Those who watched Johnson’s rise to prominence via tireless efforts to attract Republican signatures to a legal brief challenging the results of the 2020 election, and who admired his continued efforts to fight bravely against the democratic process by supplying arguments against certifying the 2020 election, were stunned and heartsick to see this apparent 180 on the legitimacy of majority rule. Just because it was an election that happened to result in his selection as speaker of the House, did that make winning a majority of votes suddenly a legitimate way of obtaining power? Where were the doubts? Where were the questions? Where were the barrage of dubious legal arguments? Why was he just sitting there and letting people congratulate him on his election, as though it were a good thing?
It was unclear exactly what had prompted this shocking change of heart. Some speculated it was the smaller number of voters involved, and the fact that the majority of them were Republicans, that had turned Johnson around. Others thought that perhaps he was tired and confused after more than three weeks of speakerless chaos, and that as soon as he had the opportunity to rest, toy with the gavel and breathe, he would reconsider. Still others thought he did not realize that 220 was greater than 209 and believed himself to be acting consistently with his principles.
Given Johnson’s previous leadership in the field of undermining election results, many worried that this reversal would have a disastrous cascading effect. Across the country, voters would start to be terrified that their voices might be heard and they would actually have to be governed by the people they had voted for.
Many expressed concern that this could set a terrible precedent in which Republicans at state and local levels also simply accepted the results of elections, perhaps even refraining from attempts to impeach duly elected judges. “If we just start accepting the outcomes of votes,” warned one observer, “there goes our entire 2024 strategy!”
Some pro-voters thought that this might signal a bold new direction for the Republican Party, away from election denialism and towards a willingness to embrace democracy. “We can build on this!” they suggested. “First, you accept one election, and then you accept another, and then, gradually, we’re back to being a functioning democracy where the leadership of both major parties accepts fundamental democratic principles!”
Others thought, nah, probably not.
Credit: Source link
