House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-SC) on Sunday acknowledged that voting rights bills remain ill-fated in the Senate, but that he hasn’t lost hope on their passage, following Sens. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) and Joe Manchin (D-WV) reiterating their loyalty to the filibuster last week as Democrats looked to change Senate rules to push their election reform legislation through the evenly-split chamber.
I would love to know what those in the trenches are thinking. Because the minute the mikes are stuck in the faces of those who are having fun with this, then the drama and Performative Art start.
I don’t follow this drama like some, but when there was a pause after the WH meeting that night (after the horrible Sinema address to the Senate) with no quotes-to-hate-on, I looked at that as substantially more adult than the mikes stuck in either delinquent Senator’s face
I’d be thrilled if Clyburn and others turned their attention to a “Jim Crow test” for the GOP “centrists” in the Senate. Why not focus on Romney, Collins, etc. and challenge them to support voting rights rather than focus on Democrats who disagree about a procedural issue? Whatever the actual odds of persuading these groups, the messaging is completely murky right now, with the GOP effectively skating from its responsibility for gridlock.
Take em at face value. Sinemy is a one term sellout who believes she has only 11 more months to accumulate set for life favors, and Manchination is planning on retiring in 2024 to manage his family’s fossil fuel wealth.
Sinema doesn’t like to explain her reasoning on much of anything. Manchin thinks he can’t explain certain things to his voting base. It is not surprising, therefore, that they don’t understand the social good of requiring the minority in the Senate to at least defend in public their opposition to a bill the majority supports in a “talking filibuster.” Neither politician likes to think through an issue and articulate their positions in a persuasive way, probably because they don’t and they can’t.
First of all, someone like Angus King should stand up in the Senate and review the origin of the Filibuster: It began because of a supermajority that Dems held, and gave the minority a voice in legislation. It should not even be in use when they are 50-50. because it gives the minority (ie: the less popular views) unreasonable power over the Senate.
Secondly, He should mention that although Democrats usually win the popular vote, they are often restrained from passing the very laws they were elected to do by arcane rules, which are out of touch with the majority of people. Those who gave Dems the majority in Congress and the Presidency complain because they don’t see everything happening that they want. They say they won’t vote next time, or will vote 3rd party, or something else as useless.
ALL Democrats need to understand that this is going to take more than 1, 2, or 3 years of support to get stuff done. Put the blame where it belongs: with the recalcitrant and anti-governing GOP. Get them out! Just list the stuff that they do to benefit all but regular, normal people, and maybe Dems will learn that to get what they want they need to take the long view. (and forget about Sinema and Manchin: the only reason they are Dems is so they will get constant attention)
Cashing out is not a bad strategy. Moreover, in Sinema’s case, does not appear to be part of her original plan. It’s a crime of opportunity. The risk after leaving such a trail of legislative wreckage and self-dealing is that they could be seen a looters from here on out.
Nobody runs on the platform of “imma sell you out”. But yeah, without the tied senate this wouldn’t be possible. So in the spirit of our resident eeyores, her and manchination clearly are the democrats’ fault, especially stacey abrahms.
Did Obama’s, LBJ’s, Ford’s, Carter’s, Bush 1’s, JFK’s?, even Reagan’s (Alzheimers among other things.). Seems to me, Ezra’s claim is quite ordinary in nature.
Really? Did you expect the GOP to cooperate in any way? Did you think that McConnell would ever say, “vote you conscience?” It’s true that Biden campaigned on the idea that he could use his reasonableness to get stuff done. It was his hope, and it should have been true to an extent.
Then there all the things that critics go after, as though things would have been so much better if trump were not TFG: Leaving Afghanistan, getting vaccines out to every single person who is smart enough to want one (not punishing the states that aren’t on his side), getting 2 new variants of Covid, not getting Build Back Batter through (so far), Russia stirring up war. threats, and on and on.
Only the President’s staff mentions the many positives that he has achieved. It doesn’t make Dems or the media look biased to do that so why don’t they? The expectations for trump were so negative that when he achieved rotten things, it was expected, so no problem, right? Wrong!
Tell me this: What Presidency ever HAS turned out as planned?
Democrats have a huge personality flaw…too many are highly judgmental fair-weather-friends.
