Larry of the Lawn Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 5 minutes ago, Ran said: Shouldn't it be that the voters of West Virginia are a problem, not one that anyone can do much about anytime soon, etc.? It makes about as much sense to me to frame it that way as to frame Manchin as the problem. Sure, I suppose in a representative democracy, it's always the voters and never the rep who are the problem. I think that's largely a distinction without a difference. Joe Manchin, the gestalt of WV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ran Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 Just now, larrytheimp said: Sure, I suppose in a representative democracy, it's always the voters and never the rep who are the problem. I think that's largely a distinction without a difference. I think it makes quite a difference in how one perceives the nature of the "problem", personally. The focus on Manchin is either political naïveté or political cynicism, but either way it obscures the actual reality of why we have these particular set of outcomes. The salient questions should be how to either make WV more liberal/progressive OR how to win elections somewhere else that diminishes the deciding role a particular WV elected official may have on the national scene. It's especially salient to consider the latter because in all likelihood Manchin will be succeeded by a Republican when he choses to not run again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Zog Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 1 hour ago, Centrist Simon Steele said: I also think this is a false narrative and a Democrat could be elected [in WV] and not have to pretend to be Republican. The 2020 election, in which West Virginia's other (Republican) senator defeated her Democratic rival by about 43%, suggests otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maithanet Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 2 minutes ago, Ran said: It's especially salient to consider the latter because in all likelihood Manchin will be succeeded by a Republican when he choses to not run again. Democrats definitely need to be facing the reality that there's a good chance both Manchin and Tester's seats will be Republican after 2024 (whether they run or not). So bad as the Senate map and math looks now, there's a good chance it'll be even worse soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrimTuesday Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 7 minutes ago, Karlbear said: Alternately, when you have just the barest grasp of power, the idea that you should reject the reason you have that grasp because it's not enough is really stupid. The US isn't going to realize that 'killing the poor' is a bad platform for a long, long time. Either accept that or get used to never getting anything you want, ever. Those are your options. As opposed to what, a Republican senator in WV who has zero reason to play ball ever with Dems and will be re-elected easily unless they fuck a dead hooker on live TV? I mean, really - what are your options here? You're not going to get a very progressive or even mildly progressive candidate elected in West Virginia when they're like Trump +25. You'll just keep losing that over and over again. You have two basic options - go with a dem who can win in a state like WV and may not play ball all the time, or go with a GOP candidate who will never talk to you and will actively encourage people to kill you. Again, those are your options. You may not like them but that's what you got. The point is that eventually, you aren't going to have even the barest margin of power because every time you manage to overcome the inherently undemocratic nature of the Senate, you get handcuffed by someone who cares more about his damned reputation and posturing than he does about actually achieving the stated goals of the Democratic party, and not even my wing of the party, we're talking the fucking establishment's stated goals. If you are unable to effectively wield that power, it will be taken away from you. There is the old quote that is attributed to LBJ, that "It's probably better to have him inside the tent pissing out than outside the tent pissing in." but at a certain point, Manchin is in the tent and just spinning in circles spraying piss both inside and outside the tent. We're going to lose that seat, it's not a question of if, it's a question of when, and when that happens, what will we have to show for Joe Manchin's time in the senate? Just stopping Republicans is not enough, we have to actually govern in a way that gives Democrats real accomplishments they can run on in 2022 and 2024. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 3 minutes ago, Maithanet said: Democrats definitely need to be facing the reality that there's a good chance both Manchin and Tester's seats will be Republican after 2024 (whether they run or not). So bad as the Senate map and math looks now, there's a good chance it'll be even worse soon. Which is why it's imperative to maximize the opportunities they have this cycle - PA, OH, WI, NC. Right now, that means recruiting the best possible candidates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 1 minute ago, GrimTuesday said: We're going to lose that seat, it's not a question of if, it's a question of when, and when that happens, what will we have to show for Joe Manchin's time in the senate? There's this pretty big bill that's about to be passed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrimTuesday Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 3 minutes ago, DMC said: There's this pretty big bill that's about to be passed. Yes, and it is a good bill in spite of Joe Manchin doing everything he could to knock holes in it. If he had his way, we'd be looking at the 2008 recovery bill all over again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ran Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 5 minutes ago, GrimTuesday said: Yes, and it is a good bill in spite of Joe Manchin doing everything he could to knock holes in it. If he had his way, we'd be looking at the 2008 recovery bill all over again. I think he did have his way, and we're not looking at the 2008 recovery bill... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 5 minutes ago, GrimTuesday said: Yes, and it is a good bill in spite of Joe Manchin doing everything he could to knock holes in it. If he had his way, we'd be looking at the 2008 recovery bill all over again. It's good politics for him at home, and again, we need his seat even if he can be a pain in the ass now and then. This is still one of the most progressive bills ever passed and we should be celebrating, not looking for reasons to complain. And it's official, though there was no doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 7 minutes ago, GrimTuesday said: Yes, and it is a good bill in spite of Joe Manchin doing everything he could to knock holes in it. If he had his way, we'd be looking at the 2008 recovery bill all over again. First, as Ran said, the concessions to Manchin were incredibly minor substantively and almost entirely about him looking like he had influence. Biden asked for $1.9 trillion and got $1.9 trillion. And if we didn't have his vote, did you see the 10 "moderate" GOP Senators' proposal we'd have to negotiate with? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 41 minutes ago, Ran said: I think he did have his way, and we're not looking at the 2008 recovery bill... Yeah, the crazy thing about Manchin is that he is extraordinarily liberal compared to the moderate Democratic senators in 2009. Look at his demands, and then look at what senators like Nelson and Lieberman demanded during the ACA negotiations. It's night and day. And Manchin said on Sunday he was open to an enormous infrastructure bill, up to $4 trillion even, so long as it's paid for with increased taxes on corporations and the wealthiest 1% (as opposed to just borrowing). I think there's less than 15 Democratic senators who would've been open to that in 2009. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IheartIheartTesla Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 Why is the bill being signed Friday and not today or early tomorrow? In terms of PR, Friday releases are terrible. You could dominate news for couple cycles at least with an earlier signing ceremony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 5 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said: Why is the bill being signed Friday and not today or early tomorrow? In terms of PR, Friday releases are terrible. You could dominate news for couple cycles at least with an earlier signing ceremony. The Government Publishing Office is kinda slow, especially for large bills. It can take a couple days for the formal bill to be properly formatted and engrossed and ready for the President's signature. It's the same reason there was a delay before the Senate was able to send the final bill over to the House. The House voted today because they only got the bill yesterday. ETA: It's why Biden is giving a speech tomorrow night, even though the signing won't have happened yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.