mtutiger

You made a post about how fears of fascism isn't enough to break through to the jobs voter - I respond back that climate may suffer from the same issue. I interpreted your comment about "jobs voters" as covering a wide spectrum, not just limited to progressive voters. So yeah, maybe climate appeals to progressive "jobs voters".... but does it persuade other "jobs voters"?

The Democrats only need progressive votes to win elections?

Obviously it's not abstract for progressives.... how about for people who are not progressive? That average person that fife speaks of who doesn't sit around and think about this stuff like we all do? I see what fife is saying with fears of fascism not being sufficient a platform to run on.... obviously he's correct. But I'd also argue that Democrats (progressives included) are generally pretty bad at marketing their platforms to the average person., and climate change may be one of the better examples of their ineffectiveness.

Couldn't the same thing be said about climate change funding in the BBB? Isn't that pretty abstract to the average person as well?

I feel like I've read some stories over the past year about GOP politicians in Florida showing signs of being more concerned about climate change than in the past. Of course, it's not being reflected at all at the federal level (particularly from Rick Scott)

This is 100% accurate. It's not good enough to have great solutions, you have to market it in a way that the broader population will be attentive to. And that means marketing to people who aren't necessarily high in terms of educational attainment and may live in areas that are less hospitable toward liberal politics. Also marketing to people who have day to day concerns (like putting food on the table) that make things like climate change seem abstract in contrast. And the communication between Democratic politicians on these big issues (all of them - moderate and progressive) is generally pretty poor. You have to make the case why this stuff matters, not just to your friend group, but to people who may be hostile to your own world view.

IDK... I just think cultural issues have a lot more salience now than economic ones. And unfortunately, that disadvantages the Dems in a lot of the country.

Question text is important. And the reality is, for the majority of Americans who don't focus on this stuff as much as we do, should a bill eventually pass, it isn't gonna be thought of for each of its constituent parts complete with a rosy narrative as it is framed by DFP, it'll be thought of as "Joe Biden's BBB bill" And when you are talking about a state like West Virginia, where the President lost by almost 45 points, it seems important to take that into account instead of just saying "ackshully, the bill is popular, because DFP poll" I dont like it anymore than you do, but pretending that negative partisanship doesn't exist doesn't make it go away.

Are you really arguing that Joe Biden's standing in a particular state is irrelevant to a discussion about the popularity of his agenda in that state? Again, don't know what to tell you.

There was a poll conducted of West Virginia on 3 November last year. And Joe Biden lost it by nearly 45 points. If one really believes that if the question were framed as being Joe Biden's bill (as it inevitably would be should a bill pass) and that West Virginians would subsequently approve 65-35, I don't know what to tell you. Maybe, just maybe, Joe Manchin understands his state better than social media and message board randos?

On the discussion of length of time, will people acknowledge that giving the population a benefit for 2-3 years and having them taken away once they sunset may not exactly be a political gold mine?

One big issue I see with the discussion around this bill is that it supposes its the "be all end all" in its current form.... But there are a lot of pitfalls that come with a grab bag approach with many programs that all sunset in two years. Not to mention the utility of some of these programs (PreK is an excellent example - it's not clear how accessible it will be to many Americans depending on what state they live in). On one hand, I see "pass the bill to motivate the base", but is it a guarantee that the bill as written will have no downsides when implemented? I just think that philosophical debate about amount of programs and years is the thing that needs to be figured out. Dem leaders tried to plow ahead without engaging Manchin on that, given his consistency on that complaint. The end result may be something like 2-3 programs for 10 years + climate... if the programs are well implemented, I don't see how that wouldn't be a win in this environment.

Cool. Have a great night!

Yep, I was wrong. I apologize. Do you want to discuss programs/length and how that may be a legit sticking point, or am I just wasting my time trying to talk about this stuff with you?

I literally gave you a specific reason why he may not support the current iteration - that he has repeated frequently over the past few months and reiterated this morning on FOX - in the paragraphs that you didn't quote. Again, the debate about how many programs/how long was never really dealt with in this process. And yeah, if Manchin has a philosophical difference with the House bill on that subject, that seems like something that could be a roadblock.

And I've already stated that I believe that he (and his voting record) are well to the left of where the median voter in his state sits right now. The fact that he has supported a number of things Biden has proposed to date reflects that. Maybe, just maybe, he doesn't agree with aspects of how the current bill is? Maybe he doesn't like that its a grab bag of programs that only last for 2 years instead of a few programs set to last for 10? That's actually a legit criticism of the House bill, and he has repeated it over and over and it really hasn't been dealt with... Instead, when he makes his statement today (reiterating this criticism), people act shocked and angered, as if they haven't been paying attention. And talk about Lucy and the football and all that crap. I'm just sort of tired of it... the situation is what it is. He's number 50, figure something out that he'll go with and take the W.

And as I said to Tater, you could write that question as "Joe Biden's BBB Bill" and get a drastically different result. Because negative partisanship is a thing.

I mean, there's a reason that Paula Jean Swearingen got her ass kicked against Capito last cycle.... I believe he understands his state better than we do and that, if anything, he is well to the left of average for West Virginians. It is what it is. Again, I don't love having to rely on his vote. But on the other hand, Russ Feingold, Katie McGinty, Bill Nelson, Sara Gideon.... There have been countless Senate races that could have been won over the past four years that would have made that 50th Senator someone aside from Joe Manchin. But they weren't, this is what we have. And you don't fix it by taking your bat and ball and going home, you do it by electing more people so he's not your 50th vote.

Did they poll Joe Biden's BBB bill? Thats the problem with issue polling... the moment you link the issue with an actual politician (especially one who lost a state by almost 45 points), I'd bet those numbers are big time underwater.

Joe Manchin, the guy who basically gives the D the Senate majority at the moment, represents a state that Trump won by almost 45%. If he were strictly doing shit that voters in his state wanted, he wouldn't even be at the negotiating table.

More passion in those 90 seconds than in three years of Matty P

The facts are what they are, but at the end of the day, none of that is gonna change Manchin's position. And over and over through this negotiation, people have basically pretended that Manchin doesn't exist or that they can just plow forward on all of this stuff without him. I get it, it sucks... I'm certainly not a huge fan of his. But you have to play with the team that you have. And they are playing with 50 Senators and a VP tiebreaker. Which ain't much.. No amount of pretending otherwise will change that. So figure out something that will get the 50+1, and get it done. Same as it ever was.

This additional context in Manchin's statement this morning is where the rubber meets the road. There has been a philosophical divide on doing less for longer or doing more for shorter, and it hasn't been clear throughout this process that this discrepancy has been dealt with.

Concerns about our own domestic situation notwithstanding, the past couple of years haven't exactly been great for far right parties.... blocked out of power in Israel by a grand coalition, divided in France, little gain in Germany, set to lose tonight in Chile. And even Orban is facing a united opposition coming up.