(IMO) 1) are Dems willing to sacrifice important and achievable legislation (i.e. foreign aid, etc.) in order to screw with the Rs? and 2) is there any suggestion that a Johnson replacement would be an improvement, insofar as Democratic goals and aspirations?

does not get to the finish line first. Then, once it does, I don't think the Dems would be risking anything by preventing a motion to vacate from getting to a vote.

The real question is, what does the majority do? It has been suggested that if a motion to vacate is taken to the next step , that there would be more resignations by more moderate pukes.

Lastly, I do not think the majority is interested in electing a more moderate GOP member.

just make sure it fails. That is what the 'riding to the rescue' verbiage is referencing.

And part 2) .. Precisely! I don't think the Rs (in their current disarray) are capable of electing anything more moderate than Johnson. Which destines any subsequent speaker to ...

Big bonus …m turd green and friends will be put in their appropriate place if they vote to vacate and don’t have the votes! How good for everyone, and I do mean everyone except the crazies