Yuval Levin has an interesting editorial in the New York Times, “Some Good Can Come Out of the Kevin McCarthy Fiasco”.
It’s a good angle for a liberal paper. It tries to point out that not everything being asked of McCarthy was awful. But a few of his supporting point, well, do not hold up.
Mr. McCarthy offered a number of hollow concessions. For example, lowering the threshold for a new vote for speaker matters little, since members wouldn’t seek such a vote if they didn’t think a significant number of their colleagues would support it.
This might be true if the goal was to actually depose Mr. McCarthy. It is likely not. The goal is to be obstructionist, waste everyone’s time, make some empty symbolic point, gain press, make money, stay elected. If you are Matt Gaetz or Lauren Boebert, why wouldn’t you do this, loudly and frequently? Why would the crazies have pushed for this change if not to use it?
Muttrox predicts that there will be new votes for speaker, and more than once.