US Politics: The supply chain of hot takes remains robust

[Kalbear]

17 minutes ago, DMC said:

I honestly don't think this is why Romney and Murkowski have no chance of supporting the bill (although with Murkowski she certainly has the electoral concern of course).  I think they are just legitimately ideologically against the bill.  Collins?  I could see her being close to Manchin's position privately but the idea that the Dems could just "give her a bunch of goodies" to get her on board belies the fact they don't have much to offer beyond pork.  Plus the cardinal rule for any Republican, even Collins, is to not vote for tax increases - and that's not exactly a new thing at all.

I think that McConnell would remove them from their committee assignments and that threat is pretty big for them too. Being overall ostracized from Republicans and being "the reason" something passed for Biden is, IMO, a giant stick - and getting pork isn't going to help them. 

Mostly, I just don't think we're in an era where pork matters nearly as much as party identification and being able to stay at least somewhat partisan. Romney might consider voting for it - but not because it provided any benefits to Utahns (which it does in spades). 

[DMC]

1 minute ago, Kalsandra said:

I think that McConnell would remove them from their committee assignments and that threat is pretty big for them too. Being overall ostracized from Republicans and being "the reason" something passed for Biden is, IMO, a giant stick - and getting pork isn't going to help them. 

I doubt he'd do that.  Ironically, there's a report out today that GOP Senators are appalled by House GOP efforts to strip committee assignments from the 13 members that voted for the infrastructure bill.  Obviously there's a huge difference between the bills from the GOP's - and especially McConnell's - perspective, but that's just not McConnell's style (nor Thune's, nor virtually anybody in the GOP leadership).  He's never even threatened that when the three have bucked the party in the past.

6 minutes ago, Kalsandra said:

Mostly, I just don't think we're in an era where pork matters nearly as much as party identification and being able to stay at least somewhat partisan. Romney might consider voting for it - but not because it provided any benefits to Utahns (which it does in spades). 

Certainly agree that pork doesn't matter much in a polarized era, pretty sure we've discussed that before.  As for Romney considering voting for it, I'd say he's the most opposed to it of the three from an ideological standpoint.