Why Don't Senators like Manchin, Sinema, Sanders, and even McConnell

[MineralMan]

listen to the voices of the people out there? Why are their views set in stone and why do they appear to be unmovable?

EGO!

Almost nobody who doesn't have an almost supermassive ego ever gets elected to the US Senate. It takes enormous chutzpah to run for that high office - the second most powerful elected office under our Constitution. So, that's an explanation that applies to most in the Senate.

Becoming a Senator is hard. Very hard. It's tough enough to get elected to a House seat, but the Senate is a whole other animal.

So, if you are a Senator, you have strong opinions, and a strong will to stick to those opinions. Voters in your own state might get a chance to put in a word or two, but a Senator can not listen to constituents on any issue and still get re-elected. Anything someone not from your state says doesn't matter at all to you if you are a Senator, though.

Senators believe what they believe. Period. Look at that Senator from Vermont. He's another man with a massive ego. He even refuses to be part of a major political party, of all things.

So, don't be surprised if any Senator refuses to change his mind. His (or her) ego won't allow that.

[RKP5637]

1. Reminds me of companies I worked for that went under because the CEO was stuck in his ways!

[area51]

78. +1 n/t

[wryter2000]

2. Doesn't seem to me they're all that way

I can't imagine Sherrod Brown being unmoved by a visit from civil rights leaders. He'd also care that his constituents firmly support the bills he's almost single-handedly killing.

[wellst0nev0ter]

3. Remind me again when Sanders has been an obstructionist?

Serious question.

[MineralMan]

5. Really, he hasn't done much in the Senate.

Not much at all.

[wellst0nev0ter]

8. You can say the same thing for almost every Dem senator

Thanks to our divided Senate, we haven't been able to pass most of anything.

Right now we need senators NOT to act like Manchin and Sinema. For that extremely low bar, Sanders is doing his job.

[LanternWaste]

24. Based on what measure?

Or is it simply another "this is my opinion... yours may be different" slogan with no objective measure to support it as anything else?

[CentralMass]

11. He isn't. Article - Why Biden is keeping Bernie close

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/02/bernie-biden-relationship-472128

[wellst0nev0ter]

12. Thank you!

Apparently Bernie is acting more of a collaborator than his critics would like to admit.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

18. Forced an amendment to the Stimulus that had no chance of passing

And was already deemed to not be able to be passed by reconciliation. Not obstruction, per se, but bullshit showboating that has led to the constant demonization of one senator over her stupid behavior voting against the bill.

[wellst0nev0ter]

19. No, it's not obstruction

It's the complete opposite of it. He's trying to get things done and pass Biden's agenda, while other Democrats sit on their thumbs and give up over bullshit rules.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

20. Biden had stated he wanted it seperate when the parliamentarian shot it down

But Bernie didn't care and engaged in theatrics. You honestly think that Harris was going to break with Biden and fire the parliamentarian because Bernie didn't like what he said?

Bernie COULD have introduced a different bill, instead he played theatrics.
That's the opposite of trying to get things done and pass Biden's agenda.

[wellst0nev0ter]

21. He's showing the rest of the Dem's how it's done

Because he learned the lessons from 2009-10.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

23. Breaking with party leadership and showboating is how it's done?

He accomplished nothing except for giving Sinema enough rope to hang herself.

[wellst0nev0ter]

28. It's a hell of a lot better than doing nothing

Or doing too little, like how the Democrats squandered their majority in 2009-2010.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

29. I seem to recall some pretty big legislation getting passed in 2009-2010

But certain Democrats didn't feel it was good enough and sat out the midterms because they didn't get a pony.

[wellst0nev0ter]

32. Yeah, Democrats made sure we didn't get credit for Obamacare

All the good stuff of the bill kicked in after the midterms. It may have been a good law, but it was poorly designed to win elections until about 8 years later.

[betsuni]

34. Because, as you know, the senate only had a filibuster proof majority for four months and ten days

and it was during this time that the ACA was voted on and then passed into law on March 23, 2010.

[wellst0nev0ter]

41. And the Democrats campaigned on ACA and won more seats

Oh wait...

[betsuni]

44. Democrats shouldn't have provided affordable health care to Americans just to win an election?

Wow. I disagree. Just like now, elected officials should think about the good of the country, not their careers. The ACA saved lives and after many years Americans became less scared of government involvement in health care, paving the way to universal health care in the future. As you know, the ACA passed the House with a public option.

And the reason the ACA wasn't popular until later was all the fear mongering about death panels, as you know. Republicans scared people into voting against their interest, as always.

This is a forum for Democrats, as you know, and members should really stick to facts and reality and not blame Democrats for imaginary things.

[wellst0nev0ter]

45. If you can't sell good legislation to the voters

You are a crap politician, period.

[betsuni]

48. As if people vote for Republicans because they sell their good legislation.

[wellst0nev0ter]

50. Like it or not, the goops have a vision and they sold it

Of course the vision was white supremacy and "take our country back" but they sold the hell out of that product and successfully demonized the opposition.

Meanwhile, the ACA was so toxic moderate Dems were running away from it. 34 Dems voted against it, and they were not from the progressive wing.

[betsuni]

51. Republicans aren't the only ones demonizing Democrats.

"Neoliberals" "elites" "corporate Democrats" "status quo" "corrupt" "rigging elections" "will stop at nothing to prevent progressive legislation" "ideologically bankrupt" etc. As you know.

[Cha]

73. Damn Straight.. Conveniently Forgotten by

by some.. ahem.

[betsuni]

30. Democrats had a filibuster proof majority in the senate for four months and ten days.

What did they "squander"?

[AZSkiffyGeek]

31. Apparently they should have bucked Obama and introduced legislation that couldn't pass

[wellst0nev0ter]

33. Their majority

Remember that?

[AZSkiffyGeek]

35. Hey you're the one who is bashing them...

[betsuni]

36. Their imaginary two year majority?

Al Franken:

"During the 2012 campaign, Republicans and their lackeys in the media liked to claim that Obama 'owned the Congress for the first two years. They did everything he wanted.' That was Mitch McConnell. Chris Wallace of Fox News put it this way: 'The first two years, he had a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.' I think they kept using this talking point specifically to drive me insane. The truth is that we held a filibuster-proof majority from September 24, 2009 (when Paul Kirk was sworn in), until February 4, 2010 (when Scott Brown was sworn in) -- all of four months and ten days."

[wellst0nev0ter]

40. I promise you

This is not a gotcha comeback that you think this is. If anything, this factoid makes the Democrats look MORE ineffective.

[betsuni]

46. How?

That Republican talking point Franken is talking about was very effective in damaging Democrats.

[Demsrule86]

60. And they had a fair number of moderates in the Senate then including Landrieu and

Lincoln. Some still here were delighted when we lost moderates or conservadems because they don't understand, we will never have majorities without them. The country has not moved left. We owe our House and Senate majorities to moderate Democrts.

[iemanja]

66. the poster said it wasn't obstruction

and clearly explained what is was. It has nothing to do with getting things done.

[wellst0nev0ter]

69. The poster was deflecting and I brought it back to the issue at hand

I know what's going on, thank you very much for mansplaining things

[iemanja]

74. I can't mansplain

because I'm not a man. The avatar should have provided a hint to that. Your insults don't substitute for the absence of substance. They are a weak excuse. Insults, however, are the characteristic trademark of you and your fellow acolytes. Some things never change.

[wellst0nev0ter]

75. Sorry, didn't mean to assume

Anyone can mansplain, regardless of their gender.

[iemanja]

76. Anyone can insult instead of advancing an argument

and that is obviously all you have.

[wellst0nev0ter]

77. You're right, this back and forth is not productive at all

Have a nice day

[George II]

56. Check yesterday's Senate votes.

[Budi]

62. Was that the one where he filibustered against NASA Funding?

Think he may have misread that part & thought it was funding the dreaded Bezos!

It was for the increased funding of NASA.
He was the lone filubuster against NASA funding.

[wellst0nev0ter]

70. A protest vote is not the same as obstruction, slugger

I know that concept is beyond your scope of understanding, but I just wanted to make the distinction clear.

[Budi]

4. What's weirder is when their Voting Record doesn't reflect their public persona.

The Public image they cull is not reflected in their Voting Record.

It's often more like doublespeak, hypocrisy.

[George II]

58. Yes. We saw that in yesterday's votes.

[FoxNewsSucks]

6. Sanders isn't ego-driven.

You can look at his entire public record going back to being the mayor of Burlington and see that he's always been consistent and responsive to the concerns of ordinary Americans. There are others too.

They are, unfortunately, all burdened by the need to have a lot of campaign money. That's the real problem. A few years ago a study found that the wealthy and corporations got what they wanted from Congress nearly all of the time. Working Americans do not. It's the money, they listen to the voices that fund their campaigns and keep them in office.

Also, some of them are indeed egotistical assholes.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/testing-theories-of-american-politics-elites-interest-groups-and-average-citizens/62327F513959D0A304D4893B382B992B

"The central point that emerges from our research is that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence. Our results provide substantial support for theories of Economic-Elite Domination and for theories of Biased Pluralism, but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism."

[George II]

61. This is really a very informative site, updated frequently....

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-congress-votes/

Sanders is a Senator from the state that most closely aligns with Joe Biden. Vermont is the highest rated of 50 in the "Biden margin vs. trump" category - +35.4%.

On the other hand, of the 50 Senators in the Democratic caucus, he has voted against Biden's position more than any other in the caucus. 50th of 50 Senators.

[FoxNewsSucks]

64. 538 is good, they also put out a good podcast

Usually two-three times a week.

That link, which was updated as of 6/9 at 9:30 am, has Sanders voting record as 93.5% "with Biden". We mock republicons who mindlessly fell in line to do the bidding of Bush, or MF45. I don't have a problem with not every democrat having a 100% "with Biden". As long as they're voting the right way on things that matter most, such as S1. 49 Democrats co-sponsored that, I think the 1 who refuses is a far bigger problem than the 3-5% "not with Biden" votes from Sanders and others.

Fact is, no matter what letter is after a name, Sanders has worked harder in support of Democratic philosophy and policy than many with that "D".

Anyway, the original topic was what motivates Senators, and I stand by my post that most are answering to the wishes of the people funding them. Sometimes ego coincides with that, but not always.

[George II]

67. True, we shouldn't expect all Democrats to vote for the party's position blindly every time, but....

....it seems year after year the same members of the caucus vote less with the Democrats that others.

For example, this year we have 50 Senators, they break down like this w/respect to voting with Biden:

35 100%
14 96.8%
1 93.5%

Yesterday's bill was a very important one, the main bill and the two votes on amendments. 49 Senators voted for it and the two amendment votes, 1 voted against all three.

I can't understand why someone would vote differently than all 49 others in the caucus, but vote with 30 or so republicans.

[NewHendoLib]

7. very tired of the lectures here recently of how we should be thinking

[CentralMass]

10. I agree.

[NewHendoLib]

13. I guess I missed the promotion to thought police person

[FoxNewsSucks]

68. Me too.

I would have applied. Things would be so much better if everyone would just think the way I tell them too.

For the whole world, too, not just DU

[NewHendoLib]

71. .

[CentralMass]

9. Bernie Sanders is an integral part of the current Democratic caucus

Subcommittees Bernie Sanders is on.

Budget (Ranking Member)
Energy & Natural Resources
Environment & Public Works
Veterans Affairs
Primary Health & Retirement Security (HELP) Subcommittee (Ranking Member).

I would argue that he was very instrumental in aiding Joe Biden in his primary win and somr his policy ideas have clearly been adopted.

[BlueTsunami2018]

14. Because they aren't beholden to the voters.

They’re beholden to their owners.

Sanders does listen to the People. His issues are popular throughout the country.

[CentralMass]

16. He also won his last Senate election with 67.4% of the vote.

[CousinIT]

15. They get a LOT of money from Americans for Prosperity, Kochs, US Chamber...

...to NOT listen.

All they hear is money falling into their campaign coffers. The screams of Democracy dying is drowned out.

[CentralMass]

17. Who gets money from these sources ? You paint with a broad brush.

It would appear that not even Manchin received $$ from koch's pac.

https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/koch-industries/C00236489/candidate-recipients/2020
No contrbutions to federal candidates in the last couple of cycles.
https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/americans-for-prosperity/C90013285/candidate-recipients/2018

[CousinIT]

27. . . .

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100215503293

[CentralMass]

38. Sanders is not a recipient.

[progressoid]

47. +1

[Autumn]

55. The name Samders is in invisable ink in that article?

[RegularJam]

22. None of them are immovable.

All will also accept significant compromise.

You are talking about the fringe elements of a diverse party.

[jcgoldie]

25. Why are you trying to lump Bernie Sanders..

... together with the republican minority leader and two democratic senators who are holding up Biden's agenda. Its very disingenuous.

[Rhiannon12866]

26. +100

[Progressive Jones]

37. Thank You ! nt

[Hassin Bin Sober]

39. Lol. They've been squawking so long that "hEs nOt a dEmOcrat!"

Now it sticks in their craw that “rEaL dEmoCrats!” are harpooning Biden’s agenda.

[spanone]

42. Money Money

[Brainfodder]

43. Corruption to the Nth.

Greedy
Republican
Evil
Everyday
Douchebags?

[Voltaire2]

49. Your attack on Sanders is reprehensible.

Consider self deleting.

[NeoGreen]

53. Some people might say...

...it is a POV worthy of FR.

[Fix The Stupid]

59. "Free Republic"? Nah..It's not like the OP spent years there...

"Free Republic"? Nah..It's not like the OP spent years there denigrating the democratic party...I mean, who would do that???

I mean it would be something if there screenshots and the like...but I am sure those do not exist...

Just another "look at me!!!" thread to stoke egos.

[joetheman]

52. I would say that Manchin, McConnell, Sinema ARE listening to the voice of THEIR people, not

THE people. The problem is that THEIR people are Trump suckers who are just like him with respect to greed, corruption, and racism. THEIR people are our problem and what is mostly wrong with America today. They need to be out voted in every aspect of their lives and that is going to take time and the maturation of decent, democracy-loving people. Until then it's going to be hell all over.

[George II]

57. What may surprise everyone is that both Manchin and Sinema have voted WITH Biden's position....

....100% of the time since he's been in office (see link below in the column "How often the member votes in line with Biden's position&quot .

Also look at who is at the bottom of list when sorted by Biden's position! That doesn't include three more votes yesterday where he voted with republicans and against all other Democrats.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-congress-votes/

What's also good to note is that Manchin's state had the 50th highest difference of 51 states/DC between trump's vs. Biden's vote in last year's election.

[Act_of_Reparation]

63. Occam's Razor, my good man.

Because they don't have to.

[MineralMan]

65. Exactly.

[SYFROYH]

72. A political scientist friend once told me there is no correlation between public opinion...

...and legislation. Zero.