Share this page!

Will Stancil Profile picture
Twitter logo
25 Oct, 6 tweets, 2 min read
I'm just a broken record on this, but the way Dems have permitted Manchin to gradually change his role from "marginal vote who has to be cajoled into supporting the bill" to "point man for the entire endeavor" is just absurd
There are 50 Democrats and all their votes are needed equally. It's ridiculous to say "Well, Manchin is a major holdout, therefore he gets to write the bill to his specifications and everyone else gets to eat dirt." Just absurd negotiating
So what? Do Trump voters have a strong opinion on whether BBB should be capped at 1.5 trillion, should contain means-testing measures, should include the CEPP, etc. etc. etc.? This sort of public-opinion determinism sounds savvy but is very, very stupid.
Person in a negotiation: "I know I said final offer before but I changed my mind. Here's my actual final offer."

Dems: "Oh my god! Final offer! FINAL OFFER! Quick, give it to him! Give him your shirt! Oh my god oh my god this is scary oh my god"
Dems actually have a good amount of leverage over Manchin, in that he does not want to see the bipartisan bill go bust - or Biden fail, generally. But he's bluffed Dems (an easy task, it seems) into believing he's agnostic about whether any of this passes.
Because liberals are addicted to various theories of structural determinism, they look at a negotiation like this and assume the outcome is preordained. But it's not. Both sides have something the other wants; where they meet depends on their skill as negotiators.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Will Stancil

Will Stancil Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @whstancil

Will Stancil Profile picture
27 Oct
For the 1000th time, I ask: why is Manchin being allowed to issue line-item vetoes for a package that will be voted on all at once?

It doesn't matter if he dislikes any individual provision, the only question is whether he'll sink the whole bill over it!
Maybe it's possible Manchin will kill the bill unless it's $1.5 trillion, AND excludes CEPP, AND excludes methane fees, AND includes mean-testing, AND excludes a billionaire's tax, etc. etc.

But no one is even asking that. It's just assumed he can write every single provision
Did the GOP holdouts on the 2017 tax bill, like Bob Corker, get to write the whole bill exactly to their liking? No? They just had to suck it up and decide whether to back a bill that they didn't love?

Well, then why do we have to let Manchin write all of BBB?
Read 6 tweets
Will Stancil Profile picture
26 Oct
What some people have missed with regards to this thread is that the question of whether Dems will have to compromise with Manchin (yes) is separate from the question of whether they've maximized their leverage over him (no!)
Clearly the reconciliation bill is not going to be the progressive's dream bill under any circumstances. But there are still a range of possible outcomes, and right now, the way the talks are working seems to maximize the likelihood we end up closer to Manchin's end of that range
If you want to pressure Manchin, you want to:
-negotiate the deal as a package, not piecemeal negotiations on each provision
-force him to make a hard decision rather than pass a bill he's happy with
-not allow him to bluff you with threats of walking away
Read 4 tweets
Will Stancil Profile picture
26 Oct
With all due respect to Gillibrand, why are individual senators stuck negotiating individual policies with Manchin? This seems like a huge cause of the catastrophe currently swallowing the Democratic Party's agenda.
The way bargains work is pretty simple: "You give something, you get something."

That's what was supposed to happen with the bipartisan bill: we gave Manchin his bipartisan compromise and a bunch of WV pork, and he was supposed to support the bigger bill in return.
But in order for this to work, you have to do it ALL AT ONCE. If issues are taken up individually, Manchin doesn't have to take the bitter with the sweet. He can dig in his heels each time, making bargains impossible.
Read 15 tweets
Will Stancil Profile picture
25 Oct
Okay, real slow for the kids in the back: the current negotiation over the BBB bill is happening because both Manchin and the other Dems want a reconciliation bill to pass. Manchin would prefer it to be smaller and other Dems would prefer it to be bigger.
There are deals that neither side would accept. A $100 billion bill would be vetoed by most Dems. A $6 trillion bill would be vetoed by Manchin. Somewhere in between, there is (presumably) a range of bills that both sides will accept.
We don't know what that range of possibilities is! Nobody does, because it benefits both sides to underplay what they'll accept. Also, it's quite possible that the participants themselves don't know what they'd accept, if the offer truly was "This deal, or no deal."
Read 10 tweets
Will Stancil Profile picture
25 Oct
Manchin is not happy with zero! If he was happy with zero, he could just... go home. Do you think he's engaging in a months-long negotiation out of charity?
There's this bizarre thing going on right now, where everyone is styling themselves as extremely savvy pragmatists, but also, treating whatever crazy thing comes out of Manchin's mouth as his true, unmovable position. Like... bluffs exist, my people
"Wow, Manchin is insisting he'd go home and take all the marbles with him, that definitely is real and couldn't possibly be him trying to scare you into responding exactly like this"
Read 4 tweets
Will Stancil Profile picture
8 Oct
Do people not realize that David Shor, far from telling Democrats “what they don’t want to hear,” has prospered because he tells them EXACTLY what they want to hear?
“It’s not your fault you lose elections. Focusing on economics and avoiding controversy is correct. It’s the fault of BLM and ‘Defund the Police,’ and the best thing you can do is make them go away” - yes, these words definitely horrify the leaders of the Democratic Party.
Anyway, it’s sort of strange when you realize that m for all of its influence of his general worldview, Shor’s prescriptions are kind of… unclear. Let’s say you’re David Shor and you’re given full control of Cal Cunningham’s campaign. What do you do differently?
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @whstancil has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @whstancil!

Read all threads by @whstancil

:(