OT: Is it safe to assume, assuming markets hate uncertainty, that if McCarthy gets the nod, the markets... if they do in fact blink, it'll be an (upside) blink? IE, if they pull off 218 votes, there's no reason to think the S&P would drop on that news right? Or do I have to dedicate a monitor to C-Span today?
Yep. But if it gets crazy long enough some of them may play the quorum game by just no showing which bumps up the value of the existing McCarthy votes. I would like to see McCarthy go but, at the same time, the holdouts are not playing the best game in town. Ideally you hold out and also have a candidate who wants the job.
Do you have a source? You’re arguing against what’s on a government website. I remember 2011 very well. If we don’t pay the interest on our bonds that’s a default. While that interest has priority, the Treasury needs to print money to do that.
The market likes to do crazy sh#t and then reverse it the next day anyway even if it did react. Non-farm payroll tomorrow matters.
Yeah it'll be a non-event if he does get it... marketwise at least. Maybe a little 10 minute volatility. The defense stocks might get a nice pop.
Traders already knew Kevin McCarthy would have a hard time getting Speaker of the House. What he should do is give up some concessions. RINOs love to give the Democrats everything they ask for including, the kitchen sink. It would not kill Kevin McCarthy to give the opposing Republicans some wins.
What is the "nuclear option" you ask? Well it involves changing the rules to vote for speaker from requiring a majority to simply requiring the most votes. This would pressure the 30 Republicans who oppose McCarthy to vote for him --- otherwise the Democrat Hakeem Jeffries will get elected House Speaker. Sources say House Republicans discuss 'nuclear option': Lower vote threshold to be speaker https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...eat-in-gop-house-speaker-standoff/ar-AA15VfvF As McCarthy's quest to become speaker of the House continues to fall short, some of his allies are exploring a radical idea: lowering the threshold needed to be elected. Under current House rules, a candidate needs an outright majority of all members voting to be elected speaker. With 433 members voting so far -- and one member voting "present," which doesn't affect the total -- that means McCarthy has repeatedly fallen far short of the 217 currently needed to win a majority. The rules, however, can be changed: With a simple majority vote, the House could decide to allow a speaker to be elected with a plurality, or whoever has the most votes when no one has a majority. This has happened before, but very rarely. It's called the "nuclear option" because it would force anti-McCarthy voters to face a stark choice: vote for him or watch Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries get elected instead. After all, Jeffries has received 212 votes in every single round so far and the most McCarthy has received has been 203. But would those 20 renegade Republicans continue to vote against McCarthy if doing so would result in electing a Democrat as speaker? Advocates of the option say the change would call the critics' bluff and force them to vote for McCarthy or take the blame for ceding control of the House to Democrats. According to two McCarthy allies in the House, the idea is being discussed among House Republicans. They believe Democrats would support the rules change. One influential Republican voice, however, told ABC News he opposes the idea. "I know it is an idea that has been floating around," incoming House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., said. "I'd be opposed it." He added: "I know Hakeem would like, but I don't."
"Not my circus, not my monkeys" Biden: GOP speaker drama 'embarrassing' and 'not my problem' https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/04/biden-house-speakership-00076322