Joe Manchin says that he's voting against the For The People Act (Voting Rights)

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Well we can kiss the House goodbye at any rate Sinema is a consponsor and she already said the samething as Manchin

With gerrymandering districts and Gavin Newsom at 45 percent and may lose the Runoff with Gov Cox, D's aren't gonna Redistrict 6 out of Cali, D's aren't gonna hold a 5 seat Majority with DeSantis and Abbott and no Commission gerrymandering FL and TX

That's just Logic, both Abbott and DeSantis could Redistrict 5 D's in each out office

If HR 1 passed it could still be axed by Conservative SCOTUS by Judicial Review

[It’s so Joever]

That’s it, screw him.
It’s time to play hardball. We needed this one thing with this trifecta and we need to risk it all.
If he doesn’t want to play, well strip him of everything.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Should Ds keep the S 51/49 Majority they can win the H back in 2024 or 2026 should Covid be gone and it will be by then just not fast enough in 2022

Probably in 2026 Ernst, Collins and Tillis are 3 most Vulnerable Rs out there, most House control changed in Midterms not Prez races, 2024 might be too soon to win H back
78 percent believe Rs will take H, 78 percent have D's winning S

I hope D's maintain the H, but we aren't gonna win OH, IA, NC and FL without HR 1 a landslide to keep the H a 52/48 Senate isn't big enough to keep the H

[SWE]

Joe Manchin wouldn't vote to save his daughter a burning building without a Republican arsonist's consent.

Ok tbf if that happened that would be pretty cool

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Justice Alito, Thomas and Gorsuch are smiling that Manchin is doing the work for them and they won't have to take up HR 1, they allowed Gerrymandering in much of 2010s.

But, 2024/2026 even if no HR 1 passed, D's can win back control of the H , Covid is bound to get better, but probably in 2026

[OSR stands with Israel]

The fact you guys thought you could pass your entire agenda with only 50 votes is hilarious. A 222-213 house majority and 50-50 senate majority by definition means you have to water down much of your agenda to get it passed

[ibagli]

https://twitter.com/LPDonovan/status/1401556652281716738

[PragmaticPopulist]

https://twitter.com/lara_putnam/status/1401557014011125760?s=20

Food for thought.

[7,052,770]

The fact you guys thought you could pass your entire agenda with only 50 votes is hilarious. A 222-213 house majority and 50-50 senate majority by definition means you have to water down much of your agenda to get it passed

It's pretty heartbreaking that even you are so far gone that you write off protecting the integrity of elections as merely "our agenda" rather than the last chance to save American democracy.

[OSR stands with Israel]

The fact you guys thought you could pass your entire agenda with only 50 votes is hilarious. A 222-213 house majority and 50-50 senate majority by definition means you have to water down much of your agenda to get it passed

It's pretty heartbreaking that even you are so far gone that you write off protecting the integrity of elections as merely "our agenda" rather than the last chance to save American democracy.

Like I said oppose it for these reasons :

- I oppose same day registration(Even Oregon doesn’t have this )

- I don’t think vote by mail should be expanded anymore than it already has as one of the biggest problem with vote by mail is it violates secret ballot principle

- I don’t think donations should be matched at a 6:1 ratio

-  candidates shouldn’t be required to release 10 years of tax returns . Mitt Romney only released  two and that is good enough

- I don’t trust independent commissions at all . Any commission should rather have equal amount of democrats and republicans only with no independents(other parties can get on the commission if they averaged 5% of the vote in presidential vote in the past decade ) . If they cannot come to an agreement then you would have an algorithm draw the lines




This bill isn’t anywhere near as good as you guys make it out to be

[Sir Mohamed]

The more I watch this unfolding, the more I want America to become a parliamentary system. A prez / head of govt needs a functioning majority in the legislature.

[lfromnj]

Why can’t they just pass a bill with:

• Demanding 7 days a week early voting in the final week of election cycle
• Ban Gerrymandering
• Precients based on population.

If he’d oppose that then.... yikes

Shouldn't precincts be based on voter eligible population or the voter roll?

[DrScholl]

Attach this bill to a funding bill that gives West Virginia massive amounts of money and make him vote against that.

[7,052,770]

The fact you guys thought you could pass your entire agenda with only 50 votes is hilarious. A 222-213 house majority and 50-50 senate majority by definition means you have to water down much of your agenda to get it passed

It's pretty heartbreaking that even you are so far gone that you write off protecting the integrity of elections as merely "our agenda" rather than the last chance to save American democracy.

Like I said oppose it for these reasons :

- I oppose same day registration(Even Oregon doesn’t have this )

- I don’t think vote by mail should be expanded anymore than it already has as one of the biggest problem with vote by mail is it violates secret ballot principle

- I don’t think donations should be matched at a 6:1 ratio

-  candidates shouldn’t be required to release 10 years of tax returns . Mitt Romney only released  two and that is good enough

- I don’t trust independent commissions at all . Any commission should rather have equal amount of democrats and republicans only with no independents(other parties can get on the commission if they averaged 5% of the vote in presidential vote in the past decade ) . If they cannot come to an agreement then you would have an algorithm draw the lines




This bill isn’t anywhere near as good as you guys make it out to be

You're free to nitpick particulars of the bill. So do I, along with most Democrats here. I think we all see that it's a rough draft "message bill" and not something ready to enact tomorrow.

But you should support the overall goal of it if you want American democracy to make it out of this decade and endure for the rest of our lives, and that includes not characterizing it as a partisan agenda item.

[OSR stands with Israel]

The fact you guys thought you could pass your entire agenda with only 50 votes is hilarious. A 222-213 house majority and 50-50 senate majority by definition means you have to water down much of your agenda to get it passed

It's pretty heartbreaking that even you are so far gone that you write off protecting the integrity of elections as merely "our agenda" rather than the last chance to save American democracy.

Like I said oppose it for these reasons :

- I oppose same day registration(Even Oregon doesn’t have this )

- I don’t think vote by mail should be expanded anymore than it already has as one of the biggest problem with vote by mail is it violates secret ballot principle

- I don’t think donations should be matched at a 6:1 ratio

-  candidates shouldn’t be required to release 10 years of tax returns . Mitt Romney only released  two and that is good enough

- I don’t trust independent commissions at all . Any commission should rather have equal amount of democrats and republicans only with no independents(other parties can get on the commission if they averaged 5% of the vote in presidential vote in the past decade ) . If they cannot come to an agreement then you would have an algorithm draw the lines




This bill isn’t anywhere near as good as you guys make it out to be

You're free to nitpick particulars of the bill. So do I, along with most Democrats here. I think we all see that it's a rough draft "message bill" and not something ready to enact tomorrow.

But you should support the overall goal of it if you want American democracy to make it out of this decade and endure for the rest of our lives, and that includes not characterizing it as a partisan agenda item.

These are some of the main provisions of the bill

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

Joe Manchin actively hates democracy. His whole thing is that elections are irrelevant, anything that both sides don’t agree on shouldn’t pass the Senate. Because he’s an open minded independent philosopher king, just like stupid people who only take the laziest possible position on everything say they want.
Ironical this self-conception makes these typesof politicians completely unreasonable people who are impossible to work with. They have no clear goals so they can’t be bargained with, any political pressure brought against them, whether from other politicians or their constituents, actually reinforces their position because it confirms in their mind that they are the last honest man fighting against the big bad political machine, and any incentive just confirms what a savvy, deal making political operator they are.
Nothing can get people like Manchin to budge because they don’t have any greater ideal than feeding their self-image and their whole worldview is built to make sure that everything feeds their ego.


And, no, even just reauthorizing the VRA isn’t going to happen. Joe Manchin doesn’t have substantive objections, he just doesn’t believe in voting for anything Republicans don’t.

[Roronoa D. Law]

https://twitter.com/StevenTDennis/status/1401547192876347395

But Manchin can not actually believe that he alone can actually drag the Democrat's feet for the next 3 1/2 years doing nothing.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

https://twitter.com/StevenTDennis/status/1401547192876347395

But Manchin can not actually believe that he alone can actually drag the Democrat's feet for the next 3 1/2 years doing nothing.

You are assuming that Manchin thinks about anything beyond what is immediately in front of him.
He very much can by just doing it on one damn thing after another.

[President Johnson]

Disappointing and quite pathetic. But as long as the filibuster isn't abolished, HR1 wouldn't have passed the senate anyway.

[emailking]

Why can’t they just pass a bill with:

• Demanding 7 days a week early voting in the final week of election cycle
• Ban Gerrymandering
• Precients based on population.

If he’d oppose that then.... yikes

I don't think you'd get 10 Republicans for that though.

[Roll Roons]

The fact you guys thought you could pass your entire agenda with only 50 votes is hilarious. A 222-213 house majority and 50-50 senate majority by definition means you have to water down much of your agenda to get it passed

It's pretty heartbreaking that even you are so far gone that you write off protecting the integrity of elections as merely "our agenda" rather than the last chance to save American democracy.

- I don’t think donations should be matched at a 6:1 ratio

Holy s**t, this. Should millions of dollars in taxpayer money really go towards funding MTG?

For people bitching about Manchin, I've said it before, and I'll say it again. In 2004, Byron Dorgan won reelection in North Dakota with 68%, while Bush carried the state with 62%. The last time Democrats had more than 50 Senate seats, their majority included Senators from not just North Dakota, but also South Dakota, Louisiana, Arkansas, Missouri, Indiana. Those states are unwinnable? Well they also had Senators from Florida and North Carolina, which should be within reach. And they accomplished this even as Republicans had a Senator from deep blue Illinois.

Democrats have just lost their way, plain and simple.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

Disappointing and quite pathetic. But as long as the filibuster isn't abolished, HR1 wouldn't have passed the senate anyway.

The idea was that, no Joe Manchin couldn’t be this aggressively stupid and we would have some kind of filibuster work around, even Angus King was onboard for this, after he got on board with some marginally modified HR1. And Sinema could strong armed into pretending to be reasonable for once.

But Mr. Manchin just really is that stupid.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

Why can’t they just pass a bill with:

• Demanding 7 days a week early voting in the final week of election cycle
• Ban Gerrymandering
• Precients based on population.

If he’d oppose that then.... yikes

I don't think you'd get 10 Republicans for that though.

You won’t get one

[lfromnj]

Why can’t they just pass a bill with:

• Demanding 7 days a week early voting in the final week of election cycle
• Ban Gerrymandering
• Precients based on population.

If he’d oppose that then.... yikes

I don't think you'd get 10 Republicans for that though.

You won’t get one

Of course not because precincts should be based by equalizing number of possible voters or average votes. Unfortunately then Democrats would call that racism and Jim Crow.

[Former President tack50]

Like I said oppose it for these reasons :

- I oppose same day registration(Even Oregon doesn’t have this )

- I don’t think vote by mail should be expanded anymore than it already has as one of the biggest problem with vote by mail is it violates secret ballot principle

- I don’t think donations should be matched at a 6:1 ratio

-  candidates shouldn’t be required to release 10 years of tax returns . Mitt Romney only released  two and that is good enough

- I don’t trust independent commissions at all . Any commission should rather have equal amount of democrats and republicans only with no independents(other parties can get on the commission if they averaged 5% of the vote in presidential vote in the past decade ) . If they cannot come to an agreement then you would have an algorithm draw the lines

This bill isn’t anywhere near as good as you guys make it out to be

I am not going to comment on the mail-in voting since I am against mail ballots in general due to bad experiences with them (and the way the US do mail-in voting seems quite insecure to me tbh)

-What is wrong with same day registration? As long as all the paperwork is in order and the person in question can prove they are eligible to vote, what's so bad about them registering?

-Donations being matched by the government is a good thing. In fact in an ideal world donations from corporations would be illegal and those from individuals be heavily restricted, with political parties being publically funded

-More transparency is always good, though tbh if that was a big issue I don't think Dems would have too much of an issue reducing the amount of tax returns to 2 years or even eliminating the requirement

-Independent commissions are still better than "bipartisan" commissions, which lead to incumbent protection maps as opposed to actual fair maps.