Do Dems get a "working majority"?

[7,052,770]

51 would be pretty disappointing, as it means we blow both Georgia seats and don't get any of the reaches (SC, TX, AK, KS, MT), or we do get one of those but blow NC.

I'm thinking 53-55 is the most likely, increased to 55-59 after liberating Douglass and Puerto Rico from their second-class status.

[7,052,770]

Yes, but that's after admitting DC as a state

The problem is I don't see 50-51 seats being enough to admit DC as a state.

Not a single Democratic Senator will oppose it. There is no argument against it (assuming you exclude the federal buildings) beyond "They might elect Democrats/blacks to the Senate, and I don't like that." No Democrat is going to stand up for taxation without representation, for Americans denied a voice in Congress altogether.

Once it's going to pass anyway, you'll probably see some Republican support too, just for the optics.

[7,052,770]

Yes, but that's after admitting DC as a state

The problem is I don't see 50-51 seats being enough to admit DC as a state.

Not a single Democratic Senator will oppose it. There is no argument against it (assuming you exclude the federal buildings) beyond "They might elect Democrats/blacks to the Senate, and I don't like that." No Democrat is going to stand up for taxation without representation, for Americans denied a voice in Congress altogether.

Once it's going to pass anyway, you'll probably see some Republican support too, just for the optics.

I was assuming that DC statehood could still be filibustered, and my point was I'm not sure if there's enough numbers to nuke the filibuster.

Although if Angus King is saying "do it", then.....

As far as I know it can be, but Democrats can and will declare that the filibuster doesn't apply to new states if they need to, just like Republicans declared it didn't apply to new Supreme Court justices.

[7,052,770]

Also, DC and PR statehood is not some radical left idea. I don't see any reason for the 4 to vote against it. DC has been part of this country since its founding and PR has been part of the US longer than East Prussia has been part of Russia so why not.

Exactly. The only reason DC/PR statehood is "controversial" is because Republicans have framed it that way. It's actually quite obvious that all Americans should be represented in Congress unless they explicitly don't want to be (which is something that PR will decide next week).

Democrats must NOT allow Republicans to define the admission of the 51st and 52nd states as some kind of norm violation or something that requires a big concession to them to even out.