Whip count: Here’s how much trouble Kevin McCarthy is in

It’s a rather fanciful hypothetical meant to persuade the caucus to unite behind McCarthy. But that fact that McCarthy felt the need to lodge this warning shot would seem to say plenty about how imperiled he views his ascent as being.

And that doesn’t come out of nowhere. McCarthy was passed over once before for House speaker, back in 2015, amid a revolt from the party’s right wing. And so far at least five House Republicans have signaled they’re opposing McCarthy for speaker. Given the GOP is likely to have a 222-213 majority, that means McCarthy could be just shy of the majority of votes he needs on Jan. 3 to become speaker.

There are many variables here, including how these members might register their discontent. If they don’t vote for an alternative — if they vote “present,” for instance — their protest votes will effectively only count half as much. A candidate doesn’t need 218 votes, but rather a majority of those casting a ballot for an actual candidate. The death of Rep. A. Donald McEachin (D-Va.) on Monday doesn’t immediately change McCarthy’s math, but if another member is absent or votes present, the threshold would also be lowered. (For more on the entire process, see here.)

It’s worth drilling down on just how firm McCarthy’s opponents are and what their beefs are, given the maneuvering ahead. As things stand, we count precisely five Republicans as indicating they’re against McCarthy — at least for now.

If five of these names are truly committed to actually voting against McCarthy (and all Democrats cast ballots), they could kill McCarthy’s shot at becoming speaker — again.

Here’s how we break it down. And we’ll continue to update this list as new comments come in.

Hard nos (4)

Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.): Biggs is the House Freedom Caucus member who stepped forward to challenge McCarthy when the GOP conference chose its leader and candidate for speaker earlier this month. He got just 31 votes — to McCarthy’s 188 — but he has signaled he’s not done fighting McCarthy. In an op-ed two weeks ago, he wrote that “it is time to make a change at the top of the House of Representatives. I cannot vote for the gentleman from California, Mr. McCarthy.” In case you thought there might be wiggle room, spokesman Matthew Tragesser assured The Washington Post on Tuesday: “He is a hard no. He will not vote for McCarthy under any circumstance.” Biggs this week also estimated that there are currently about 20 “pretty hard nos” on McCarthy.

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.): Gaetz was the first one to come out against McCarthy hard, even long before the House GOP conference chose McCarthy as its leader and nominee for speaker earlier this month. Gaetz said before the conference vote: “I’m not voting for Kevin McCarthy. I’m not voting for him tomorrow. I’m not voting for him on the floor.” Puck News went on to ask Gaetz whether there was any concession that could change his mind, and he reportedly responded with a flat “no.”

Rep. Bob Good (R-Va.): Good had spoken out against McCarthy before the conference vote too. And while we previously saw some wiggle room, he was unequivocal in a recent interview with Stephen K. Bannon. Bannon asked him whether there was anything McCarthy could do to earn his vote, and Good responded, “No, sir, because we can do better. … We have to have a new speaker.” He added that “there are more than enough of us who have resolved not to vote for him.”

Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.): Norman has cited McCarthy’s refusal to adopt the Republican Study Committee’s plan for the budget and has repeatedly said he’s a firm no. “I’m not going to support Kevin McCarthy,” he told Just the News last week. He later told Politico that he is a “hard” no and added of the idea that McCarthy could earn his vote via concessions: “It’s too late right now.” Norman also, very notably, dismissed the idea that he would merely vote “present” or not vote, suggesting he will use all his leverage to attempt to thwart McCarthy.

Very likely no (1)

Rep. Matthew M. Rosendale (R-Mont.): Rosendale has highlighted an issue for many Freedom Caucus types: the idea that the House rules don’t empower the rank and file enough. “We need a leader who can stand up to a Democrat-controlled Senate and President Biden, and unfortunately, that isn’t Kevin McCarthy,” Rosendale said earlier this month. That would seem to leave open the possibility that McCarthy could make the kind of changes Rosendale needs. But Rosendale’s office indicated he’s mostly firm. A spokeswoman told Puck that Rosendale would vote for McCarthy only under “extreme circumstances.” Gaetz dismissed the idea that it would come to that, though, saying that if people think Rosendale or Norman could flip, “Those people don’t know Ralph Norman and Matt Rosendale.”

Possible nos worth watching

This isn’t an exhaustive list, as many haven’t weighed in. But some Freedom Caucus types have indicated they’re not committed to McCarthy.

Rep. Chip Roy (R-Tex.): Some have lumped Roy in with these other five — and he did nominate Biggs at the conference vote — but he hasn’t addressed his Jan. 3 plans as directly. In a lengthy House floor speech after the conference vote, he criticized the Senate GOP for keeping Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on as its leader, but he didn’t address McCarthy as directly. Like Rosendale, he has focused like a laser on changing House rules, but he also called McCarthy a “friend” and said he has “been engaging and will continue to be engaging in good faith.”

Rep. Clay Higgins (R-La.): After the conference vote, Higgins declined to commit to voting for McCarthy and suggested the party doesn’t need a repeat of its years under Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.), whom he criticized for cutting too many deals.

Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.): Perry told The Hill recently, “I’m not making my position known. I do have an open mind, but I also see what’s happening.”

Rep. Andrew S. Clyde (R-Ga.): Appearing on conservative radio last week, he said: “Well, I will tell you that you’ll know that on January the 3rd. We’re still having negotiations.”

Rep. Barry Moore (R-Ala.): He told The Hill he’s not a hard no and added, “We won’t really know until Jan. 3 how things shake out.”