Looking for a savior, House Republicans are clamoring for Paul Ryan to be their next speaker. But just two years ago, when the young Wisconsin conservative asked for his colleagues' help to pass a bipartisan budget deal, 62 of them walked away.

It was December 2013, and the nation had already endured a costly two-week government shutdown two months earlier. As the House Budget Committee chairman, Ryan had contributed to the crisis by fostering unrealistic expectations on the right. But he was back before the House, with a path forward for Republicans that avoided new taxes and promised some stability in the appropriations process.

“This first step is designed to help improve people’s lives. It is designed to make this government work at a basic functioning level, and by passing this, we will reduce the deficit,” he told the members. “We came here to get something done. We always lock horns. We always argue. We never agree. I think it is about time, for once in a long time, we find common ground and agree. That is what this bill does, and that is what I ask my colleagues to consider.”

Ryan didn’t fail: He got 169 Republican votes, more than enough together with 163 Democrats. But the fact that so many in the GOP still voted "no" is a bit of history worth revisiting in light of the turmoil now.

Two points stand out most. First, whether it is Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) or a future Speaker Ryan, House Republicans are best understood as a coalition government of two parties, not just one.

Second, in these circumstances, no Republican speaker can really govern without being willing to be a speaker for the entire House, not just the GOP. Old concepts of party loyalty are almost outdated given the growing influence of outside groups on the right, armed with money and contributing to the internal discord. And the speakership demands both the clarity of vision to delineate Republican principles and the fortitude to aggressively reach out for Democratic votes.

Boehner illustrated this best when he seized the initiative in March and assembled a bipartisan coalition to resolve the perennial problem of reimbursements for Medicare physicians. He made compromises to get needed Democratic help, but also got what he hopes will be real entitlement savings, long sought by the GOP and important to the future viability of the health care program.

As the sitting speaker, the Ohio Republican was able to cut this bargain, and for all the grumbling on the right, remained secure in his position for the remainder of this Congress. Democrats were not about to jump into what was seen as an internal Republican struggle over Boehner’s future. The very fact that the GOP Conference remains so split today on Boehner’s successor suggests he was capable of surviving for much longer in this Congress if he chose.

Instead, Boehner threw in the towel and, in doing so, made the speakership weaker for the GOP, not stronger.

Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), who might never have been up to the task, opted out last week. Even before the Boehner downgrade, Ryan was reluctant to take the job, given the burden on his family and the power he enjoys already as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee.

If Ryan chooses now to run for speaker, he would bring considerable assets. Young, handsome, a Midwest conservative Catholic, he outwardly resembles Boehner himself when the speaker first won his seat in Ohio in 1990. But where it took Boehner 20 years to get the gavel, Ryan is still just 45 — a more articulate, self-described policy wonk who has walked the national stage already as his party’s vice presidential nominee.

Ryan would be a flashier trade-in, to be sure, for Republicans. But as his experience in 2013 showed, Ryan would still face the same divisions that Boehner did. And for all his policy smarts, 2013 showed an opportunistic side of Ryan, his critics say. For this was a chairman so educated in issues but then promoting unrealistic goals just to stay current with the conservative young guns he helped to foster.

Following on President Barack Obama’s reelection, that year was a roller coaster for the party. The GOP went hard right to pass a March budget that defied the White House by promising large, unspecified cuts from programs for the poor to help shore up defense spending. Ryan’s 10-year path to a surplus also assumed repeal of Obama’s signature health care reform. But when the whole appropriations process collapsed on the House floor in July, he and Boehner were left with no legislative vehicle to attempt this in regular order.

As a result, the leadership was backed into a corner where it felt pressured from the right to use a governmentwide continuing resolution, or CR, to defund Obamacare. The result was the shutdown, after which Ryan was tasked to work with his Senate counterpart, Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), to find some compromise on spending levels.

“We in Congress, Democrats and Republicans, would like to get back to the business of exercising the power of the purse, exercising our constitutional duties by stating priorities,” Ryan said at the time. “If you are just doing CRs all the time, we’re not doing that.”

“I want to get something done that is achievable. I don’t want to keep talking grand bargains that never happen. I want to see where we can get something done that is achievable and go for that.”

In fact, the two-year package he negotiated with Murray did much of that. In fiscal 2014 and 2015, the government was funded in a more orderly fashion and, while never getting all they wanted, Republicans used the appropriations process to impose their priorities and policy riders.

But Ryan lost support inside his divided party. In March 2013, the GOP had split 221-10 in favor of his doomed budget plan. On his more lasting compromise in December, the split was 169-62.

If Ryan were to become speaker, the same budget issues will be there to greet him almost immediately, since his compromise with Murray has run its course. But so will the basic math inside the Republican Conference.