Manchin's filibuster defense contradicts the Senate legacy he claims to protect

[Celerity]

2. He has publicly ruled out the two most obvious forms of modification

The 41 votes need to sustain modification, and the 'talking filibuster' (as he insists he will never accept doing away with the 60 votes needed for cloture rule). Not many other options that actual would stop a filibuster out there that conform to his demands.

Sinema may be even harder to assuage, as she ludicrously wants a 60 vote threshold on ALL Senate actions, including doing away with the two exceptions that exist now that came from the two mini-nukes. Both are fairly hostile to reconciliation as well, despite their voting for the big COVID bill via reconciliation.

Feinstein is a cipher, as she will never vote to do away with the filibuster, but has not really said where she stands on modifications.

They are the ones who have to cave, not the rest of our caucus. I have yet to have one person (despite many, many attempts) explain to me the modifications that they will accept AND that will actually allow us to pass these vital bills. All I get is vacuous 'Schumer said failure is not an option' type replies, along with implied accusations of my disloyalty to the party by even asking questions, which is outrageous. I have not, do not now, and never will work off blind faith for anything in my life. It is just in my makeup. If blind acceptance and a moratorium on even asking probing process questions are now made manifest as a requirement to post here, then I am not long for the board.

BTW, a great article that adress some of your reply (the WHY it is so important and why it truly needs to be done part):

The filibuster hurts only Senate Democrats — and Mitch McConnell knows that

The numbers don't lie.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.msnbc.com/msnbc/amp/ncna1255787