NEW: I profiled Joe Manchin. I cover his 4-decade career, and his improbable rise to become Democrats’ key 50th senator.
I interviewed him about the filibuster, HR1, the minimum wage, whether he’d ever switch parties, and more. Some highlights: vox.com/22339531/manch…
On Manchin's op-ed saying there's no circumstance under which he'll eliminate the filibuster:
“The op-ed was as clear as it could be... If you want to argue about it for two years, then you’re going to waste a lot of your energy and your time.”
Manchin on HR1/S1: “How in the world could you, with the tension we have right now, allow a voting bill to restructure the voting of America on a partisan line?”
He insists it will just feed more distrust in the system and "anarchy" like Jan 6 — "I'm not going to be part of it"
Historically, Manchin has spent decades defining himself in contrast to his party's left flank. He was part of the conservative wing of WV Democrats and often clashed with unions in the '80s and '90s, leading to his defeat in a tense 1996 governor primary.
In the years following his '96 defeat, Manchin won over many of his critics in the party, making clear to unions that they could live with him as governor.
He won that job in '04, but by the time he won, he knew the state was slipping away from Dems
The backdrop for the piece is the erosion and then collapse of the Democratic Party in West Virginia. Dems had controlled the legislature for eight decades, and both Senate seats since 1959, before the 2014 midterms. But cracks were evident beforehand. Manchin saw all this happen
Yet as governor Manchin found a path to overwhelming popularity, mixing canny political branding, image management, legislative dealmaking, and old-fashioned retail politics.
His legislative style: bring every interest to the table and come up with a deal everyone can live with
In the Senate, Manchin has the most conservative voting record of any Democrat. Yet his vote has had a tendency to materialize when Democrats really need it — such as in saving Obamacare, or passing Biden's stimulus. vox.com/22339531/manch…
Progressives hope Manchin's opposition to rules reform will be negotiable too.
But to me he insisted that he truly believes that ending the filibuster would "lose the purpose of this democracy," by ensuring "violent swings" from one party's control over the law to the other
The argument that Republicans will let "nothing" pass isn't convincing to Manchin — in part because it's a bit out of date.
As political scientist Frances Lee told me, Congress has gotten a surprising amount done in the last few years. vox.com/22339531/manch…
Manchin has been involved in many bipartisan deals, on issues like rescuing miners' pensions, energy policy, and of course last December's Covid relief package.
But these came while Republicans were trying to keep control of the Senate. Unclear whether they'll continue
Manchin is concerned about extremism from the GOP base ("if you saw my emails on a daily basis, it's unreal," he told me). But he argues the solution is for Democrats to moderate, to try to turn down the temperature. He hopes that, by rejecting filibuster reform, that can happen
I asked Manchin if he'd ever switch parties, and he said, "I know I can change more from where I’m at." And he defined what he said were the principles of the Democratic Party he grew up with.
Here’s how I think about Project 2025’s policies - in 3 groups.
1.) Centralizing presidential authority over the executive branch
2.) Longtime conservative priorities
3.) A very aggressive religious right agenda, especially on abortion
The Heritage Foundation has been doing Project 2025-esque stuff for decades but there are some different dynamics this cycle due to Trump’s close ties with Heritage, and his own former appointees lying in wait to return to office and correct his first term mistakes
That’s particularly evident in the Project’s focus on amping up the number and power of political appointees (relative to career civil servants) throughout the executive branch, especially at the Justice Department
The tangled, nearly 7-year saga of the Stormy Daniels hush money scandal and investigations that has resulted in Trump now being on the verge of indictment, explained
THE PAYOFF: The month before the 2016 election, Stormy Daniels prepared to come forward alleging a consensual sexual encounter with Trump 10 years prior — but let it be known she'd accept payment for her silent.
Michael Cohen sent the payment, $130,000, on October 27, 2016.
INVESTIGATION 1 (FEDS): When SDNY prosecutors investigated Cohen, they argued the $130,000 payment violated federal campaign finance laws, since it was meant to help Trump win the election.
Cohen pleaded guilty to this and other charges. But the theory was never tested in court
Hunter Biden has filed a countersuit against the computer repair store owner who provided his emails and files to Trump allies.
It's interesting to look very closely at which claims Hunter explicitly denies and which he claims not to have knowledge sufficient to confirm or deny
Hunter denies he was referred to the repair store.
Hunter says he lacks the knowledge to confirm or deny whether he asked the repairman to recover info from damaged computers and whether he himself returned to the shop the next day
So this is not an outright denial that Hunter dropped his laptops off at the repair store. Instead it seems to point to a "I don't remember" (implicitly: "I was too wasted" defense)
Here we have the same exercise, "Whom to Leave Behind," but with different identities. Race is only explicitly mentioned for one person on the list. It's dated 1998 at the bottom.
Thoughtful @henrygrabar piece on how the city-dwellers worrying about a "crime" problem seem to actually be worrying about a "public disorder" problem.
You can imagine a spectrum from “total anarchy” to “authoritarian clampdown."
Current debate is between those who think cities have gotten too disorderly and need more order, vs. those suspicious attempts to enforce more order will inevitably be discriminatory & authoritarian
Another installment of the debate here.
The reason the tide seems to be turning somewhat toward the "more order" camp, it seems to me, is that the "less order" camp doesn't seem to have a solution, focusing instead on denying there's any problem
I wrote about the most consistent throughline to Ron DeSantis's career — his enthusiastic self-reinventions toward whichever political cause is in vogue and whichever persona could help him achieve his next ambition.
This tendency of DeSantis’s was evident back in 2019 when @reihan pointed out that he had shifted from a spending-cutting Tea Partier to a Trump superfan to (early in his governorship) a surprisingly uncontroversial pragmatist. But he wouldn't stop there.