the public appearances of almost anyone else. on either side of the aisle.
president obama is the most civil president that i can remember.
the outrageous attacks on him are met with calm and patience, as much as is, and more than, humanly possible.
you consider his comments on boehner to be comments of hate?
i consider them to be completely mild, and very truthful.
on the other hand, i will never forget boehner's rant on the evening of health care passage.
not a display that would make you proud for your children to see. it was extraordinary to see that.
and cantor's snideness. what a display in congress.
as far as barack obama's public image, he has done or said nothing, to my recollection, that should make him feel any shame whatsoever, or need to apologize for words or conduct, in front of his two daughters.
to me, that is the true measure of a man.
if you want to talk about a practice of hate, of evil having a human experience, there is a palpable spiritual darkness in the republican party now. and it is so strong, that their very own people are scared by it.
whatever you might think of the policies of barack obama, as far as we know of his public image, he shows nothing but reason, restraint and thoughtfulness, as a human being.

Posted by: jkaren | September 18, 2010 9:46 AM | Report abuse

"The recent, obviously coordinated attacks on Boehner are just laughable."
"Public sentiment must be directed toward hatred, and that hate must attach to a particular figure. That's the teaching of 1984; that's the practice of this administration."


the attacks are laughable, precisely because barack obama is not a messenger of hatred. it is not his spiritual practice, as it is for so many others now.
president obama won the nobel peace prize, because his walk is that of a gentle man, and a wise man.
sadly, most of the world, mistakes restraint, humility, reflectiveness and civility, for weakness.
in his public image, of what we know of president obama, he has said or done nothing, that he would need to apologize to his daughters for, or explain his words or thoughts.
he has been exemplary.
exemplary in a time where there are actual messengers of hate swirling around him, and attacking him.
whether you like his policies or not, the walk of president obama has been exemplary. he is a good person, of humility and great courage.
we are so fortunate to have him.
his greatness and goodness will be recognized at a later time.
why it takes so long for people to appreciate what they have, is just characteristic of the impatience and shortsightedness in our human natures.

Posted by: jkaren | September 18, 2010 10:38 AM | Report abuse

Cantor and Vitter. The young guns of GOP. Ilaughed so hard I soiled myself. But not to worry Vitter knows who to call for that!

Posted by: jimbobkalina | September 19, 2010 4:07 AM | Report abuse

Unless one is brain damaged it is clear that the powerful in congress, for the most part, on both sides of the aisle are corrupt beyond redemption. The sooner the Dems realize this, the sooner they will repair their party.

Posted by: illogicbuster | September 19, 2010 8:18 AM | Report abuse

The real problem in this election and the last is the general lack of seriousness in tone. Both parties are quite good at telling us what (or whom) they are against and providing us with glittering generalities about what they are for, but the specifics are short. The tea party has perfected this. They are even better at telling us what they are against, but just as short on substance for a positive agenda.


If you really believe that the majority whipped into a frenzy over “hope” and “change” two years ago truly knew the detailed specifics of the home and change they wanted, I’d suggest you have a very optimistic view of voter base knowledge. I’d suggest instead that most simply knew that they were against the last eight years and that the hope and change option made them feel warm inside, regardless of its content.


If you really believe that the average tea partier has though through a positive agenda, again, I’d suggest you are a very optimistic person. Sure, I want the deficit reduced to 0 as well. What specifically are you going to cut to do it? I’m not implying it can’t be done – just that the tea party hasn’t told us how they plan to do it. They do like to say that their “constitutional rights” are being shredded, but few can point to a specific line in the Constitution or its amendments to support their point.


Their anger is in part justified. Many people didn’t get the type of change they bargained for. Nor did Ms. Pelosi provide us the most ethical government ever as she promised – just more of the same corruption. On the other end, Republicans as the supposedly fiscally responsibility, ran up the highest deficits to that point in the nation’s history and one of the primary opponents of McCain’s war on earmarks was Mitch McConnell himself. The call to “clean house” isn’t without merit – but sometimes the new furniture can be as ugly and uncomfortable as the old.


The problem is that the anger and demands for change haven’t been matches with specifics about change. I don’t care much for this administration, and I don’t agree with everything in Paul Ryan’s plans, but at least they have put details down on the table to start the discussion. What have Ms. Pelosi, Mr. Reid, Ms. Palin, Mr. McConnell, or Mr. Boehner offered of real substance?


Just as with the Bush to Obama change out, I won’t shed a tear to see the party leadership in either party go. As in their change out, I just don’t see much of substance and quality to replace it with.

Posted by: MAurelius | September 20, 2010 1:12 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company