Respect for Marriage Act

[Skill and Chance]

My very early prediction, assuming the Collins amendment is added to the bill:

Collins
Murkowski
Portman
Tillis
Scott (FL)
Ernst
Toomey
Romney
Capito
Johnson

On the bubble (3 of them will vote yes):
Fischer
Cramer
Tuberville
Sullivan
Burr
Lummis

Fringey (1 of them will vote yes)
Rubio
Thune
McConnell
Crapo

Tuberville!? Lummis!? Rick Scott? Johnson?

This is one issue the Trump-huggers are more open to supporting than the pre-Trump conservative establishment types.  They generally came into office after this was already settled and are animated by other issues.

[Reactionary Libertarian]

Johnson and Tuberville made vaguely supportive noises a while back. Scott represents Florida. Lummis is a woman representing a sparsely populated, libertarian leaning western state. I have a gut feeling for some reason. A lot of this is based on extrapolating from the sorts of people that voted Yes in the House.

If there was already that much support they wouldn't be delaying the vote till after the midterms. It seems like they're having a hard time getting enough support in the Senate even though close to a quarter of the more conservative House GOP votes for it. I think they would have gotten more support in the Senate if they had held the vote on the same day.

[Pres Mike]

Johnson and Tuberville made vaguely supportive noises a while back. Scott represents Florida. Lummis is a woman representing a sparsely populated, libertarian leaning western state. I have a gut feeling for some reason. A lot of this is based on extrapolating from the sorts of people that voted Yes in the House.

If there was already that much support they wouldn't be delaying the vote till after the midterms. It seems like they're having a hard time getting enough support in the Senate even though close to a quarter of the more conservative House GOP votes for it. I think they would have gotten more support in the Senate if they had held the vote on the same day.

I suspect several republican senators asked for the vote to be after the midterms, to not upset the conservative base. In return, they’ll vote for it.

If it was a hard no, Schumer would have a vote before midterms to force them on record.

[Ferguson97]

Johnson and Tuberville made vaguely supportive noises a while back. Scott represents Florida. Lummis is a woman representing a sparsely populated, libertarian leaning western state. I have a gut feeling for some reason. A lot of this is based on extrapolating from the sorts of people that voted Yes in the House.

If there was already that much support they wouldn't be delaying the vote till after the midterms. It seems like they're having a hard time getting enough support in the Senate even though close to a quarter of the more conservative House GOP votes for it. I think they would have gotten more support in the Senate if they had held the vote on the same day.

I suspect several republican senators asked for the vote to be after the midterms, to not upset the conservative base. In return, they’ll vote for it.

If it was a hard no, Schumer would have a vote before midterms to force them on record.

Massive mistake on Schumer's part. After the election, they will have no incentive to keep good on their promise.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

My very early prediction, assuming the Collins amendment is added to the bill:

Collins
Murkowski
Portman
Tillis
Scott (FL)
Ernst
Toomey
Romney
Capito
Johnson

On the bubble (3 of them will vote yes):
Fischer
Cramer
Tuberville
Sullivan
Burr
Lummis

Fringey (1 of them will vote yes)
Rubio
Thune
McConnell
Crapo

Tuberville!? Lummis!? Rick Scott? Johnson?

Johnson and Tuberville made vaguely supportive noises a while back. Scott represents Florida. Lummis is a woman representing a sparsely populated, libertarian leaning western state. I have a gut feeling for some reason. A lot of this is based on extrapolating from the sorts of people that voted Yes in the House.

Close to 40% of Republicans outside the South/Bible Belt voted for it in the House.  Virtually no Republicans from the South voted for it, on the other hand.  I think you need to factor in regional politics, which would take someone like Tuberville off the board.

[Schiff for Senate]

Portman's the only plausible GOP vote for a cloture vote here, let alone for actually passing the bill, and that's specifically because his son is gay. Everyone else will vote no (even Murkowski), and if Portman didn't have the immediate gay relative, he'd probably be a no vote too.

Get real. Murkowski and Collins are both safe yes votes.

[Schiff for Senate]

My very early prediction, assuming the Collins amendment is added to the bill:

Collins
Murkowski
Portman
Tillis
Scott (FL)
Ernst
Toomey
Romney
Capito
Johnson

On the bubble (3 of them will vote yes):
Fischer
Cramer
Tuberville
Sullivan
Burr
Lummis

Fringey (1 of them will vote yes)
Rubio
Thune
McConnell
Crapo

Tuberville!? Lummis!? Rick Scott? Johnson?

Johnson and Tuberville made vaguely supportive noises a while back. Scott represents Florida. Lummis is a woman representing a sparsely populated, libertarian leaning western state. I have a gut feeling for some reason. A lot of this is based on extrapolating from the sorts of people that voted Yes in the House.

Close to 40% of Republicans outside the South/Bible Belt voted for it in the House.  Virtually no Republicans from the South voted for it, on the other hand.  I think you need to factor in regional politics, which would take someone like Tuberville off the board.

Yup, I'm going to guess that Tuberville and Rick Scott both vote no. Lummis? Maybe. I doubt it, but Cody isn't without a point in his case for a yes vote on her part; and Johnson might get the sense to realise voting yes on this is politically sensible.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

My very early prediction, assuming the Collins amendment is added to the bill:

Collins
Murkowski
Portman
Tillis
Scott (FL)
Ernst
Toomey
Romney
Capito
Johnson

On the bubble (3 of them will vote yes):
Fischer
Cramer
Tuberville
Sullivan
Burr
Lummis

Fringey (1 of them will vote yes)
Rubio
Thune
McConnell
Crapo

Tuberville!? Lummis!? Rick Scott? Johnson?

Johnson and Tuberville made vaguely supportive noises a while back. Scott represents Florida. Lummis is a woman representing a sparsely populated, libertarian leaning western state. I have a gut feeling for some reason. A lot of this is based on extrapolating from the sorts of people that voted Yes in the House.

Close to 40% of Republicans outside the South/Bible Belt voted for it in the House.  Virtually no Republicans from the South voted for it, on the other hand.  I think you need to factor in regional politics, which would take someone like Tuberville off the board.

Tuberville said he was open to it. He's not you in the sense that he doesn't actively care much what people different than him in a different state a thousand miles away do in the privacy of their own homes.

[Pres Mike]

Johnson and Tuberville made vaguely supportive noises a while back. Scott represents Florida. Lummis is a woman representing a sparsely populated, libertarian leaning western state. I have a gut feeling for some reason. A lot of this is based on extrapolating from the sorts of people that voted Yes in the House.

If there was already that much support they wouldn't be delaying the vote till after the midterms. It seems like they're having a hard time getting enough support in the Senate even though close to a quarter of the more conservative House GOP votes for it. I think they would have gotten more support in the Senate if they had held the vote on the same day.

I suspect several republican senators asked for the vote to be after the midterms, to not upset the conservative base. In return, they’ll vote for it.

If it was a hard no, Schumer would have a vote before midterms to force them on record.

Massive mistake on Schumer's part. After the election, they will have no incentive to keep good on their promise.

I mean, perhaps not?

Yes, often republicans senators will be “open to vote” for legislation to only back out. But once they commit to vote, they typically do. Except for a few trouble makers, the United States senate has fairly good rapport regardless of party.

[Sestak]

So, at this point, I feel it’s fairly likely this is going to pass in the next couple of months? Given what’s just happened I can’t imagine the GOP will want to keep this an issue on the table…

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

My very early prediction, assuming the Collins amendment is added to the bill:

Collins
Murkowski
Portman
Tillis
Scott (FL)
Ernst
Toomey
Romney
Capito
Johnson

On the bubble (3 of them will vote yes):
Fischer
Cramer
Tuberville
Sullivan
Burr
Lummis

Fringey (1 of them will vote yes)
Rubio
Thune
McConnell
Crapo

Remind me what the Collins amendment is?

[Sestak]

So, at this point, I feel it’s fairly likely this is going to pass in the next couple of months? Given what’s just happened I can’t imagine the GOP will want to keep this an issue on the table…

Update: it’s now being rumored that the Senate will indeed be voting on this sometime this week.

[Sestak]

https://twitter.com/frankthorp/status/1592295472240422913?s=46&t=jx2d07CMp9_...

[Dani Rose]

I feel like this one passes now that the midterms are over. Fingers seriously crossed, because it would protect us from another absolutely stellar Supreme Court ruling.

[Hope For A New Era]

https://twitter.com/frankthorp/status/1592295472240422913?s=46&t=jx2d07CMp9_...

[Reactionary Libertarian]

Looks like it’s really happening.

I’ve been very impressed with how the Democrats have handled this bill, in both the House and the Senate. They’ve worked with Republicans to write a modest bill, there are no poison pills hidden anywhere, they prioritized passing it, and thus delayed it until after the midterms, rather than cynically holding it over voters’ heads in November by taking an early vote when it would fail. My question is, why only do this for gay marriage??? Meanwhile for abortion they only vote on bills that go way past Roe, for cannabis they load the bill full of “racial equity” garbage, why?

[Unbeatable Titan Susan Collins]

Looks like it’s really happening.

I’ve been very impressed with how the Democrats have handled this bill, in both the House and the Senate. They’ve worked with Republicans to write a modest bill, there are no poison pills hidden anywhere, they prioritized passing it, and thus delayed it until after the midterms, rather than cynically holding it over voters’ heads in November by taking an early vote when it would fail. My question is, why only do this for gay marriage??? Meanwhile for abortion they only vote on bills that go way past Roe, for cannabis they load the bill full of “racial equity” garbage, why?

For weed I think Dems jut love using it as a youth turnout carrot, and that many Democratic Senator don't truly care for the issue all that much so they are fine with their poison pills.

Roe is a different matter. They are no where close with their beyond Roe bill. (49 votes). A cleaner Roe bill does a bit better (Murkowski-Collins 52 votes), Neither are close to 60 or close to overcoming the filibuster.  A 60 vote abortion bill should one exist, probably includes a ban on late term abortion after a certain week threshold outside when a mother's life is in danger which is probably unpalatable for much of the Dem base and the Senate caucus. I don't think Democrats would love a bill that bans abortion after 15 weeks but guarantees it through six. (Not that I'm sure you could sell 10 Republicans on that bill either). So for Roe Democrats stick with a messaging bill because there is no alternative they will agree to. 

[Oryxslayer]

https://twitter.com/JoshNBCNews/status/1592647482236096512?s=20&t=Ba-HkSXHop...

Romney now a guaranteed Yea.

[Ferguson97]

https://twitter.com/JasonSCampbell/status/1592578776747356162

Ben Shapiro seems deeply invested in making sure Republicans are completely unpalatable to normal people.

[Dani Rose]

When this inevitably passes, I hope - genuinely hope - that the GOP runs on trying to repeal it. I really, really hope they do that. It's a very good, fantastic idea.

[Zedonathin2020]

When this inevitably passes, I hope - genuinely hope - that the GOP runs on trying to repeal it. I really, really hope they do that. It's a very good, fantastic idea.

If any Republican high ups are reading this, please do so, it'll get you so much support you guys will win California!

[Reactionary Libertarian]

When this inevitably passes, I hope - genuinely hope - that the GOP runs on trying to repeal it. I really, really hope they do that. It's a very good, fantastic idea.

If there was any appetite in the Republican Party for relitigating gay marriage, this bill wouldn’t even be discussed.

[Dani Rose]

When this inevitably passes, I hope - genuinely hope - that the GOP runs on trying to repeal it. I really, really hope they do that. It's a very good, fantastic idea.

If there was any appetite in the Republican Party for relitigating gay marriage, this bill wouldn’t even be discussed.

I don't doubt that it's fairly well-accepted, but Shapiro's reaction has already indicated that the America First wing is not going to be happy about it, and they still hold enough own-goaling power in the GOP to make a losing stink out of it.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

When this inevitably passes, I hope - genuinely hope - that the GOP runs on trying to repeal it. I really, really hope they do that. It's a very good, fantastic idea.

If there was any appetite in the Republican Party for relitigating gay marriage, this bill wouldn’t even be discussed.

I don't doubt that it's fairly well-accepted, but Shapiro's reaction has already indicated that the America First wing is not going to be happy about it, and they still hold enough own-goaling power in the GOP to make a losing stink out of it.

There is even a division within the America First faction. Shapiro and the rest of the band of idiots like Matt Walsh and Steven Crowder are religious nuts, while the younger, less well off contingent are relatively fine with gay people as long as they can go back to hating women and minorities.

[Reactionary Libertarian]

When this inevitably passes, I hope - genuinely hope - that the GOP runs on trying to repeal it. I really, really hope they do that. It's a very good, fantastic idea.

If there was any appetite in the Republican Party for relitigating gay marriage, this bill wouldn’t even be discussed.

I don't doubt that it's fairly well-accepted, but Shapiro's reaction has already indicated that the America First wing is not going to be happy about it, and they still hold enough own-goaling power in the GOP to make a losing stink out of it.

LOL Shapiro is not from the “America First” wing. The America Firsters are more concerned with immigration and trade. Shapiro, even though he is Jewish, is from the evangelical  “TrueCon” wing focused on toxically unpopular positions like opposing abortion and same-sex marriage (and cutting entitlements too!) that are often unappealing to the “populist” voters themselves.