Skip to content

Give Manchin and Sinema a Break

Hum de hum. It's Saturday so let's piss everyone off.

For starters, I will stipulate up front that I mostly disagree with everything that Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema have demanded in order to win their votes for the American Rescue Plan. (The only exception is the $15 minimum wage, which I'm mildly against since I think it ought to be more like $12 or so.)

But.

Everyone knew this was coming. All the wise heads on Twitter and elsewhere have spent the past couple of months warning everyone that Democrats have precisely 50 senators and that means legislation has to satisfy the 50th most liberal Democrat. There's no way the coronavirus bill was going to be a Bernie Sanders wet dream. What's more, Joe Biden ran explicitly as a fairly moderate guy, and there's no reason to expect him to govern otherwise.

Under the circumstances, we did pretty damn well! A $1.9 trillion bill, regardless of the tweaks that Manchin demanded, is a helluva thing—especially given its generally strong focus on lower incomes. And overall, Biden has turned out to be considerably more progressive than we expected.

And yet, an awful lot of progressives have insisted on absolutely reaming Manchin and Sinema for their (admittedly sometimes performative) objections to the bill. We did the same thing to Susan Collins last year, and it sort of looks like we might be planning to do it to Lisa Murkowski sometime soon.

This is insane. These folks just aren't super progressive and we all know it. They are potential allies in certain cases, and the best way to keep them that way is to persuade them to join us, not to piss them off every time they disappoint us. Politics aside, human nature is what it is: If you attack someone viciously, they are more likely to oppose you in the future because they hate your guts.

So for chrissake, knock it off. Throw things at the TV set if you must, and complain all you like in private. In public, though, keep the complaints relatively mild, and couple them with hopes that we can win their votes in the future. I fully understand how galling this seems, but if you want to win, this is the one of the prices you have to pay.

105 thoughts on “Give Manchin and Sinema a Break

  1. MontyTheClipArtMongoose

    Looking at Kyrsten Sinema's background (ex-Republican, ex-Mormon, bisexual wig enthusiast), she has the potential to be the next Tulsi Gabbard (ex-Republican, putative ex-cultist, Assad fetishist Accutane enthusiast), an unlikely Democrat pushed ever further to the margins & eventually a John Donne defying isolate unto oneself like Droopy Dogg Joe Liebermann. We cannot let this happen again. If the Democrats want to offer as clear a big tent image as claimed, there has to be as much space for Sinema, who is not as problematic as either Droopy or Tulsi, as Bernie Sanders. (Also more problematic than Sinema.)

    If, on the other hand, those with the Brand New Congress & #OurRevolution movements & their elected allies El Escuadron Radical de Amigas No Blancas de los Trustifarianos, attack Sinema too hard, she'll as likely turn into post-Sanders Institute Gabbard as anything.

    (As to Manchin, he is the Appalachian Fritz Hollings: the last of his kind (Retitement Age White Democrat in the South). Over time, more Old South/Monochromatic Piedmont spots will be taken up by those a bit more like their Tidal Plain cousins like Tim Kaine & his apprentice Jon Ossoff, but for now, he's the best we've got.)

    1. MontyTheClipArtMongoose

      That reminds me: the Fauxgressive Left had no issue with someone at least as conservative as Sinema in the person of Tulsi Gabbard from c. 2014-20, but Sinema is a bridge too far. I have to think it's because the Yung Guevaristas in the Ejercito Sandernista de Liberacion Individual del Trabajo find commonground in Tulsi's selective application of Paleoconservative noninterventionism & embrace of Ron Paul & Donald Trump style imputation of America being at least as much a problematic actor as the country's rivals, but that seems mean. (Correct, but mean.)

      Anyway, could just be even more superficial than that, in that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez & Tulsi Gabbard hate Hillary Climpton more than they hate preexisting conditions exclusions. (If they even hate rescission at all.)

    2. skeptonomist

      Manchin was elected in West Virginia, which went 2:1 for Trump and over 70% for the other (Republican) Senator. Could any of his critics get elected as a Democrat in West Virginia? He must have some idea what he has to do to stay elected. And if he is not elected, Republicans may get their majority back - there is nothing now indicating a big victory for Democrats in the next few elections. But as a matter of fact in a state this Republican he may actually be helped by criticism from Democrats and the liberal media - the Republican voters presumably like people who defy Democrats. Democrats in West Virginia may or may not want someone more liberal, but their only real choice is Manchin or a Republican who would have voted against the stimulus bill.

      1. Mitch Guthman

        What you say would make a lot more sense politically if any of the votes Manchin's being asked to take would be politically difficult in West Virginia. But Biden's COVID recovery package and the $15 minimum wage poll very positively in West Virginia. So what was the logic behind the performative centrism on votes which should've been easy for him and which might actually come back to bite him in the ass?

        1. kenalovell

          He gets no recognition from opposing measures which need 60 votes to pass. By making a fuss about a couple of peripheral matters in this bill, he got lots of media attention to reinforce his image as the centrist-who-is-not-afraid-to-defy-the-leftists. Hardly anyone will remember or care in '24 what the votes were about when he says he stands up for conservatives when necessary.

          1. Mitch Guthman

            That’s an interesting possibility. Alternatively, if Manchin is an asshole and gratuitously hurts innocent people with his overweening performative centrism on easy votes for immensely popular stuff, what makes you think he’s going to stick his neck out on things that might legitimately generate some opposition in West Virginia?

            Manchin has given interviews in which he’s all but announced his opposition to the entire Democratic platform. I think we’re stuck with him until we can run him out of politics and ruin his post-senate lobbying ca, too. But it would be a mistake to continually make excuses for him. If we lose in 2022 because of him, we need to make an example of him.

      2. NealB

        This is belabored. Manchin's not up for re-election until 2024, IIRC, and by then, if he's as sensible as you say in general, he'll retire by then. Democrats need a plan B in West Virginia either way.

        1. Jasper_in_Boston

          Why would it be "sensible" for him to retire? Maybe he likes being in the Senate. It's a cushy, prestigious job, and the pay doesn't suck. It's no doubt a possibility he could lose a reelection bid. West Virginia's pretty red, after all. But he might win! He seems to know what he's doing.

          I personally hope he serves until the 2030s. He's far better than a Republican. (Sorry, he is; all 50 GOP senators voted against the president's relief bill).

    3. MontyTheClipArtMongoose

      *Retirement Age NOT Retitement... though a fleftist would turn that into a joke on El Tio Demento, Jose de MBNA having so many facelifts.

    4. HokieAnnie

      Tim Kaine was not raised in Virginia, he was born in the Midwest raised in a devout Catholic family. He met his wife while at Harvard Law School and they decided to move to her hometown instead of his after graduation, Mrs. Kaine is the daughter of a beloved Republican former governor (circa 1970s) back when there were moderate Republicans in Virginia. Senator Mark Warner grew up in Connecticut but came down to the DC area to go to college and stayed.

      Senators Kaine and Warner are examples of modern Virginia - a ton of folks moved from the Midwest and Northeast into Virginia from the 1960s through today, along with immigrants from all parts of Asia and the America. At this point the newcomers and their children outnumber the old timers.

    5. KenSchulz

      (Sinema was never a Republican; she was a Green before becoming a Democrat; just in case anyone forgot that Clippy is a snarkmeister)

    1. Mitch Guthman

      Doesn't that raise the question of why those individuals are in politics? None of them stand for anything. None of them believe in anything beyond following their own star. Apparently, one can be a senator with an empty space where most people have their hearts.

      But Manchin can not be happy know that most of his party's membership and more than a few of its leadership would happily take the opportunity to be rid of him. I think most Democrats in West Virginia would prefer to be rid of him and all it takes is one bad primary campaign and his out of politics (and lucrative post Senate lobbying) forever. Uneasy lies the head that wears a senatorial laurel leaf.

      1. kennethalmquist

        The only people who would be happy to be rid of Manchin are people who would be happy to see a $650 million COVID relief bill rather than the $1.9 billion bill that actually passed. That would mean, among other things, a really slow economic recovery from the effects of the pandemic.

        If you are not aware, West Virginia is a solidly red state. Republicans hold all statewide offices and majorities in both houses of the state legislature. At the national level, all three Representatives are Republican, as is one Senator. Unless something happens to turn West Virginia blue, or at least purple, when Manchin leaves the scene both West Virginia Senators will be Republican.

        1. Mitch Guthman

          As I say, that’s the conundrum. We need Manchin at the moment because without him there wouldn’t be any COVID-19 relief bill at all. On the other hand, pandering to him greatly reduces the likelihood that the Democrats will be able to hold onto the Congress in 2022.

          And it becomes even more of an uphill battle in 2024, particularly since Manchin has made it clear that he intends to protect Republican voter suppression efforts from congressional legislation. In a sense, weakening the Democratic Party prevents us from increasing our senate majority which in turn keeps Manchin as the indispensable man. So, again, it’s a conundrum but if we lose the senate in 2022 we should consider a vendetta against Manchin as an integral part of building back better.

          But I’m also curious why telling voters in West Virginia that he’d successfully reduced the amount of aid they’ll receive is something that Manchin needed to do politically.

  2. S1AMER

    You gotta work with what you got, whether you've a baseball manager trying to win games with a weak bullpen, or a Congressional leader trying to hold together a very ideologically different bunch of people in order to pass legislation.

    Until we can figure out how to overcome all the additional gerrymandering and voter suppression that's coming soon to many states, and then elect more Democrats across the land, the Manchins and the Sinemas and the Sanderses and the AOCs will always be with us, annoying other Democrats and frustrating efforts to pass legislation.

    So: (1) It's always dumb to burn bridges to those on the fringes of the party, in case we can occasionally get them to vote along with others to pass at least some legislation. And (2) Yeah, we gotta work a lot harder to elect "better Democrats" in a lot of places.

    1. MontyTheClipArtMongoose

      Yup.

      I just looked up the NJ governor's race. Phil Murphy is replacement level politico, but better than the goomba I saw on the GOP side. (& also better than Joe Piscopo, another failed star who has found a second celebrish life as a MAGA mouthpiece, & might run for the GOP nom as well.)

      Plan to give $25 to his campaign this weekend. But also another 25 to VA Lt Gov candidate Hala Ayala, who runs closer to a Sandernista than my usual Dem picks, but also seems more electable than her Conmmonwealth ideologic cousin Tom Perriello*. (My VA Gov pick is Jennifer Mc Clellan, but Carroll Foy would be alright. Just no Fairfax.)

      *In many ways, Perriello is as much a Congressional electoral failure as Jon Ossoff, & possibly more an Executive office electoral failure than Pete Buttigieg, yet no one at 538 ever calls Perriello an unequivocally TERRIBLE CANDIDATE, nor does anyone in #OurRevolution call him a Middle Management Cypher.

      It's funny that way.

      1. MontyTheClipArtMongoose

        *Commonwealth, NOT Conmmonwealth... though Perriello, ex-Obama regime functionary at HHS turned Obama critic from the fleft, does have the conman's skill for glibness that we also see in ex-Obama regime functionary turned critic from the fleft, Ro Khanna.

        What I am saying is Tom & Ro & Alexandria & Rachida & Ihlan & Pramila & Jamaal & Brent & Kara & Bernie & Jane O'Meara & Talcum X, etc., are playing the Yung Indolents in their donor class for suckers. (Fools & money soon separated, & all that.)

        1. HokieAnnie

          Oh Perriello worked at Dept of State under John Kerry, he tried to run to the left of Ralph Northam in 2017 but lost the nomination to Dr. Northam. It's really a shame that Virginia stupidly limits governors to one term and more stupid that there's not the support to fix that yet.

          1. MontyTheClipArtMongoose

            Thanks for the correction.

            I knew Tommy P was a disenchanted Obama regime official, but forgot which department.

      2. HokieAnnie

        My neighbor Justin Fairfax (yes really!) is done in VA politics. Is that fair? Hard to say because the accusations against him can't be proven or disproven nor have any addition women come forward to accuse him of sexual misconduct. But polling is showing that he's trailing behind nearly every other candidate save for the socialist guy from Manassas, VA

        A fascinating development is Governor Northam endorsing a new guy instead of the incumbent Mark Herring for the AG post. Is he going to endorse someone other than Terry McAulliffe for Governor or is he going to not endorse anyone and support the eventual primary winner?

        1. MontyTheClipArtMongoose

          Next door neighbor or just same residential area?

          I lived three blocks from Scott Walker when he was Milwaukee County Executive & later Governor of Wisconsin, but either way, you should have me beat.

      1. jamesepowell

        If the Democratic PTB do not make sure AOC stays in congress, they are making a very big mistake. Sure, she says annoying things from time to time, but she wasn't holding up the COVID bill to make it worse.

        We have a generation of voters only now forming political connections. They like her more than they like anyone else in the Democratic Party.

          1. HokieAnnie

            I think AOC is a savvy politician not just a rabblerouser. It would be a pity if NY A-holes tried to shiv her in the redistricting.

    2. Mitch Guthman

      At the same time, though, it's important to remember that neither of these individuals would vote for any of the Democratic priorities (and Manchin, in particular, has broadly hinted that he opposes all of them) if they didn't need the support of Democratic voters and feared losing that support if they pushed too hard.

      If they ever lose that fear, they'll both vote with the Republicans on everything. Al Capone once said, “You can get more with a kind word and a gun than with just a kind word". I agree it's a delicate balance but both of these senators need to totally believe that if they stray too far from the reservation, they'll be dumped regardless of the costs.

  3. clawback

    Trying to imagine a world in which the opposite phenomenon exists. Republicans get mad at Mike Pence, criticize him or perhaps attempt to murder him, and he becomes a Democrat because Republicans were mean to him.

    In any case, I imagine most of us will just go ahead and continue to write critical blog comments about idiocy by Democrats when appropriate rather than treating them with kid gloves.

    1. MontyTheClipArtMongoose

      Christmas in Columbus with Greg & Mike needs to be a Vincent Gallo movie. (The unofficial sequel to Buffalo 66.)

    2. MontyTheClipArtMongoose

      Were a long way from seeing a Jim Jeffords* in either party anytime soon, soonish, or away.

      *Fun Jim Jeffords adjacent fact: Patrick Leahy is the only US Senator from Vermont elected as a Democrat in the last 100 years. (Or some such.)

      Bernie doesn't count. He's an I.

  4. ColoradoCat

    There is a great article on The Atlantic this morning on what makes Joe Manchin tick. I found it helpful in not being so disappointed in some of his votes.

  5. Jasper_in_Boston

    ^^^So for chrissake, knock it off. Throw things at the TV set if you must, and complain all you like in private. In public, though, keep the complaints relatively mild^^^

    Kevin's entirely wrong about this. Manchin and Sinema welcome lefty kvetching. That's the whole point of their schtick: to encourage this sort of thing. When you're being b-slapped by the libs, it makes your "mavricky" persona credible. Which is the central goal of the image management efforts.

    (We'll see if it pays off for newbie Sinema, but Manchin knows a lot better than you or I about winning state-wide office as a Democrat in a very red state).

    1. HokieAnnie

      Sinema is getting hammered not so much for her actual vote but for her childish mannerisms as she was voting (Thumbs down gesture a la John Cain). Also she looks ridiculous. It wouldn't shock me if she was primaried in the next cycle by a candidate with a more mainstream appearance.

        1. MontyTheClipArtMongoose

          8/50=1/3?

          I think you need to redo your study of proportions.

          16% isn't even the Keyes Konstant, let alone 1/3.

    1. KenSchulz

      It’s hard to tell. I think some of the Nays were institutionalists who resisted overruling the parliamentarian. Manchin and Sinema were the only Democrats to publicly voice opposition to $15. Some Republicans, I think, claim to want the states to set locally-appropriate minima. A number of blue and purple states have already raised their minimum wages, giving cover to their Congresspersons.

  6. rorywohl

    "These folks just aren't super progressive and we all know it. They are potential allies in certain cases, and the best way to keep them that way is to persuade them to join us, not to piss them off every time they disappoint us."

    Oh, Kevin, stop being so reasonable and practical. You know we Democrats are the party of, "Well, if it can't be exactly my way, I'm taking my ball and going home."

    1. MontyTheClipArtMongoose

      More of this Reasonable Kevin Drum & less of the Meet the GOP on Election Reform Halfway by Accepting Their False Premises of Democrat Minority Voter Impersonation as True Reasonable Kevin Drum.

    2. laughingcats

      As someone in Minnesota, I still miss Al Franken. Dems cannot pursue their highest standard policies to the point of driving out representatives who are acting for common folks like me instead of bowing to some ideal perfection that is and always will be unattainable in the real world. Yes, I don't like either of them, but there is not a single Republican who is supporting bills that I think will make a difference to non corporate entities.

  7. KenSchulz

    Those of you who think this actually helps Manchin and Sinema in their home states - I hope you are right, because we are surely better off with two Senators who will usually vote for Democratic initiatives, than two R’s who never would. Still, I think this episode demonstrates why progressives will get more of what they want with the moderate Biden in the White House than they would have gotten from Sanders. Sanders managed to get himself on the wrong side of both the Blue Dogs and the institutionalists, who resisted voting to overrule the parliamentarian.
    I still think the route to $15 is through the infrastructure bill; it’s the closest thing to a must-pass until the next appropriations cycle.
    The increase to $15 was always going to be gradual. If I were writing the bill, I would condition the step increases to reductions in the unemployment rate. That would counter the objection that ‘it will be a job-killer!’ Say, every half-percentage point drop in U3 or U6 bumps the rate another buck, with a start at $11 or $12. Assuming the $1.88T passes, and the vaccines pan out, declining unemployment is darn near certain.

    1. Midgard

      Again, this is capitalism. You have to play by their rules. A 15 dollar Min wage by 2025 simply is not possible in today's climate. This isn't the generation after the great depression nor the cold war fears that helped spur fears of a labor uprising. Look at union membership before the Great Depression and after. Capitalist liquidation is great for anti-capitalism. It spurs it. When I tried to expose Ron Paul and Lew Rockwell back in the 00's(paternal jewish ancestry for both men) I used pro-white anti-capitalism as a bully pulpit in my rebellion and you know what they told me: "we have "you" by the collar". As long as enough "pale faces" think they invented capitalism and liberal democracy, you won't get anywhere. So, I said, lets bring back the gold standard and let the system die........they responded it would never happen and the system would be bailed out everything until it couldn't. Capitalism needs multipliers based around technology to grow. If technology wasn't growing enough to make long term profit, the system will choke on debt. Well, here we are.

      15$ by 25 doesn't kill the system, but starts leaking profit. Which means higher prices. Which means higher nominal rates. Debt is debt. Capitalism is the debt based system invented by converts to Judaism in Italia starting around 800-900 fully organized into a religion by 1200. They spread throughout Latin Europe and Eastern Europe by 1700. The Pope got into it quickly. By the black death, the Monarchies needed it to stabilize society. The first "kicking of the can". By the 1600's the aristocracy was leaving political world for the world of money and became the first capitalists. They knew where modern power is from.

    2. MontyTheClipArtMongoose

      Agreed.

      & the job killer argument is what the AZ & WV GOP would have used to kill Sinema's & Manchin's support with the electorate. The desert flats methheads & holler methheads would have been told, repeatedly, that Democrat Paedophile Liberals insisting on paying Black burgerflippers in Detroit, Mexican burrito folders in Los Angeles, & Chinese wok stars in Seattle 15 dollars to do menial jobs is why the Walmart distribution center closed in Gilbert or the parts plant in Parkersburg moved to Thailand.

  8. Mitch Guthman

    To say that Manchin and Sinema should be given a pass for purely performative centrist posturing because they’re potential allies is sort of begging the question.

    If they are potential allies, it's only because they recognize that they probably cannot keep their senate seats without significant Democratic support and then only to the extent that they greatly fear losing that support. So the question is, if there’s no circumstances under which they have to earn the support of Democrats, what’s the incentive to cooperate?

    A related point is that nobody was demanding that they take a hard vote in terms of reelection. For both of them, this was purely performative centrism against things that are overwhelmingly popular both nationally and in their respective states.

    And, you can be absolutely certain, that when the Democrats lose control of Congress in 2022 the centrists will be pointing at BLM or the attacks of the woke twitterite on Dr.Seuss or the fact that people were mean to Bari Weiss. Equally, you can be sure that the performative centrism that stopped Democrats from maximizing their chances in 2002 will get but short shrift.

    1. DaBunny

      Manchin is popular in the bright red state of WV. He'd be quite popular as an R too. I can't say for sure he'd win, but he'd have an awfully good shot at it. Ergo, Ds need Manchin more than Manchin needs Ds. They need to and should be flexible with him. I'm fine with him and fine with that.

      AZ is purple. Sinema was fairly progressive in the dim and distant past (i.e. a few years ago). She could and did win office from a lefty position. Her flipflop to performative centrism pisses me off.

      1. Mitch Guthman

        I would be vastly more sympathetic to what you say if these had been hard votes in the context of Arizona or West Virginia politics. But both bills are very popular in both states. So none of this performative centrism was dictated by local politics. They hurt ordinary people because they are terrible human beings who are sufficiently elite to no longer care about others.

    2. n1cholas

      Agreed.

      The point of passing POPULAR, NEEDED legislation is that you're going to gain voters.

      If Manchin and Sinema are so afraid of losing their seats that they'll help prevent the Democratic Party from passing POPULAR, NEEDED legislation, then how does that help their constituents? It doesn't, but it protects their own seats of power and prestige.

      If passing Democratic Party legislation isn't enough to GAIN voters so that the Democratic Party picks up Senate and House seats in 2022, then it's done. It's over.

      The Republican Party is going to win back power because they've made it clear the Democratic Party doesn't have the willpower to do what is necessary, and, this time Virginia, they do.

      Manchin and Sinema are REPRESENTATIVES. They should be going to their constituents and telling them why they made the decision to vote on legislation that they did, because it will HELP THEM.

      Or, whats the point of having a Manchin and Sinema if they're going to be the reason why we lose the House and Senate due to voters seeing the Democratic Party as incompetent and impotent in doing what is necessary?

      For fucks sake. If the Democratic Party is really this powerless to do what is needed to save the country from the fascists, then it's already over. This is just the calm before the storm. Good luck.

      1. Mitch Guthman

        This is the conundrum of Manchin, in particular. There are a large number of people who will suffer and perhaps die so that he can enjoy himself with his performative centrism. Innocents will be harmed to serve Manchin’s overweening vanity.

        Politically, Manchin’s relentless focus on performative centrism and on obstructing the Democratic agenda makes it ever more difficult and unlikely that the Democrats will hold either house of the Congress in 2024. And, thanks in no small part to Manchin, the party will probably also lose the White House. That’s the price of having Manchin as the “50th Democratic vote”.

        On the other hand, what we saw after Manchin’s supposedly more “centrist” and “moderate” changes to Biden’s relief bill seems quite instructive, too. Not a single Republican crossed the aisle to support this watered down bill. That means, without Joe Manchin as the “50 Democratic vote” there wouldn’t be even the watered down relief package.

        So many people need help and evidently accepting the depredations of his callousness and pandering to the vanity of Manchin are, essentially, the price of fire. We need to start building a Democratic organization in West Virginia from grass roots so that we can eventually replace Manchin with a better human being and a better senator.

      2. TriassicSands

        "The point of passing POPULAR, NEEDED legislation is that you're going to gain voters."

        One would hope so. But in the U.S. in 2021 that is a shaky proposition. Voters are so ill-informed and so driven by utter nonsense that they can support certain legislation and oppose the party and officials who passed it.

  9. UrbanLegend

    Manchin said $11 should be OK. I'm guessing they could push him to $12 in five years as a better number. So we could get the 50 Dems, but 10 Republicans? I'm not sure I see even one. Don't have a clue where Romney, Collins and Murkowsky are coming from, since they will do show switches, but fall in line even when it makes no sense. How can we make the Republicans pay a big price for their purely, 100% partisan opposition to something that 75% of the American public wanted, most of the Republican governors wanted, the most prominent business people in the country expressly said they wanted, and that every reputable economist said would would provide millions of Americans with critical assistance, help reduce unemployment, fix the economy and would not cause any serious inflation or make the deficit unmanageable. Because it cost too much? Let's review this: it was fine to give the wealthy huge tax cuts in 2017 at a cost to the deficit and the national debt of about the same amount, but not give ordinary suckers a tax break on their income from unemployment compensation?

    The hypocrisy of so-called decent Republicans like Romney, Collins, Murkowski and Rob Portman is breathtaking. We need to be blasting this stuff out there.

  10. NealB

    I had no idea Joe Manchin knew that I think he's a trogolodyte; much less that he might care or be pissed off and hate me so much that he'll turn even further to the dark side because of it. But, whoop-de-doo! Guess my intransigence is more potent than I knew. Guess I better tone it down now that they'll be moving on to the For the People act in an effort to make voting easier, fairer, and less prone to permitting an unreasonably small minority of voters in this country elect Republicans. (Anyway, all that matters with Joe, or should, is how much they love him in West Virginia, where I understand he's won statewide election fair and square. Bet they love him even more now that he wasn't able to cause more damage than he did with the ARP.)

    This was the easy one; everything that comes after this will be harder, thanks a lot to caveman Manchin. There are other words that describe Sinema better, but her actions spell it out just as well, so I'll leave it at that.

  11. azumbrunn

    Until the night before I would have agreed with your post, at least with the part about Manchin. He had his pound of flesh (the second this year after tanking the Neera Tanden candidacy). When he then demanded more flesh (and had it delivered to his door step by the GOP) in a way that gave him nothing to campaign about (much too technical for that) I lost him. The only explanation for such behavior is that it is part vanity, part narcissism, part a demonstration of his power (that everybody was painfully aware of anyway). If he had demanded special funds for his state (which I think would be justifiable given the poverty of the state due to the loss of the coal industry) I would support him. That would have been his primary job after all. But this was ridiculous.

    As to Sinema: Given her history I think the Tulsi Gabbard comparison is apt. Her state is not W Virginia; she is not under pressure to track right the way Manchin is.

    1. jamesepowell

      Manchin's not under pressure either. I mean, not under pressure to keep the minimum wage low, not under pressure to reduce benefits under the Biden's proposal.

      Assuming he is running in 2024, he would not be losing any votes by supporting a $15/hr minimum wage or better benefits for COVID relief. It's doubtful that any of the votes this year will be germane in that campaign.

    1. mudwall jackson

      sure. he voted to slice $15 billion out of a $1.9 trillion bill. if only the hard right party, the republican, had such "hard right" conservatives.

      1. MontyTheClipArtMongoose

        Exactly.

        As with Manchin's performative shooting of the PPACA like skeet, dude is, like Lady Gaga, living for the applause.

  12. rick_jones

    The perfect must be forever demanded and the good enough rejected at every turn. Anything else is plusunpure.

    1. MontyTheClipArtMongoose

      All part of the Squad, #OurRevolution, Brand New Congress, etc., being Russian-funded (to various degrees) controlled opposition, to lend American one party rule under the GQP a patina of competition.

      The tell, really, is the actual controlled opposition latching on to that term as another means to denigrate the Neoliberal Center-Left Climptonian Democrat Party.

  13. golack

    Is the comment color scheme a bit better now? That must be the case looking at the number and length of the responses.
    😉

  14. kenalovell

    I expect Manchin could do a great deal with Mitch McConnell in return for switching parties. Chairing a couple of key committees, for example, with a guarantee of RNC support at the '24 primary for the Senate or the WV governorship. He hasn't, presumably because there are parts of the Democratic Party platform he supports. But it would be crazy to assume he never would.

  15. KenSchulz

    Unlike some commenters here, I don’t profess to know more about how to win as a Democrat in West Virginia or Arizona than Sens. Manchin or Sinema. In any case, we will have to deal with them for at least two years, so I am hoping that the rest of the Democratic Senators will learn to do so with a little more finesse. And we will be lucky if they win re-election over any Republican in 2022 and 2024.
    Seriously, people, we look to be getting $1.88T+ in COVID relief, vs. the $300B that McConnell was proposing a few months ago!

    1. FMias

      Indeed. Purity Ponyism run mad.
      Drum is quite right that it's completely bonkers for the Lefties to attack visciously as many are doing the centrist Dems Senators: "Politics aside, human nature is what it is: If you attack someone viciously, they are more likely to oppose you in the future because they hate your guts."

      We just spent four years with Trumpism yet somehow that has not put paid to the empty Purity Pony posturing that a centrist Dem is somehow equivalent (and thus evil) as a Republican Senator.

      And losing sight of the size of the win here - where under a Republican Senate 300 billion was not really achievable and literally everything on the Democrats agenda was a dead letter - to getting probably 75% if not 90% of what they wanted.

      But no... more important to whine and insult the centrists than celebrate what's actually a big damn move and win.

      1. MontyTheClipArtMongoose

        This is why I don't think it would be an abject, unforced error for the NY State Legi to box out Ocasio-Cortez. She has already said she's over being a Member of Congress, & her rhetorical bombthrowing skillset seems more suited to being a fleftist version of Jim de Mint, safely ensconced in a think tank leadership sinecure, than a next gen Barney Frank.

  16. D_Ohrk_E1

    Everything played out the way I hoped it would. I mean, I figured it was always the optimum strategy to negotiate w/ the most conservative Democrat than the most moderate Republican. That ensured passage while giving Democrats the highest leverage against those moderate Republicans.

    Sure, the final bill could have been better if you're more liberal-minded like I am, but this was the most progressive piece of legislation since the ACA.

    I feel pretty damn good about how two last Democrats in the WH have had significant influence on America to help make the lives of Americans much better.

    1. MontyTheClipArtMongoose

      More likely a must pass bill, which will be how a $12 minimum wage will pass over GQP histrionics.

  17. sdean7855

    We have ended up like that awful Israeli electoral system where the tail wags the dog, where normatively insignificant players become king-makers before whom everyone bows.
    And like Dr. Johnson's legendary dancing dog: it isn't how well the dog dances, but that it dances at all.
    Behold the wonder of democracy! It passed a bill! A bill!

  18. James Wimberley

    Why are Manchin and Sinema opposed to ending the filibuster? As last week showed, when the majority is 51, they have real leverage. When it's 60, they are just Schumer's cannon fodder.

  19. Goosedat

    I met Sinema at AZ Alliance for Peace and Justice meetings and participated in some street corner vigils with her before the invasion of Iraq. Sinema's ambition was obvious as a leader for AAPJ in early 2003. I was surprised and saddened to find her featured in a Mondoweiss in 2012 story for taking AIPAC campaign donations. She has gone a long way off the peace trail and she has repudiated her advocacy for progressive policies since when she was a community organizer. She needs a progressive to challenge her for the Democratic nomination for senator when she comes up for reelection.

    1. MontyTheClipArtMongoose

      It's almost like the #OurRevolution taunts of Iowa Caucus Loser Pete Buttigieg being a lizard creature of Mc Kinsey would be at least as apt pointed toward Sinema for her AIPAC favoring, by your telling, but then again, given the fact that the #OurRevolution dipshit auxiliary of March for Our Lives supported NRA puppet Bernie Sanders in 2020, I don't think we can count on rhetorical consistency from the trustfund fauxgressives.

      1. Goosedat

        Buttigieg has always been a supporter of US violent foreign policies as well as a servant of capital. He joined the military and obeyed his deployment to Afghanistan as well as worked for McKinsey. Sinema started out as a peace advocate and ran as a state legislator to represent the impoverished.

  20. ChasB

    Don't drive Manchin and/or Sinema to Sen Selby's 1994 choice to leave the Dems for the Republicans. That was the result of Clinton-era persistent badgering then Dem Shelby.

      1. MontyTheClipArtMongoose

        Also, pretty sure Shelby, & to a lesser extent Campbell, were driven more by staying in the Senate majority, with all the plums that come with, than Democrat harassment of them over their ideologic heterodoxy.

        Anyway, how could a party always in disarray like the Democrat Party ever coordinate a campaign of harassment against anyone? It would breakdown so fast the only egg on the face would belong to the party chair.

        Jeffords, & to a much lesser extent Lincoln Chaffee, seem the better cautionary tale against hectoring Manchin.

  21. KawSunflower

    I can forgive some things, but Sinema'a flouncy turn in voting her contrarian way on the day she brought a cake in was not equivalent to McCain's thumbs-down.

    It's one thing to showboat when winning, although gloating brings on the attacks, but such stomping around - she does wear boots all the time? - surely doesn't endear her to all of her constituents.

    And instead of rewarding congressional employees with a cake for reading proposed egislation until 2 AM, can the rules be changed to require that the person demanding that read it him-or herself? Would have been nice to see Ron Johnson hoarse after such a stunt.

      1. KawSunflower

        So who would be foolish enough to listen? No one I can think of - I would just like him to suffer,with no other reader.

  22. lawnorder

    I'm also against the $15 minimum wage by 2025. It's too low. What's needed is to jump to $15 right away (due to my twisted sense of humor, I would like to see the increased minimum take effect on July 4), then increase by $1/hr. each year for five years, and then add an automatic COLA.

Comments are closed.