allen. >> jordan. >> jordan. >> allred. jeffries. amodei. jordan. armstrong. jordan. arrington. jordan. auchincloss. jeffries. babin. jordan. bacon. mccarthy. baird. >> there it is. that was congressman don bacon, republican of nebraska, not voting present, voting for kevin mccarthy. that is not what jim jordan and

the jordan forces wanted him to do. they wanted him to vote present but he voted for mccarthy. that is essentially a no vote on jordan. the next vote that we're going to be dipping in for will be congressman ken buck, another nay on jordan. his issue also different, kasie hunt, again, not a moderate against jordan, ken buck a very conservative republican from colorado, his issue is -- >> elections and whether or not joe biden actually won the election fair and square. big picture, jake, i just think we are watching the formal installation of donald trump. there have been so many ways in which this has happened, but this is a moment crystallizing it for me, as the current singular entity republican the republican party, this is an institution whose glass doors were broken. there were gun shots fired outside this chamber. the members had to evacuate in gas masks on january 6th of

2021, when a pro-trump mob stormed the place and as we were discussing before, jim jordan was and jamie reported about his insfl involvement in that, they are moving to install him now as the speaker of the house. it is the more moderate not in ideology, but in temperament, members of the republican congress who have been -- >> fact based. >> but they have been rolled time and time again over the course of the last five years. i started covering the trump administration on capitol hill in 2017, asking republicans when were they going to speak up, and they never spoke up. >> remember, congresswoman ann wagner, who was one of these fact-based republicans who on thursday when asked about jim jordan said hell no. and then monday said, she would go along. >> right. >> let's listen in on ken buck. >> jordan. >> brown. >> hakeem jeffries. >> jeffries.

>> brownlee. >> jeffries. >> buchanan. >> jordan. >> jordan. >> buck. buck? bucshon. -yard. budzinski. jeffries. burchet. >> congressman buck did not vote, but he will come back and vote no doubt. let's go to dana bash on capitol hill who has some new reporting. dana? >> i think that ken buck asking for his vote and him not being there is an example of some of what we have been talking about, about the sort of parlor games that go on with these relationships that do exist, even between say a jim jordan and ken buck.

they've been members of the freedom caucus together for quite some time. we'll see if others do the same, but he's waiting, clearly. it's not as if he's not around. he's waiting to see how it goes and then potentially he's one of those who could potentially have a conversation. i'm not suggesting that he is, you know, going to be a yes, necessarily, but the fact that he didn't vote at that time gives you a sense of some of the really intense behind-the-scenes conversations that are happening. now on the floor conversations, quiet conversations, happening, as this vote goes and we do not know how it will end. jim jordan doesn't know how it will end. >> cartwright. jeffries. casar.

jeffries. case. >> the next one we're listening for is congresswoman chavez-deremer from oregon, represents a district that president biden won by 9 points. let's listen. >> castro of texas. jeffries. chavez-deremer. mccarthy. >> congresswoman chavez-derember of oregon representing a district that president biden won by nine points, voted for mccarthy. that is basically two votes against jordan. he can only afford to lose one more. let's see what else happens. we have a few more votes before there is somebody that we anticipate will be a potential problem for congressman jim jordan. but david, so far, if i were jim

jordan, i would not be feeling good because we are only in the cs and already he has two votes against him. and congressman buck has not even voted yet, and he's a pretty firm no. >> i think we're waiting upcoming a couple congressmen from florida, diaz-balart and jimenez, battleground districts, so much -- >> mccarthy allies. >> and mccarthy allies and as you noted with the oregon district, i mean, obviously, politics plays a role here and now we know part of the pressure campaign on these republicans to get on board is this fear that was being intimated to them of a primary challenge if you're not on board because jordan is such a hero of the right, of the maga crowd, of the dominant force, quite frankly, in the republican party. so that notion of a primary challenge could cause some fear. the reality is, though, think about that. if a primary challenge is successful from the right in some of these battleground

districts, those districts are at risk falling to democrats next november and you've got such a slim majority it could hand the house majority to the democrats. i know that long-term thinking is not the calculus today for many of these republicans on the floor, but certainly for some of these republicans on the floor it's the calculus. >> let's go to manu raju on capitol hill. manu, what are you seeing where you are? >> we're told by our colleague in the chamber that ken buck was not in the chamber on the floor when they called his name here, and one reason why, perhaps, is that what a lot of members have been calculating, weighing whether to vote no, they don't want to be the decisive vote. let's listen. >> davis of kansas. jeffries. davidson.

jordan. davis of illinois. jeffries. davis of north carolina. >> so the next one we're really listening in for is congressman anthony des po seeto, a republican of new york, last time we checked with him was undecided, he is in a district that president biden won by 15 points, the republican in the most biden-friendly district and then right after him, comes congressman mario diaz-balart, who is in a strong trump district, but he's a no. let's listen in. they're both coming right up. >> desjarlais. jordan. dees pa zito. >>

>>. diaz-balart. >> scalise. >> so, with that vote for steve scalise from congressman mario diaz-balart from florida and the unusual vote from congressman anthony des po seeto from new york for former congressman lee zeldin of new york who ran and lost the race for governor, that is four house republican votes against jim jordan which means jim jordan will not win the speakership on this vote. whether that means -- unless they change their votes, which will mean, again, unless they change their votes, that he will not win the speakership now. whether he wins in a subsequent vote could happen. that's what happened with mccarthy. it also could happen as what's happened with steve scalise behind closed doors that he

could find his votes eroding. there are still other votes to pay attention to, including jake ellzey. this vote is not over yet and we'll see how big the margin of defeat ultimately is five votes now against jordan. what was the one i missed? jake ellzey? >> i didn't hear. >> i was -- >> that would have been alphabetically, yes. >> in any case, let's continue to watch, but that's already five against what he could only afford to lose three. >> we should just watch that whole present thing you heard manu talk about if they change the math here, so this is, obviously, two more, jake, he's lost two more votes than he could afford to lose here, if indeed everyone who is there today and took attendance that they were there, is voting in this process. we'll see if that magic number changes and if later folks vote present, if we see that strategy come to fruition for the jordan

folks. >> john king, i mean, you know, this was basically jim jordan, who is the one who brought this to the floor, forced it to the floor, i want a vote, this was basically his -- remember kevin mccarthy when matt gaetz said i am going to do a motion to vacate and i think i'm quoting correctly that kevin mccarthy said bring it on, is that what he said, bring it on, and he done got brought on and lost and this was jim jordan doing the same thing. steve scalise did not bring it to the floor. >> steve scalise didn't want to have to do what kevin mccarthy did, keep negotiating your power, every leverage, power, voice of authority you have as the, quote, unquote, ceo, the speaker of the republican conference. this person is third in line to the presidency. this is a constitutional officer. not just a leader of house republicans, whether you're a democrat or independent or republican watching in the country or around the world this is a constitutional officer third in line to the presidency. the size of the five, the others at the end is significant because how many people does jim jordan have to negotiate with,

right. we've heard one member wants him to strongly say joe biden won the election. donald trump. he should stop making that case. others want a commitment for money for ukraine. others want a public commitment for an aid package to israel -- >> we have matt gaetz coming up. >> jordan. >> fulcher. >> jordan. >> gaetz. >> jordan. >> okay. there are a couple others i want to hear in the next minute. andrew garbarino and carlos jimenez both are coming up in the next minutes. let's listen in. >> garbarino. zeldin. >> that's six against jordan so far from house republicans. >> mike garcia. jordan. robert garcia.

jeffries. garcia of illinois. jeffries. garciaf texas. jeffries. gimenez. mccarthy. >> okay. john king, i'm sorry, that's seven house republicans. >> so if you have to get that number to two, if everybody keeps voting, and jim jordan has to get the number, you know, to two, you know, can he nesh jats? does he have the leverage to negotiating? how many times is he willing to take the hit? kevin mccarthy humiliated himself staying out there and wore them down cutting deals. the fact that we're having this deal today is because he cut those deals. he gave so much leverage to the rank and file that he was not an effective leader. so can jim jordan get himself in the mccarthy box and negotiate his way to that gavel? now it's up to eight. if the answer is yes, and that's

a big if, bold face and underline it, if, what does he have to give up to get there and how much power or authority does he have? he called for this vote. this was his idea. this was his play under the idea that i'm going to lose the first one and then i'm going to win them over, i'm going to wear them down. we will -- a speaker has to run the house, a speaker has to be a legislative tactician. this is jim jordan's strategy and tactic. we'll see if he's any good at it. >> who was the eighth? >> tony gonzalez. >> he voted for scalise. >> that was one we weren't looking for. >> i think the key potential difference here and what i'm watching to see as, you know, they decide what to do next here is that these nine so far are not the way that matt gaetz and company were willing to essentially take the -- they created a situation that let's remind ourselves is unprecedented in american history, this is two weeks without a speaker of the united states house because the party that runs the house took out one

of their own. the fact that those people were willing to do that, speaks volumes about, you know, the way that the republican party has been pulled towards them in recent years because, you know, jim jordan when he got there was called a legislative terrorist by john boehner because he was willing to go very much not that far and those people followed in the mold. i don't think these nine, like they are people that want to govern the country and they need a speaker to govern the country. >> bring in -- david i'll come back to you, a couple former republican members of the house, if i can, rodney davis and adam kinzinger, just to get their take on this because, frankly, i'm a little surprised at the depth of the votes. this is a higher number than i thought we were going to get. tony gonzalez and granger voting against jordan, i did not anticipate. frankly, i like being surprised. this is one of the reasons we went into journalism, to be surprised. let me start with you, former congressman davis, are you

surprised at the number that we have so far, nine votes against jordan? i think we're just in the js and we have more to come. or hs. i'm sorry. >> i am surprised. i didn't think this many people would vote against him during the first round. i thought it would be an easy vote for many of my former colleagues to be able to appease the far right in their districts and say hey, we supported jim during this round. but all bets are off in future rounds. i think you're going see somewhat of a more cascading effect. members of congress can count and they realize that he's not going to be speaker in this round. i think, frankly, he's got one more round to try to gather up the votes and then i think all bets are off on who is going to be nominated next. >> congressman kinzinger what's your take? >> yeah. it's the same as rodney's. once they hit three, then i think a lot of these people that were staying quiet got permission to go no. i know there's one more that's

going to be a no likely, steve womak of arkansas and others in there. i'm surprised by this number, but i can tell you i heard a lot of names of my former colleagues that said jordan after their name was called that i know feel dirty inside for it and are now very jealous of these nine who had the courage of their convictions. all this, this whole thing, jake, is about getting people on the record so they can now go to fox news and pressure them as hard as they can. i don't think he gives up on the second round unless he starts losing more. the pressure is going to get intense and that's how they play it. >> let's listen in. >> jackson lee. jeffries. jacobs. jeffries. james. james.

jayapal. jeffries. jeffries. jeffries . johnson of georgia. jeffries. johnson of louisiana. jordan. johnson of ohio. jordan. johnson of south dakota. jordan. jordan.

jordan. joyce of ohio. joyce of ohio. joyce of pennsylvania. jordan. kamlagger-dove. jeffries. kaptur. >> all right. we continue to watch the vote, if votes continue as they are and everybody stays where they are, congressman jim jordan will not secure the speakership on this vote. people do change their votes sometimes. we'll see what happens. congressman tom kaine voted for jordan. one of the biden districts, and he is a moderate, so that is a victory of sorts for congressman jordan in his aspiring speakership. it will not be enough right now. let's go to dana bash on capitol hill with latest. >> jake, i just want to

underscore something that you just heard. we all just heard from former congressman adam kinzinger, which is why the others number keeps climbing, and it is largely because once it was clear that jim jordan would not get the votes on this first round, some members, some vulnerable members, angry members, are taking -- goes up to 11 now -- are taking what they call up here free votes, meaning they know that their vote does not have a consequence at this point when it comes to whether or not jim jordan will be speaker, so they are trying to make political calculations. >> kim of new jersey. jeffries. krishna morethy. jeffries.

kuster. jeffries. kustoff. jordan. lahood. jordan. lalota. zeldin. >> as we continue to listen to these votes, i think that's an important thing to keep in mind. the other thing i wanted to add, i was told by somebody who is helping jim jordan that some of these, again, these free votes, votes that are climbing on the others column, the 12 column, do intend to support jim jordan on the second round. the question, of course, is whether there will be enough, whether there will be enough of them. we are continuing to look at this list of 18 republicans in biden won districts to see how they are going to go and how they calculate whether they vote for somebody who they maybe don't agree with on many things -- let's listen.

>> latta. jordan. laturner. jordan. lawler. >> speaker kevin mccarthy. >> mccarthy. lee of california. jeffries. lee of florida. jordan. lee of nevada. jeffries. lee of pennsylvania. jeffries. leger fernandez -- >> who was 13?

who voted? >> lesko. jordan. letlow. jordan. levin. jeffries. lieu. jeffries. lofgren. jeffries. loudermilk. jordan. lucas. jordan. luetkemeyer. jordan. luna. jordan. luttrell. jordan. lynch. jeffries. mace. jordan.

magaziner -- >> as we listen to this roll call vote and know it looks like the outcome is clear, although we should emphasize that any of these members can change their votes, and it is very, very possible, if you think about what we saw back in january during the vote for kevin mccarthy, ip want to -- let's listen in to kevin mccarthy's vote. >> mcbath. jeffries. mccarthy. jordan. >> significant moment there. kevin mccarthy, putting his vote in for jim jordan. i want to talk to my experts here and doug, i want to start with you, because again, you were somebody who worked for house republican leadership.

as you see these votes and now it's up to 13, voting for somebody other than jim jordan, what does that tell you? >> it tells me that he's not getting through in this ballot and tells me that we're going to see republicans at some point today going into a room called hc 5, which does not sound glamorous, it's not very glamorous, it's a meeting room in the basement where the republican conference meets and this is where scalise will have the opportunity and indeed the need to press those members to vote -- >> jordan. >> excuse me. jordan to press the members who voted against him, are going to hear from their constituents, hear from conservative leaders and hear in that room and that's going to determine if a vote to happen, if he gets more or less members. >> i want to bring in david axelrod also with us. what are your thoughts? >> well, first of all, i've been listening to this conversation from the beginning about how this could be, that a guy who voted -- a guy who was an election denier and has the

history of jordan, could be so close to the speakership. he may not get there, it appears. this is the republican party. this is the party that donald trump is the runway frontrunner in for president of the united states, 70% of the republican voters are also election deniers and believe there was something amiss in the last election, so he really reflects the base of the party, and that's point number one. point number two, is the first principle for most legislators -- and i love adam kinzinger because he was willing to do his duty and put it ahead of his own political well being, that is unusual. there's a reason why the book "profile in courage" was a slim volume. that's not what politicians do. they calculate what they need to do to remain practicing politicians and get re-elected. the pressure campaign while it may not succeed for jordan has

been effective. 55 against him going into the weekend and you've got a little more than a dozen now. now, he may not get there, and as kasie hunt mentioned before, there are members there who are institutionalists and moderates and care very much about the appearance of what's going on now, and the reality that the house can't function, i wouldn't be surprised if jordan can't put this together in the next few ballots and there's going to be a move to get the house open by, perhaps, giving more authority to the speaker pro tem. you know, because i think those people know it can't go on and the republicans can't seem to agree on anyone. patrick mchenry's broadly popular. it wouldn't shock me if that happened here. but as to the first part, jim jordan is the face of the

republican party, as the republican party exists today. >> scott jennings? jim jordan, the face of the republican party, of your party? >> well, i mean, literally he's the face of it. he's on fox news every night. if you consider -- think about it. if you consider that the people who are on tv the most, the people that republican grassroots hear from the most, who is it? they hear from donald trump, they hear from jim jordan. those two guys, you know, far and away -- >> used to be those kind of republicans didn't even get close to the speaker's chair, much less within inches of the gavel, and that's what we have right now. in this round, no, it's not going to happen. but it might happen in the next round or the next round after that. >> yeah. as a strategic matter what i am interested in is, whether jordan moves for an immediate second ballot to see if some of those people peel off and get down to the actual number of holdouts. is it somewhere south of 10,

say? then when does he actually feel like he has to go into a conference room, as doug was talking about, and sort is out with those people? this is more than i would have thought, and a couple of members have said to me, this is more than they would have thought already, so are these people real or are they going to -- are they going -- is this a one round protest? that's the math question i have. >> i just want to bring in lauren fox, who lauren, i know you've been talking to your sources about the dynamic here, which is important to underscore because the last time we saw something like this was in january, kevin mccarthy was trying to woo the hardline conservatives or the, you know, never kevins or whatever you want to call them, the dynamic that is happening right now, with jim jordan is trying to do, is convince so-called moderate republicans, even though many are conservative, republicans who are from biden won

districts, swing districts, to support him. what are you hearing about how those conversations have gone, given that 13 that we see there? >> yeah. one of the things that jim jordan really tried to do was come out with a plan for how he was going to deal with the government spending deadline that was coming up on november 17th. he walked into conference a couple weeks ago and made it clear that he wanted to basically leverage an expected 1% cut that will go into effect in april to try and get some negotiations with the white house to cut spending. a lot of republicans argued that they were happy to see that jordan had a plan at all. they felt like he had some c concrete steps he was willing to take. the reality is, with the votes that we're seeing, including a surprise from kay granger, the chairwoman of the house appropriations committee, it's clear that that did not really assuage some of the concerns from republicans, and part of

the reason it may not have worked is because that 1% cut that was voted into law in the debt ceiling bill, is coming up in january, would take effect in april, and it scares defense hawks. that is a 1% cut that would have a massive effect on military preparations and if you remember many years ago, congress had the same fight over what they then called an across-the-board cut, it was known as sequestration, and it was a huge problem for the defense department. so that is clearly becoming a problematic step here, and that is maybe why you're seeing people like kay granger, the key appropriator, voting against jim jordan on the floor. >> so interesting, lauren. let's keep listening in. >> jeffries. >> rupersberger.

rutherford. scalise. ryan. jeffries. salazar. jordan. salinas. jeffries. sanchez. jeffries. santos. jordan. sarbanes. jeffries. scalise. jordan. >> as we watch -- as we watch the house floor and as we watch these not jordan votes number

climb to 14 now, i'm getting some texts and i don't know what you all are hearing, i got a text from a former republican who said, former house republican, who has been in situations like this, who said, you know, if it was just a handful, maybe jordan could do it. it looks so much harder now as the numbers go up. ashley, i know that that could be the case, but again, people could be looking at this saying i'm just going to vote the way i want to right now. but a lot of these members that we're talking about are republicans who people in your party and the democratic party think that they can beat and take the majority back in 204. >> yeah. i mean if this number was a handful, i would feel better as jim jordan. this is much larger than anyone suspected, and the -- it is a presidential year and we were talking earlier about in midterms a vote like this, some

folks could think it would really matter. here's the thing, in the 18 districts that biden won but are held by republican congress people, some of those are in states where you don't run very large presidential campaigns, like a new york, like a california. >> or nebraska. >> or nebraska. and so when you are thinking, my constituents aren't going to be focusing so much on the presidential because my state is a really red state, but my district is purple and i need to make sure that i don't get a campaign ad run against me in a moderate district where i voted for someone like jim jordan who is the founder of the freedom caucus, is an election denier, and is always on fox news pushing maga talking points. >> i just want to add that mike simpson just voted for scalise, which is a bit of a surprise. >> the number keeps climbing and, so i think interestingly, by the way, when we did this with mccarthy, they had to go on and keep doing it because the constitution requires it. in this case, there is no

requirement they stay here and do this over and over again. i'm actually really sort of fascinated now if you're jordan, is the strategic move for you here to go for another one and see if anybody peels off or to go to a meeting? on your point about the presidential election, look, donald trump is on the ballot. >> yeah. >> and so to me, if you're going to try to peel off voters in one of these districts with an ad it's not about jim jordan. it's really going to be about donald trump. if this were a midterm, i would think this might be a more consequential vote, which is why i've been a little skeptical that pressure campaign which they have been thinking they were going to run is going to be as effective. i think the presidential vibes next year are really important, and it just is a blanket over everything, including, you know, how you voted on a leadership -- >> it's an and. it's not -- i would run an ad with donald trump and jim jordan and say this is the maga party -- >> doug, i just want to tell our

viewers that victoria spartz, from indiana, ukrainian born, she, like ken buck, did not vote. she was not there. it's not that she's not here. she did not vote. >> one of the things that's really interesting what we're seeing is that a lot of these no votes, whether they're voting for scalise or mccarthy, is really the rise of the house appropriators. why have we had government shutdowns and a lot of chaos over the past few years? it's been the failure to have a working appropriations process, which isn't terribly sexy, but it is what jordan said he's going to try to do and obviously that's been on hold for a while. a lot of this conversation has been jim jordan and donald trump, and donald trump calls jim jordan. this all predates donald trump by years. this is the pick of sara palin. the 2013 government shutdown, staffing decisions that steve scalise made against jim jordan, there's a lot going on here and we're talking about a coal mine

filled with canaries. donald trump came and was the great disrupter on what already existed. >> in the last couple weeks, interestingly, technically i'm fascinated by this. when mccarthy realized he didn't have the support he gave in. when scalise realized he didn't have the support he gave in. jim jordan does not have the support right now, but they have signaled they will not relent. we're down to the third most popular guy in this line, and as a tactical matter, they have at least signaled publicly they will not give in, no matter what. it's just an interesting mindset departure, you know. mccarthy relents, scalise relents. if jordan doesn't relent, it does give you sort of a window into how sort of these -- >> every -- well -- >> mccarthy relented after he had been speaker for nine months. >> but he didn't say, let's -- >> he certainly did this time -- >> he's not out here campaigning for the -- he didn't keep campaigning for the job when he realized he didn't have the

votes. jordan here lost in conference to scalise, and now he's on the floor losing this vote. it just is interesting to see whether he sticks with it or not when the other two guys didn't. >> maybe not -- once they voted mccarthy out, but let's rewind to january where he did continue to pursue and pursue. to your point about strategy right now, i don't think you go for another ballot immediately with 15 and the votes are still being counted because to doug's first point about the alphabet, we got to three really early on in the alphabet when they were calling the roll and if you get to three in an immediate next ballot or cs or ds -- >> momentum perception problem. >> perception you can't get it done, and then you go caucus and then you -- and then you run the risk of then having to make concessions that -- >> leave my report card out of it, but the initial plan from jordan was to go to conference and after the first ballot, but

i think this becomes part of where the republicans find themselves every time manu talked about jordan today he used the word fight, and so often over the past ten years, fight came before strategy. we need to see now what is jim jordan's strategy. we know he's going to fight. does he have a strategy to land a punch, win a round and the speakership? >> we know that jim jordan knows how to fight. that's how he made a name for himself. the question is, who is he fighting, jake, and how is he going to win the fights when you have people who are very, very reluctant in your own party, as he is, to make you speaker? >> yeah. well, right now, there are 15 house republicans who are a no on jim jordan and i suspect we might have one more no when all is said and done. let me go back to our two former house republicans, rodney davis and adam kinzinger. congressman davis, your take on

this, as this vote comes to its end? >> well, it's on to round two, and then is there going to be a round three, a round four? i think there's absolutely no way that you have enough republicans in that conference that like, a few months ago on behalf of kevin mccarthy, will stand strong and say only jordan like they did when they were only mccarthy. as i said earlier, i think jim jordan has one more round to prove that he can get the votes. if i were him, i would call everybody back down to hc 5, get them in a room and try to hash it out. going right into a second round, i don't think behooves him, and frankly, i think gives him less of a chance to achieve his goal of getting the gavel >> hold on one second. i want to listen in, we have one more no vote from congressman steve womack of arkansas. let's listen to the chaos and confusion as republicans try to

figure out what to do next and democrats try to suppress their giggles. we to anticipate that some of the people who did not vote will be asked if they want to come up and vote. there are a few notable individuals who did not vote when they were called upon to do so, including congressman ken buck, perhaps most notably. let's listen in on that. of course a big decision for congressman jim jordan, does he want to go to a second vote and see if he can convince some of the 16 holdouts to change their votes? he's going to have to change 13 of the 16. so let's listen in. >> the house will come to order.

the clerk will call the names of the members who did not answer the first call of the roll. >> bilikrakis. buck. emmer. >> cardenas. jeffries. james.

cole. joyce of ohio. jordan. lamalfa. mccarthy . spartz. massey .

>> okay. so the opposition to jim jordan picked up four votes there. he had 16 originally and then in the -- looking in the absent votes, congressman ken buck voted for tom emmer, congressman john james of michigan voted for tom cole and spartz and lamalfa voted for candidates other than jim jordan. that's 20 no votes on jordan.

adam kinzinger, david chal bian was making this observation earlier which is what we seem to be hearing very much in a loud voice is, from these 20 congressmen, is please do not make jim jordan the symbol of the house republicans. >> yeah. that's correct. look, i'm impressed that there's 20. i was worried this morning because a lot of the hard opposition to jordan had been capitulating in the last 24 hours, like mike rogers from alabama and wagner from missouri were hell nos until all in. this is embarrassing for jim jordan. i think this is going to be hard for him to fix. i mean the only thing i can imagine is if he starts cutting deals and those deals include things that he's never supported in the past, for instance, if he says i'm committed to bringing ukraine funding on the floor. he may be able to peel off one or two of those. if he says i'm committed to whatever it is, i don't know, maybe he can get to his number, but i think this is hard. i think the free vote here, i

mean, you know, the easiest thing to do if you're a republican is to vote for jim jordan the first time and go away the second time. i think you could see even more peel away on the second round or he consolidates. who really knows. i think it's going to be very hard for him to become speaker now. that doesn't mean they're not going to use blistering pressure on fox news, news max, all of those, oan, to activate the base to scare the crap out of those people. there's a lot of brave people in those 20 i'm proud of. >> 20 no votes against jim jordan in this first ballot. dana bash, the question is, where do we go from here? >> the question is where do we go from here, jake, because this is, despite the understanding that he was going to lose a fair amount in the first ballot, i just got a message from a jordan ally saying, quote, this is much worse than we expected. so despite the bravado, despite

what jim jordan himself said to manu umpteen times in the hallways over the past 24, 48 hours, about the fact that he can get there, he not only didn't get there in the first round, but they expected to do better than losing 20 fellow republicans. as they have done. >> yeah. no, indeed, this is a lot worse than i expected he would do. we knew going into here, into the vote, that he had six no votes. we did not know there were 20, and he certainly lost people that weren't even on our list of people to watch, people like congresswoman granger and congressman gonzalez. manu raju, you have some reporting from the hill? what's going on? >> the expectation is that jim jordan will try to get another -- go to another roll call vote here. we'll see exactly when exactly he does this, but this is worse than they anticipated. remember, kevin mccarthy, on that first ballot back in

january, lost 19 republicans. the expectation going into this vote from people familiar with the jordan camp thinking was that they would do better than kevin mccarthy on that first ballot. they lost 20 votes right here, and in talking to members who are walking off the floor, the belief is that this was worse than they expected. they thought they would be able to get closer and thought that, perhaps, some of these members that they were surprised about where they ultimately came down, there's some concern among some of the new york republicans about how jordan would deal with a parochial issue involving state and local taxes, an issue that is very important for the deductions of those state and local taxes, an important issue from the new york republicans in swing districts. they all voted for former congressman lee jelzeldin to bee speaker of the house. the belief from the jordan folks perhaps they can win back some of the people that voted for kevin mccarthy, but some of the other ones could be much harder to win back here, but they even, despite this worse outcome than they anticipated, they do expect

this to go to a second ballot, but how much more ground can he make up? that is still a huge question, as we head into another period of uncertainty and the republican turmoil only continuing here, jake. >> i think it's a fair question. i mean, it's possible that he will win over some votes from these 20. it's also possible that there were people that, you know, not to be impolite about it, holding their nose and voting for him, that might be emboldened to say you know what, you had me for the first ballot and i don't want to go with him on the second ballot and we can do better and vote for a tom emmer or a kevin mccarthy or a tom cole, or any number of individuals. and john king, i don't think that -- i mean, i certainly am not representative of the house republican caucus but the house members of the conference that i've spoken with, who have votes, some of them who have voted for congress jordan today, are not particularly excited about him. >> they're not, and so this is roughly the mccarthy math, right. so you have to change, what, 18

votes here. mccarthy was ultimately able to do it. he took a pummeling to get there, and he gave away just about everything in the store to get there, but he was a much less, for all the fault peoples give you about kevin mccarthy and his family, much less polarizing than jim jordan. a lot of these jim jordan votes they say they're hell no, we'll see if they hold. i just want to make a point the speaker of the house runs the institution. yes, the speaker of the house has a majority leader and whip whose john on a daily basis is to count the votes. when you hear jordan people saying this is worse than we thought, which tells you they failed test number one being a leader, being able tooth t-- to do the math of your team, deny ukraine funding, get house republicans to get a majority of republican votes for anything, they have to you have to be able to count votes. you have to look some people in the eye and say, i know you want to vote know. jim jordan failed that fest.

so did kevin mccarthy. we'll see if he can recover. again, jordan is much more polarizing among the nose than he was. >> there are those afraid of jim jordan than the jim jordan camp thought. one of the big differences between jim jordan and kevin mccarthy great is that jordan is not afraid to make people angry. kevin mccarthy is afraid to make people angry. he'll pick up the phone and let you know he is angry in certain circumstances, he prefers to give you something you want if you back him. >> jim jordan is not. this shows that people are daring him to do that. that means if he's going to continue with this, it's going to get ugly fast. >> i think we also have to take into account what a surprise this vote was. one republican source said to me, he's no nancy pelosi. this was not the w.h.i.p. count that they expected.

once was set, this is going in the wrong direction. and he thinks he's going to lose more. we don't know that yet but this is not what jim jordan and his allies iyies expected. >> and his mission is entirely different. john, you said kevin mccarthy gave away the store, literally gave ware so much in dealmaking that he's not speaker of the house. that's exactly what he gave away. he gave away the job that he was fighting for in that very first day that he became speaker. here, mccarthy was all about having to woof the gates of the world and right flank. instead of the establishment and insurgent wing of the republican party that had been playing out for years and years that we've seen. this is a totally different thing. this actually looked a little bit more when legislation is being debated, right?

and you need to win over some of the folks whose political interests may not be aligned with the majority and how do you do that, to kasie's point that is not jim jordan's wheelhouse. jim jordan has never operated in that kind of space. so, for a lot of these folks, yes, the fear of a primary can matter. it can dampen their base. >> let's listen. they're gaveling. >> the house will come to order. >> the tallyiers agree on the tallies, the total 432 of which the honorable jim jordan of the state of ohio has received 200 votes, honorable hakeem jeffries from the state of new york has received 212 votes.

the honorable kevin mccarthy of the state of california has received six votes. lee zeldin of the state of new york has received three. steve scalise from the state of louisiana has received seven. the honorable mike garcia of the state of california has received one. honorable tom emmer of the state of minnesota has received one. honorable tom cole of the state of oklahoma has received one. the honorable thomas massey of the state of kentucky has received one. no person having received a majority the whole number of votes cast by surname a speaker has not been elected. pursuant to clause 12 a of rule 1, the chair calls the house in recess, subject to the call of the chair.

>> all right. well, i guess they're not going to call a second vote. good times. joining me now republican congressman from florida, carlos gimenez, congressman jimenez, thank you for joining us, you voted for former speaker mccarthy, you were one of the six to do so. 20 -- well, i guess 19 other republicans joined you in not voting for jim jordan. that was a bigger number than i thought there would be. 20 house republicans voting for someone other than jim jordan. were you surprised? >> yeah, i was surprised. i thought it was going to be like seven and 15. so, when it got to 20, yeah, i was a little surprised it was that high. i always knew, i was pretty sure, just in the circle of people that i've talked to, you know, more than five were going to vote for somebody else. and so, yeah, the fact that it's 20, it's a little surprising,

yeah. >> so some of it obviously was resentment towards the individuals that have forced this mess upon your conference to begin with. the individuals, not only the eight who voted against speaker mccarthy to begin with. but also, the others who have voted against rules. the others who have voted against the government funding bill and the like. but i also sense that there are people in the republican conference that just don't want jim jordan to be the symbol of house republicans. is that your sense as well. >> look, i want kevin mccarthy to be the symbol of us. he was our leader. look, we may have had eight republicans that lit the fire, but 208 democrats provided the gunpowder. so there's nobody without blame here. what we need to do to rectify this, is just go back in time and rectify the injustice that was done two weeks ago. my vote is with kevin mccarthy and has been. i've been very direct. i'm there, i'm still there, i'm

not changing my vote. and i said friday jim jordan has a really steep hill to climb. i don't think that hill has gotten any less difficult. there was 20. i know there's folks in for one round, after that, they're kind of like a free agent. we need to find somebody. i think the operating person is kevin mccarthy, but this conference, first of all, we need to give patrick mchenry more power to open up the peep's house. there's no reason why the people as you house has to stop because of one individual. i'm talking about the future, we have an incapacitated speaker. all of a sudden, that's it? we're not going to do anything for a month, two months? that doesn't make any sense and no organization works that way. we need to rectify that. but eventually, we need to find a speaker, somebody we can rally around. i mo my hope is kevin mccarthy.

we need to rectify that. >> so do you think there's a movement in the house to give patrick mchenry temporary powers so there could be movement, because as you point out this is the first time in the history of this great republic we have not had a speaker. and the legislative branch is just at a standstill when there are two major wars going on right now. and a government that's about to run out of money. >> i want to correct the history, i believe there have been some periods of time without a speaker. i believe there was one place one time we had 100 ballots, and maybe a couple months. but that was in the past. that's something that we need to rectify. yes, i would hope that my fellow republicans see there's a need to give standing powers to the people's business to conduct. i would hope we do that. i know there's resolutions already drafted to do that. i would hope we do that. we as a conference need to get together and find that

individual. my hope is kevin mccarthy, find that individual we can rally around and move forward. >> last question, sir. you said you'd like to get back in time and get rid of that vote to get rid of kevin mccarthy as speaker. obviously, we're out of flux compacitors. there were votes for tom massey, i can't go through all of them, lee zeldin, your former colleague. is there somebody your caucus can rally around? >> yeah, there's somebody there. we have 200 members, very smart, very capable individuals. my hope is maybe the five different caucuses can get together and come up with a name that they can agree to and that we can rally around. i don't want to put a name out there because that's gimenez's

guy, no, i don't want to do that. i'm saying guy could be a gal. you know, maybe make history and have the first female speaker of the house. there are a lot of talented people here to support. right now, my support lies with kevin mccarthy. we'll see where it goes in the future. >> thank you so much. let me throw it to dana bash. joining me is republican ken buck of colorado, he did not vote for congressman jim jordan, instead, voting for tom emmer. my first question do you want tom emmer to be speaker. >> no, i think it would be the worst job in america. mike rowe would not want to do this. >> just to under score that, you voted for somebody because you didn't like them? >> i voted for somebody because i didn't want jim. >> you did not