That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons bring us some web forums whereupon we can gather
https://www.octopusoverlords.com/forum/
https://www.octopusoverlords.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=98107
There's just so much that we're guessing at in terms of what's going on with Manchin. One problem I suspect is that going big 'to the people' in terms of making a big public spectacle probably wouldn't help with Manchin.malchior wrote: ↑Fri May 28, 2021 1:38 pm Schumer's play seem to be to run a series of votes through June that McConnell may block in toto or let some slip through tactically - but culminating in a vote on 'For the People'. The idea to probably beat Manchin over the head that his position is untenable. I just read an article that Biden is also trying to de-escalate the whole situation and this dove tails with it. So it is appeasement. It might work but it seems amazingly naïve.
They already know. They don't care. They are all in this together it's stage managed to avoid making the very necessary changes that would upset the donors that they both share. Its politics run like WWE.Smoove_B wrote: ↑Fri May 28, 2021 1:41 pm At some point they (Biden, most Democrats) are going to figure out Manchin (and others in the GOP) have no interest in governance. How they handle that, I don't know but as they continue to pussy foot around and act like compromise or consensus building can actually happen, the GOP continues to run out the clock to get us 2022.
He posted a statement on Twitter. It is currently ratioed at 3 to 1 with people just pretty much screaming at him. the odd thing is recording the statement in the first place. It feels like sick performance art. I can't even figure out who he is trying to convince.Smoove_B wrote: ↑Fri May 28, 2021 3:31 pmAs noted earlier, he's very distressed.
Oh well. He tried. What are you gonna do?
Blackmail. Threats to his job, finances, personal safety, investigations, you name it. We really need to Johnson our way outta this. Nothings off the tableEl Guapo wrote: ↑Fri May 28, 2021 1:33 pm I guess one thing I'm trying to figure out is what the best strategy is to get Manchin on board. One route is hoping he gets frustrated enough to say fuck it, but maybe that never happens. I assume that Schumer et al are appealing to his electoral self-interest....just not sure what the best option is.
And here's the toughest part for Democrats: There's no real argument -- at least no political one -- that they could use to sway Manchin. He is a Democrat in an overwhelmingly Republican state. Serving as a block on the national Democratic agenda is good politics for Manchin. And liberal groups savaging him for doing so simply helps him make the case back home that he isn't just another Washington Democrat.
He really should start thinking about his legacy. Does he want to be remembered for an event like John McCain's thumbs down on the Obamacare vote, or remembered for being spineless like Jeff Flake?Little Raven wrote: ↑Tue Jun 01, 2021 12:52 pmAnd here's the toughest part for Democrats: There's no real argument -- at least no political one -- that they could use to sway Manchin. He is a Democrat in an overwhelmingly Republican state. Serving as a block on the national Democratic agenda is good politics for Manchin. And liberal groups savaging him for doing so simply helps him make the case back home that he isn't just another Washington Democrat.
Part of that is that Manchin's statements on the filibuster and the like have been less equivocal than Sinema's. So I strongly suspect that if the Democrats can get Manchin on board, then Sinema will follow.
Also, it's important to note that Manchin and Sinema are the designated fall guys for the DNC on this issue. It actively helps their re-election chances to take a pro-filibuster stance, so they're generally happy to take the flak.
The Democrats only have 50 votes. There's no threshold they can lower it to that will let them move legislation without Republican support that does not kill it outright.
They don't need to lower the threshold. They just need to change filibuster applicability like they did for SCOTUS nominations. A simple majority is all they need to 'modify/reform' the filibuster for this purpose.Little Raven wrote: ↑Tue Jun 01, 2021 3:36 pmThe Democrats only have 50 votes. There's no threshold they can lower it to that will let them move legislation without Republican support that does not kill it outright.
WaPo wrote:Now, in a striking intervention, more than 100 scholars of democracy have signed a new public statement of principles that seeks to make the stakes unambiguously, jarringly clear: On the line is nothing less than the future of our democracy itself.
“Our entire democracy is now at risk,” the scholars write in the statement, which I obtained before its release. “History will judge what we do at this moment.”
And these scholars underscore the crucial point: Our democracy’s long-term viability might depend on whether Democrats reform or kill the filibuster to pass sweeping voting rights protections.
“We urge members of Congress to do whatever is necessary — including suspending the filibuster — in order to pass national voting and election administration standards,” the scholars write, in a reference to the voting rights protections enshrined in the For the People Act, which passed the House and is before the Senate.
What’s striking is that the statement is signed by scholars who specialize in democratic breakdown, such as Pippa Norris, Daniel Ziblatt and Steven Levitsky. Other well-known names include Francis Fukuyama and Jacob Hacker.
“We wanted to create a strong statement from a wide range of scholars, including many who have studied democratic backsliding, to make it clear that democracy in America is genuinely under threat,” Lee Drutman, senior fellow at New America and a leading organizer of the letter, told me.
“The playbook that the Republican Party is executing at the state and national levels is very much consistent with actions taken by illiberal, anti-democratic, anti-pluralist parties in other democracies that have slipped away from free and fair elections,” Drutman continued.
Yeah, this is what's maddening with Manchin. He can loudly proclaim the majesty of the filibuster, while reforming it to exempt a couple key areas where things really need to pass (like voting protection). He gets to preserve the majesty of the Senate, while allowing things to pass in areas where he wants them to pass. But (so far at least) he's not even doing that.malchior wrote: ↑Tue Jun 01, 2021 4:13 pmThey don't need to lower the threshold. They just need to change filibuster applicability like they did for SCOTUS nominations. A simple majority is all they need to 'modify/reform' the filibuster for this purpose.Little Raven wrote: ↑Tue Jun 01, 2021 3:36 pmThe Democrats only have 50 votes. There's no threshold they can lower it to that will let them move legislation without Republican support that does not kill it outright.
Well the obvious reason is he doesn't want them to pass or doesn't take the risk seriously. There are hundreds of experts imploring him to act. Either he is corrupt, malovolent, or an idiot. There is no flattering case for the guy.
Indeed. Shared here:Little Raven wrote: ↑Tue Jun 01, 2021 3:16 pm If Manchin and Sinema were replaced tomorrow by AOC clones, there would suddenly be another 2 or possibly 3 Democratic Senators with 'reservations' about ending the filibuster. The Democrats are a very wide party - they never vote in lockstep the way the GOP does.
“A lot of members are happy Joe Manchin is the tip of the spear, getting shot at every day,” a Democratic aide told The Daily Beast. “Seven or eight of them stand behind him.”
Uh huh. I can see it now - "The filibuster shall not apply to any legislation that the Democrats think is important, but SHALL still apply to all other legislation."
Well yeah. They're all in denial or in on it.Little Raven wrote: ↑Tue Jun 01, 2021 4:55 pmI think the big disconnect here is that most liberals assume that McConnell will kill the filibuster the first chance he gets anyway, so why bother preserving it? But I think holdout Democratic Senators believe McConnell will never let the filibuster die on his watch, although he will ruthless exploit it when/if the Democrats kill it.
Lots of people believe that. Not because they think McConnell is a great person or anything, but because they believe that 9 times out of 10, the filibuster serves his interests, and McConnell is smart enough to play the numbers.
McConnell wants the judges to do the GOP'S legislation from the bench. And that's already happening. Even if the dems pass, say, HR1, the idea is that it will be crippled.Little Raven wrote:Lots of people believe that. Not because they think McConnell is a great person or anything, but because they believe that 9 times out of 10, the filibuster serves his interests, and McConnell is smart enough to play the numbers.
Remember, whatever McConnell is, he is NOT a Trumper. Trumpers want to DO things. (terrible things, but things) McConnell belongs to the sect of the Republican Party that basically wants to keep things as they are. The filibuster is fantastic tool for that purpose, and one that he will gleefully wield against reactionary Republicans and Democrats alike. He will never allow it to expire on his watch.
Or at least, that's what a lot of people who have worked with McConnell for decades think.
Right - the filibuster as currently structured works just fine for McConnell's interests. He can do a lot of what he cares the most about (confirm judges + upper income tax cuts + deregulation) through reconciliation and other filibuster exceptions, while Democrats can't (since you can't pass new regulations as a general rule through reconciliation processes). Plus since the Senate is tilted in the GOP's favor, they're almost always going to have at least 41 Senators, and it will be easier for them to get to 60 than Democrats.Pyperkub wrote: ↑Tue Jun 01, 2021 8:48 pmMcConnell wants the judges to do the GOP'S legislation from the bench. And that's already happening. Even if the dems pass, say, HR1, the idea is that it will be crippled.Little Raven wrote:Lots of people believe that. Not because they think McConnell is a great person or anything, but because they believe that 9 times out of 10, the filibuster serves his interests, and McConnell is smart enough to play the numbers.
Remember, whatever McConnell is, he is NOT a Trumper. Trumpers want to DO things. (terrible things, but things) McConnell belongs to the sect of the Republican Party that basically wants to keep things as they are. The filibuster is fantastic tool for that purpose, and one that he will gleefully wield against reactionary Republicans and Democrats alike. He will never allow it to expire on his watch.
Or at least, that's what a lot of people who have worked with McConnell for decades think.
Right and that's the point. McConnell wants it for specific purposes. If a new need arises, he'd reform around it as needed. And that is essentially why we'd tell Democrats they should. It might be a race to the realpolitik bottom but it is go time now.El Guapo wrote: ↑Wed Jun 02, 2021 11:19 amRight - the filibuster as currently structured works just fine for McConnell's interests. He can do a lot of what he cares the most about (confirm judges + upper income tax cuts + deregulation) through reconciliation and other filibuster exceptions, while Democrats can't (since you can't pass new regulations as a general rule through reconciliation processes). Plus since the Senate is tilted in the GOP's favor, they're almost always going to have at least 41 Senators, and it will be easier for them to get to 60 than Democrats.Pyperkub wrote: ↑Tue Jun 01, 2021 8:48 pmMcConnell wants the judges to do the GOP'S legislation from the bench. And that's already happening. Even if the dems pass, say, HR1, the idea is that it will be crippled.Little Raven wrote:Lots of people believe that. Not because they think McConnell is a great person or anything, but because they believe that 9 times out of 10, the filibuster serves his interests, and McConnell is smart enough to play the numbers.
Remember, whatever McConnell is, he is NOT a Trumper. Trumpers want to DO things. (terrible things, but things) McConnell belongs to the sect of the Republican Party that basically wants to keep things as they are. The filibuster is fantastic tool for that purpose, and one that he will gleefully wield against reactionary Republicans and Democrats alike. He will never allow it to expire on his watch.
Or at least, that's what a lot of people who have worked with McConnell for decades think.
So yeah, McConnell will probably stick with the filibuster as currently written. That's a reason to repeal it (or gut it), not to stick with it.
To be fair to the Founders, a great many of them would have said "Of COURSE this system will break down if you let EVERYONE vote. Most people are idiots."YellowKing wrote: ↑Wed Jun 02, 2021 11:34 amFounding Fathers: "And the stability of the system shall be maintained through the decency and moral integrity of the American people."
What's this FF quote from? I'm not familiar with it, and (per Starship Troopers) I want to know moreYellowKing wrote: ↑Wed Jun 02, 2021 11:34 am Founding Fathers: "And the stability of the system shall be maintained through the decency and moral integrity of the American people."
Me in 2021: "Oh you sweet summer child...."
This. They restricted the vote on purpose. The problem's inherent there in suppressing representation don't align with modern theories on electoral legitimacy. We expanded the franchise without any real controls on where that'd go.Little Raven wrote: ↑Wed Jun 02, 2021 11:45 amTo be fair to the Founders, a great many of them would have said "Of COURSE this system will break down if you let EVERYONE vote. Most people are idiots."YellowKing wrote: ↑Wed Jun 02, 2021 11:34 amFounding Fathers: "And the stability of the system shall be maintained through the decency and moral integrity of the American people."