The problem was that both Manchin and Sinema understood that they had leverage to decide what policies lived or died. And as often as not, they torpedoed progressive legislation because they both consider themselves "moderate." They didn't stand in the way only when it didn't interfere with their personal enrichment. And since Senate Democrats have no control over the elections that put them in that position, it's extremely dishonest to blame Democrats for it.
Now that Manchin is retiring, Democrats are shitting their pants over their chances to hold the Senate in 2024. They know they won't be able to get a progressive to replace Manchin.
No, a few words to the media is not meaningful pushback.
Why do you avoid my main argument? Manchin is head of the energy committee. Why do Democrats keep giving so much power to a quisling, even after they were betrayed by him?
How do you punish him when he can simply start caucusing with Republicans and end the Democrats' slim majority? In order to pressure him you have to have leverage, and for the past few years he's had more of it than Senate Democrats.
I'll say it another time:
You pressure manchin by stripping him of his committee assignments. This is huge leverage.
The chair of the energy committee is a very important and powerful position, and even after Manchin betrayed Bidens supposed agenda, the Democrats still give him this immense power. Why?
Hes already blocking all meaningful legislation, if he wants to give up his power and go caucus with republicans then let him. Call his bluff. If he would actually switch to (R) he would become just another run of the mill Republican. His donors would dry up, he wouldn't get headlines, he wouldnt matter anymore.
And there's still more damage he can do by defecting. Just look at what they're anticipating with his retirement. He still holds more leverage than Senate Democrats. I don't you know why you think they hold more power with such a slim majority that depends entirely on his cooperation.
Holding the majority is meaningless if you can't use it
Again, incorrect. The majority gets to determine nominations, set agendas, determine which bills come up for a vote, and so forth.
Like this?
The problem was that both Manchin and Sinema understood that they had leverage to decide what policies lived or died. And as often as not, they torpedoed progressive legislation because they both consider themselves "moderate." They didn't stand in the way only when it didn't interfere with their personal enrichment. And since Senate Democrats have no control over the elections that put them in that position, it's extremely dishonest to blame Democrats for it.
Now that Manchin is retiring, Democrats are shitting their pants over their chances to hold the Senate in 2024. They know they won't be able to get a progressive to replace Manchin.
No, a few words to the media is not meaningful pushback.
Why do you avoid my main argument? Manchin is head of the energy committee. Why do Democrats keep giving so much power to a quisling, even after they were betrayed by him?
How do you punish him when he can simply start caucusing with Republicans and end the Democrats' slim majority? In order to pressure him you have to have leverage, and for the past few years he's had more of it than Senate Democrats.
I'll say it another time:
You pressure manchin by stripping him of his committee assignments. This is huge leverage.
The chair of the energy committee is a very important and powerful position, and even after Manchin betrayed Bidens supposed agenda, the Democrats still give him this immense power. Why?
Hes already blocking all meaningful legislation, if he wants to give up his power and go caucus with republicans then let him. Call his bluff. If he would actually switch to (R) he would become just another run of the mill Republican. His donors would dry up, he wouldn't get headlines, he wouldnt matter anymore.
And there's still more damage he can do by defecting. Just look at what they're anticipating with his retirement. He still holds more leverage than Senate Democrats. I don't you know why you think they hold more power with such a slim majority that depends entirely on his cooperation.
Holding the majority is meaningless if you can't use it
Again, incorrect. The majority gets to determine nominations, set agendas, determine which bills come up for a vote, and so forth.