OK I'm all for going in to a brawl with McConnell over the filibuster, but if we don't have even 50 votes for it (Dems Sinema, Manchin oppose removing it), there's no reason to fight this battle at all correct?
Although I have to say, if Schumer was gonna agree to keep filibuster in place in any case, in exchange for some other concession from McConnell, didn't Manchin and Sinema just ruin Schumer's negotiating leverage?
If I'm getting this wrong, please explain.
It's possible that some deal was already reached and Manchin and Sinema were given a green light to make statements.
But honestly, my money is on Dems being morons and screwing themselves. Again.
But honestly, my money is on Dems being morons and screwing themselves. Again.
I really don't get why Dems are saying this was a big public win. While I believe it's possible or even likely that Schumer made a beneficial deal, the simplest telling based on public evens is that Schumer couldn't control his coalition and McConnell got exactly what he wanted.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
