MANCHIN reiterated to reporters today that Senate rules changes should be done with a 67 vote...

[demmiblue]

MANCHIN reiterated to reporters today that Senate rules changes should be done with a 67 vote supermajority. Huge problem for those seeking to pass voting rights legislation this month with just 51 votes, free of a filibuster

Link to tweet

[wryter2000]

1. Stupid shit

If we had 67 votes, we wouldn't need to change the rules.

WTF is wrong with him?

[demmiblue]

3. But, but, but... "we need some good rules changes. We can do that together."

Manchin says “we need some good rules changes. We can do that together. But you change the rules with two-thirds of people present. So, Democrats and Republicans changing the rules to work better”

For the umpteenth time he still opposes going nuclear

Link to tweet

Seriously, what fucking planet does he live on?!

[Trueblue1968]

70. I. HATE. HIM.

[aocommunalpunch]

2. An obvious way to tank the discussion.

Occam can tell you the rest.

[doc03]

4. Some can cause more damage as a Democrat than

as a Republican.

[jcmaine72]

7. Careful...

I actually got a hide pointing out what a duplicitous, traitorous, two-legged colostomy bag Manchimp is and the irreversible damage he has done to our party.

There are those, however, who still feel obligated to defend this man for some reason, no matter what new depths of treachery he oozes down to. I wish I understood it, but I don't.

[demmiblue]

8. Personally, I am one of the never-hiders when it comes to Manchin.

[jcmaine72]

13. Same here!

Silencing someone for pointing out that a toilet is backed up and overflowing with malodorous liquid stool doesn't make the toilet in question any less backed up.

[Polybius]

69. Since the rules say no attacking Democratic public figures, you sorta have to vote to hide though

Unless they come up with an exception for Blue Dogs, not hiding would in itself be breaking DU rules.

[demmiblue]

83. I consider most of it well deserved criticism, not bashing or attacking.

Besides, if it is especially egregious, I can simply back out of serving on the jury (thus also not voting to hide).

[doc03]

37. Didn't mention anyone in particular just a thought

I had.

[dalton99a]

12. No shit.

[Takket]

5. There is no senate rule that rule changes require 67 votes

You can’t just apply some arbitrary number to it. It requires just a majority. He doesn’t make the rules!

[brooklynite]

17. Yes, there is.

The package of rules approved by majority vote on Day 1 contain a provision requiring a 2/3 vote to subsequently change them.

[tritsofme]

28. The Senate is a continuing body, it does not re-adopt it's rules at beginning of each new Congress.

[brooklynite]

32. Yes, it does. In the same way it elects a Majority Leader every two years.

[tritsofme]

47. Nope, look it up. The Senate does not re-adopt it's rules, they continue.

The House must, but the Senate is a continuing body.

Just as the organization from the previous Congress,
with committees retaining Republican chairmen despite a Democratic majority, continued for over a month last year, until a new organizing resolution was finally agreed to.

[tritsofme]

30. Um...the standing rules of the Senate require 67 votes for a change.

There is nothing arbitrary about what he said.

The “nuclear option” which can be accomplished by majority vote, establishes a new precedent in the Senate, but does not change the actual rules.

The concept of the “nuclear option” only exists because of the high hurdle in finding 67 votes for a formal rules change.

[DemocraticPatriot]

31. So they can "establish a new precedent", which is essentially a rule change,

but they can't call it a rule change? Or they can't write it down in the rules? LOL


In all the discussion about changing the filibuster rule, I don't know why I've never seen anyone mention this necessity of 67 votes before today...

[tritsofme]

48. Yes, it's pretty goofy.

The filibuster rules are still written to read that it would take 60 votes to kill a filibuster on judicial nominees, but the Senate set a precedent interpreting 60 to mean a simple majority.

[PJMcK]

6. Manchin can go fuck himself

He is singlehandedly screwing our country.

[oasis]

39. History won't be kind to that guy. nt

[PJMcK]

40. History doesn't matter

As W once infamously said, "We'll all be dead."

Seriously, what Manchin is doing will screw the U.S. for the next 20 years or more. I'm in my 60s so I have less concern for history at this point. He and Sinema are screwing things for my son's generation.

[Celerity]

50. Nor Sinema, she is even more of a hardcore filibuster-lover than Manchin. She even wants a 60 vote

threshold for most ALL Senate business, repeal the 2 mini-nuke exceptions now, and end reconciliation.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100215428247

[oasis]

92. Ugh!!!. I lost all respect for her after her thumbs down vote exhibition. nt

[nykym]

9. Tell manchin fine

get off your cushy house boat and get the 17 votes from your repug friends.

[BlueJac]

10. Just keep adding another excuse for your stonewalling Biden's agenda!

[MOMFUDSKI]

11. but but but

the COAL money. I am just not rich enough yet. And screw the coal workers also too.

[Fullduplexxx]

14. Fkg shit head ... I hate this asshole almost as much as I hate the orange traitor

[turbinetree]

15. *(&$%#!@)(&%##@) U Joe Manchin......

[Emile]

16. When is his term over and will the party primary him?

[demmiblue]

18. We all understand that virtually no other Dem can be elected in WV. n/t

[Emile]

20. We all?

I don't.

[FBaggins]

25. Then increase your understanding

Because there is no other Democrat who can hold that seat in 2024

And the Republican who replaces him will be no moderate.

[DemocraticPatriot]

33. I doubt very much that even Manchin can hold it in 2024....

not while he keeps stabbing his party in the back.

[Emile]

34. Bingo +1

I would have a hard time voting for him. So we might as well give the voters in his state the opportunity to vote for a real democrat over a fake one.

[FBaggins]

35. I doubt that he plans to

He'll be 77 and has expressed interest in returning to the governor's seat (where the current governor is term-limited at the same time and might run for senate)

[Emile]

38. So the current Republican governor is going to run for Manchin' seat and

we can't primary Joe Manchin because he plans to run for governor, that it?

[FBaggins]

49. Not at all

Nobody is saying that we can't primary him.

What we can't do is get him to change his mind by threatening to primary him - because it's an empty threat. All a primary could do (assuming he runs) is make things worse. There's no chance of finding someone to his left who can win that seat. And if he chooses not to run again, the threat goes from empty to nonexistent.

[Emile]

51. I never said we threaten him with a primary to change his mind!

I said we primary him with a real democrat and let the Democratic voters decide. Didn't you say he wants to run for governor anyways? So if he runs for governor, will the Democratic politician running for the open Senate seat have to run to the right of the Republican running in order to win? What your saying doesn't make any sense.

[FBaggins]

55. But you did say that you thought that another Democrat could beat him

There is no such Democrat

So if he runs for governor, will the Democratic politician running for the open Senate seat have to run to the right of the Republican running in order to win?

Nope. (S)he will simply lose.

Once again - There is no other Democrat who can win that seat. Anyone to the right of Manchin is a Republican.

WV is an R+23 state. The second reddest state in the country.

[Emile]

58. I never said that. I said let the Democratic voters decide if they want a fake

Democrat or a real democrat!

[FBaggins]

61. See your post #20

It was pointed out that no other Democrat can win in WV...

... You disagreed

[Emile]

62. I stand corrected. Thread is getting long.

[demmiblue]

44. OK, Sparky. n/t

[Emile]

53. Sparky, is that some sort judgemental name calling smear?

[demmiblue]

84. ...

[Emile]

85. . .

[dalton99a]

19. January 3, 2025

[manicdem]

42. zero chance

There is no chance of a challenger beating him in a primary, much less a general election. Only possibility is to have a dem challenger that is MORE CONSERVATIVE than Manchin.

It is a deep red state.

Better to support challengers in other states.

[Emile]

43. How conservative? Will he have to be more conservative than the Republican candidate?

I like for the voters to have a choice between a Democrat and a Republican, not two Republicans as you are describing.

[manicdem]

45. The stats

I dunno what the specific breakdown is for his district, but in 2016 WV voted 67.9% for Trump and 26.2% for Clinton, and 2020 68.6% trump and 29.7% Biden.

In Manchin's last election in 2018, he got 49.6% of the vote compared to the Repub at 46.3%. Manchin relies on more out of state funding and support while Repubs use more local funding and support. This means Democrats like Manchin are hanging on by a thread to stay in office in WV.

It's a miracle that even a conservative Democrat like Manchin can hold office in WV. There is no chance an even slightly more progressive candidate could win there. This article goes into the miracle of Manchin: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/07/us/politics/joe-manchin-west-virginia.html


Anyone suggesting Manchin getting replaced is totally oblivious of what goes on there.

[Emile]

46. So are you going to answer my question?

More conservative than the republican running?

[manicdem]

54. Depends

As with anything complex, there are a multitude of variables and a single criteria isn't going to do it. Manchin has vast political experience, Senate incumbant, strong out of state support, strong party support (to keep a blue seat in a strong red state), good connections, and bipartasanship (not afraid to go against the dem party).

Manchin won the close race, 49% to 46%, in the general election in 2018 because he had several advantages that may not come up again:
1. The Dem party threw a lot of out of state support for him and in opposing his republican challenger, Morrisey, to keep the seat blue.
2. His republican challenger had a very tough primary election that burned him out.
3. Morrisey ran out of funding for the General election.

Those factors combined allowed for him to win his 2018 election being less conservative against his republican challenger. Half of it was Manchin, half of it was luck that the Republican party couldn't keep up.

A new democrat party challenger would have to be more conservative than Manchin to win the general election if they are missing any of those things I mentioned above.

[Emile]

57. So screw the Democratic voters in West Virginia, the only choice is two Republicans.

I don't buy it. Manchin has 0 chance of being reelected .

[Polybius]

73. And a Republican has a 100% chance in WV in 2024

It's a sad reality when Trump almost gets 70% of the vote.

[Emile]

74. So we just give this seat up because we can't win with a Democrat?

[Polybius]

76. Yeah

Save the money for elsewhere. It's like fighting a UFC fighter. Best to walk away when you can't possibly win.

[Emile]

79. Defeated without even trying!

A defeatist attitude will never win elections anywhere! Regardless of which state.

[dumbcat]

80. I think what you are having trouble with

is the concept that there aren't enough Democratic voters in West Virginia.

Of course you can give them a choice. But they'll still lose, based on recent stats.

[Emile]

81. Not having any troubles at all. Your saying Republican voters

cross party lines and I find that hard to believe. Give the Democratic voters in WV a choice, and if Manchin wins the primary you have nothing to fear!

[manicdem]

59. Continued...

In addition to what I posted, Manchin's predecessor Sen Robert Byrd - author of the Byrd amendment to prevent federal funding for abortions, was similar to Manchin and a carryover from WV conservative Democrat days. Manchin was appointed to Byrds seat when he died and became the incumbant, starting his Senate career while the state became more Red.

[Emile]

60. Are you afraid if the party primaries Manchin the West Virginia democrats

won't vote for Manchin? Doesn't seem quite fair to the Democratic voters they can't decide for themselves who they want to represent them.

[manicdem]

65. Different types of democrats

There are different types of democrats...Progressive, Moderate, Conservative. Dems in WV seem to be more Conservative types overall, along with the independants. We just tend to assume most democrats are progressive here since that is what DU is and are the most vocal and in the news

[Emile]

66. Are you afraid?

[manicdem]

67. Nope

Playing smart is the better term. Better to put our focus and resources into other States where we have a better chance of winning.

[Emile]

68. So it's smart not to allow WV Democratic voters a choice

between a REAL Democrats or a fake one! That sounds like fear to me!

The only thing we have to fear is fear itself!

[manicdem]

71. tradeoff

There's limited time, media time, and money. Do you put it all into one race you'll likely lose. Or put it into many races you could win?

In other words. Lose 3 races to win 1?

[Emile]

72. We are still talking about a primary race right?

[manicdem]

75. General election matters

Primary's don't matter, General's do.

Primary Manchin out to lose the democrat seat, that's historical and hard fought that you'll never get back. To get...revenge? Not a winning strategy. Just holding a Dem seat means a lot by itself. Committee assignments. Judicial and executive confirmations. Passing lesser bills vs no bills. Etc.

It's my last post for this topic. If you like losing then go for it. Double down!

[Emile]

77. If Manchin wins the primary your fears are over!

[Dave says]

21. Who's paying him to sabotage the democratic agenda?

I'd like to know who's pulling his strings. He must know he's ushering in a Republican House and maybe Senate, too.

[Vinca]

22. Today all I'm hearing being reported is that Joe Biden is being boycotted in Georgia by

voting rights groups. WTF????????????????????? I didn't realize some people in the party thought Joe Biden was Harry Houdini and could magically do things. Why aren't they parked on Joe Manchin's door bugging the hell out of him? Why not Sinema? Why are Republicans getting a pass on all of this? I'm really, really, really, really pissed off today and Manchin is the icing on cake.

[Rob H.]

23. How much clearer does he have to make it that he's never going to get to yes?

Mind-blowing that people are still defending him at this point.

[qazplm135]

26. They're defending him

Because they agree with him.

[FBaggins]

27. Nope

They're "defending" him because the alternatives are all worse.

[qazplm135]

29. Yep

This is about a specific policy position has zero to do with alternatives.

Y'all keep acting like any criticism of him means he leaves. Since you can't possibly believe that, I'm going to go with you don't criticize because you don't have criticisms to raise.
Especially since you could alternatively just keep silent instead of active defense.

So yeah, don't believe ya.

[FBaggins]

36. Amazing mind reading skills that you imagine you posess

If it works as well at poker, you would be dead broke.

[qazplm135]

91. Nah

No mind reading required just watching actions

[uponit7771]

56. Evidence they agree with him? tia

[JustAnotherGen]

24. Then it's over

This is running down the clock - and not enable DOJ to hit the 400+ state laws in time for the midterm.

We - and I'm not talking out of my ass - are going to need mass mobilization of black voters throughout America.

IF we can overcome - then bring it GOP. We are not our great grandparents - and won't take this shit. Go right ahead and throw out every single black vote in America -

And watch us turn en masse. We've been kind, patient, and 'nice' for 400 years.

No more.

[Calista241]

64. If election reform passed today, the 2022 mid-terms would probably go ahead under the current rules.

This is about 2024.

[uponit7771]

78. What good would 2024 be if GQP gets back into power in 2022? They'll change every voting ...

... law they can in Jan 2023 and they'll do it the first week they're power.

[dumbcat]

87. They can't change any federal voting laws

because Biden can veto them.

[uponit7771]

90. True, they don't need to change federal laws they're doing it at the state level. How can we win ...

... even in 2024 if they have these laws in place and there's nothing at the federal level making them change?

tia

[Calista241]

88. No matter what they do, even if they win both the house and the senate

no new laws get passed or go into affect without the President's signature.

[uponit7771]

89. Then that's still a net lose for 2024, the GQP has made RELEVANT inroads into skewing the voting...

... in their favor with the anti access and voter nullification laws alone.

How can we win in 2024 if what they CURRENTLY have in place is not removed?

Thx in advance

[IcyPeas]

41. Why does it seem that Manchin holds more power than the President of the United States.

he makes me sick.

[LiberalFighter]

52. There is nothing in the Constitution requiring it.

I'm surprised he doesn't think that the Senate Majority Leader should be elected by 2/3 vote.

[Tommymac]

63. Fuck Joe Manchin.

Yes, I said it.

He is a traitor to the Biden Agenda and the planks of the Democratic Party.

Yes, I said it.

One man or woman should not be allowed to make the rules.

Fuck Joe Manchin.

Yes - I said it again.

[Yandex]

82. This dog won't hunt

There are times I break down and cry

[ecstatic]

86. pos. nt