[link removed] [[link removed]]
John,

Imagine it’s the last election - the one from 2022. You’re in line to vote and you’re chatting with the person next to you.

Suddenly, that person says, “Hey, I’ll bet you that at some point in the next Congress, the leaders of the minority party will announce that they’re going to vote to protect the Speaker of the House from getting fired.”

If someone had said that to you, the rational response would have been, “How much will you let me bet? Can I bet my house? My car? Because you’re talking about something that has never happened and I can’t imagine a scenario in which it would.”

And then, this week, you would have lost that bet.

I’ll admit that, as time has gone by and outlier events have accumulated, it’s gotten harder for me to convey just how historically weird this Congress is. I know all writers try to make things interesting, but seriously folks, we’re just way off the charts here.

So the big question this week was whether the right-flank would actually try to fire the Speaker.

Five weeks ago, one of them filed a motion to fire him - but, until now, they hadn’t requested a vote on it. Under the rules, it only takes one member of the House to call a vote on a motion to fire the Speaker.

So it was basically dangling over the Speaker’s head, generating lots of media attention for the person who filed it, but with most folks thinking it probably wouldn’t happen.

Then the Speaker called the vote on Ukraine - over the fierce objection of the right-flank - and once again we all looked up at that motion hanging over his head and wondered if anyone was going to cut the string.

The right-flank did their media tour bashing the Speaker, but it was clear there wasn’t the same level of support to fire him as there had been for the last Speaker.

And then, this week, the top three leaders of the minority party announced that if the vote to fire the Speaker does occur - at least, a vote based on that particular motion from that particular member - they would vote to block that attempt.

In other words, they would vote to save the Speaker - at least this time.

The next day, the folks who filed the motion to fire the Speaker announced that they would force a vote on it, to occur next week - knowing it would fail.

Why?

Two reasons:

One, the right-flank had to escalate. That’s core to their brand. They couldn’t listen to the announcement from the minority party and say, “Well, I guess that’s checkmate. There’s no way we can win the vote to fire the Speaker so it would be foolish to call it.”

That’s not how they think. They can’t risk looking weak, even if it means certain defeat. Once they were boxed in, they felt they had no choice but to fix bayonets and charge.

Second, the minority party’s announcement effectively shielded the right-flank from the consequences of their actions.

The reason they hadn’t called the vote wasn’t just because they were afraid of losing - it was also because they were afraid of winning. Firing another Speaker would have created an extremely unpredictable political environment for them. Maybe they’d come out on top, maybe not.

Now, they know the outcome: They’ll lose. The Speaker won’t be fired, so it’s safer for them to make the attempt. They’ll get a media bonanza in exchange for taking limited political risk.

That’s why they delayed the vote until next week. It gave them an extra week of media attention.

So next week, you’re going to see the minority party essentially save the leader of the majority party from a revolt within his own ranks. And that’s just incredibly, deeply strange stuff from a historical standpoint.

The Very Aggressive Tracker

If you’ve never run for office, you might not know about trackers.

Trackers are young staffers who are paid by some political group to follow the opposing candidate around with a camera and video them anytime they’re in public.

Trackers exist on a spectrum of hostility. Some are quite docile.

My last tracker was perfectly pleasant. He would show up early to all my public events, set up his tripod and camera, start filming when I started speaking, and then leave quietly after I was done. He was basically there just in case I tripped over my shoelaces or blurted out something unprofessional. At the end of my campaign, I walked over and shook his hand and we spoke politely for a few moments.

Then there’s the other end of the spectrum, which I witnessed two days ago.

We had just finished our votes. I walked off the House floor and over to the bike rack outside the Capitol building where I lock my bike.

I heard some yelling and looked up. A tracker was following a congresswoman who was walking alone. This young man was totally crossing the line. He was yelling in her face, holding a camera a foot away from her, trying to get a reaction.

She was looking away, trying not to give him any usable footage, which is the right thing to do in that situation.

I unlocked my bike and headed over. I slowed down as I approached and placed my bike between the tracker and her. Trackers are instructed not to make any physical contact, so I knew he’d back off a bit, which he did.

The congresswoman and I started chatting. I was telling her how glad I was that I bought this bike, how much time it saves me getting to and from meetings, and she told me about her bike.

Meanwhile, the tracker is hollering, still trying to get her to react, yelling over us as we spoke.

It took about three minutes for us to get back to her office, at which point the tracker departed.

And this is the part of campaigning you don’t see. It’s our job as candidates to stay positive, but dang, it can be hard sometimes.

Campaign update

I don’t have a tracker yet, but I will.

Our race is basically 50/50, so it’s inevitable. I’ll let you know when he pops up.

I’ve got drill this weekend (I’m a Major in the National Guard), so it’ll be the rare weekend for me that doesn’t involve campaigning.

But that aside, we’re going full steam. My last stop was in Burlington, North Carolina. Great crowd, good questions.

Every time I go somewhere, it’s all of you who help get me there. The logistics of a statewide campaign are intense, as you can imagine. The way we fund it is by including links at the bottom of these emails and politely asking all of you to chip in. So far, it’s worked great.

So if you can, I’d appreciate your support. You can use ActBlue to contribute directly to our campaign here [[link removed]] . Some folks would rather not use ActBlue, so an alternative (that still goes directly to our campaign) can be found here [[link removed]] .

If you've saved your payment information with ActBlue Express, your donation will go through immediately:

CHIP IN $10 NOW [[link removed]]
CHIP IN $15 NOW [[link removed]]

CHIP IN $25 NOW [[link removed]]
CHIP IN $50 NOW [[link removed]]

CHIP IN $100 NOW [[link removed]]
ANOTHER AMOUNT [[link removed]]

Thanks, as always, and I’ll have plenty to report next week.

Best,

Jeff
Paid for by Jeff Jackson for Attorney General
Jeff Jackson for Attorney General
P.O. Box 470882
Charlotte, NC 28226
United States
www.jeffjacksonnc.com [[link removed]] | [email protected] [[email protected]]
This email was sent to [email protected] . If you'd like to receive fewer messages or wish to no longer receive these messages, please unsubscribe. [[link removed]] If you are a registered lobbyist with the state of North Carolina and have received this email in error, please unsubscribe. [[link removed]]