So I think this is missing the issue. BBB individually is all popular poll-tested vanilla policies. The strategy to PASS it has been a disaster that’s done grievous damage because of Schumer’s decision not to pick a combo of policies Manchinema signaled support on first.
https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1485980106170503170
Indeed, Manchin and Sinema seem fairly flexible as to which spending polices even go into it since they’re mostly not very controversial. The main barrier is the overall cost and structure. That’s all on leadership and WH.
There’s a plausible strategic explanation: “Let’s aim higher than they wanted on BBB and then pressure them to come closer to our number.” But if it’s January and you’re begging them to even consider their July offer again, it’s a self-evident failure on substance and tactics.
Meanwhile, as a result of leadership’s specific decisions on both BBB and voting, the members you need most are being constantly antagonized and the focus is entirely on divisions within the party in both cases. You can make an argument why it might have worked…but it didn’t.
Just to make this clear, Manchin getting hung up on the permanent/temporary issue was visible for months. It was not some sudden shock unless you were convinced he would fold. I kept bringing it up, asking sources about it, writing on it, they just didn't acknowledge it as real.
There's a lot of talk about what does or does not count as "good faith" negotiations, but if you're going to have this conversation seems important to note this what the argument on the non-Manchin side looked like in crunch time
https://twitter.com/BenjySarlin/status/1471125822836817928
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
