Nate Cohn

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

--Senate GOP feels an instinct to demonstrate that the system works, given Trump and the filibuster threat --GOP was always willing to give on infrastructure/competitiveness and Obama didn't properly test it — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

Speculating, I can imagine four plausible explanations (not endorsing any): --GOP opposition to Biden isn't nearly as deep as Obama, allowing some level of bipartisanship --GOP laissez faire mores were routed by COVID/Trump, allowing deficit spending without angering base — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

GOP isn't willing to give Ds anything close to what progressives would want or what Ds could do on their own without the filibuster But it's hard to think of anything like this happening back in 2009 or 2011, and I'd read something grappling with that https://t.co/aSioG7dAEC — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

RT @SangerNYT: This bill, one of the largest industrial policy initiatives in modern Anerican history, just passed the Senate. Read about i… — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

RT @igorbobic: GOP Sen. Rounds floated possible path on infrastructure: ~$1 trillion on hard infra projects but “perhaps not look at identi… — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

RT @NateSilver538: One way to put it is that the push for HR1 reveals that Democratic leadership is either unserious about elections reform… — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@tbonier @chrislhayes @IChotiner @AlecMacGillis which i don't think is entirely implausible. but more importantly, there's no other actionable theory. and if you think there's a must pass bill, you have to pursue whatever opening you think might exist even if you think it does not — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@chrislhayes @IChotiner @AlecMacGillis given what he's said, i just don't think it's credible to imagine that one day he wakes up and decides to give up on the filibuster so that the progressives can get their way. and that seems to be the alternative theory of the case — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@chrislhayes @IChotiner @AlecMacGillis yeah, totally. i just think that any plausible route to getting manchin to give up on the filibuster would involve demonstrating the impossibility of compromise to his total satisfaction, with no stone left unturned — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@IChotiner @chrislhayes @AlecMacGillis one last very unlikely path forward: Ds can offer things Rs actually want, especially on mail voting, though there's no chance they will. maybe that's the kind of 'effort' at bipartisanship that has a 1/1000 shot at leading manchin to reconsider the filibuster, when it fails — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

RT @mattyglesias: The Congress Show (red) where people fight and post vs Secret Congress (blue) where they pass laws and do things. https:/… — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

RT @BBuchman_CNS: #BREAKING: The Senate has voted to approve the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act, a $200B+ package that beefs up Americ… — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

cxn: not first ballot; 28-27 on the penultimate ballot https://t.co/WHuyOZDZzd — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

(here, ranked choice appears to encourage democrats to stick with gross on first ballot, who edges out murkowski 28-27. of course, gross loses a race that murkowski presumably would win (as 1/3 of the murkowski vote prefers a republican to gross)) — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

Don't let anyone ever tell you there's no strategic voting in ranked choice! https://t.co/Ta9G0YQvOU — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@chrislhayes @IChotiner @AlecMacGillis and there may be many other potentially non-controversial provisions on this topic! i just don' tknow — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@IChotiner @chrislhayes @AlecMacGillis i obviously doubt anything would happen, because nothing ever does. but it is not so obviously tinged with longstanding partisan fights and ideological concerns as these fights over suppression, gerrymandering, etc — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@IChotiner @chrislhayes @AlecMacGillis and fwiw, i don't know if i'd 100% rule out the possibility that there's 60 votes on subversion. it hasn't been tried; dems don't even have proposals. maybe they're palatable. and mcconnell hated 1/6, and he probably doesn't want to be in that spot again — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@IChotiner @chrislhayes @AlecMacGillis and fwiw, i don't know if i'd 100% rule out the possibility that there's 0.00% chance of 60 votes on subversion. it hasn't been tried; dems don't even have proposals. maybe they're palatable. and mcconnell hated 1/6, and he probably doesn't want to be in that spot again — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@IChotiner @chrislhayes @AlecMacGillis but if you don't try for 60 bc you've concluded its impossible, you've just let manchin and the filibuster off the hook and nothing happens — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@IChotiner @chrislhayes @AlecMacGillis no, but it's kind of irrelevant tbh there are two ways for a bill to pass: --end the filibuster --get 60 votes. but the guy who won't end the filibuster wants 60 votes! so you'll either get 60 votes, or you try for 60 and fail in such a credible way that manchin reconsiders — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@chrislhayes @AlecMacGillis not like passage will come down to this, but whether JLRVA is more intrusive than floors depends on where you set the floor. HR1 set the floor at the ceiling, so yeah that's more intrusive. but protecting the fundamentals may not be so intrusive — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@chrislhayes @AlecMacGillis there's really not much overlap. it covers only a handful of states. it's not retroactive. it doesn't really deal with gerrymandering. doesn't do subversion. and it counts on the federal courts to ultimately conclude that GOP measures violate the VRA, which isn't likely at all — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@chrislhayes @AlecMacGillis but it's really not the same issue! it's about voting, but it deals with a different category of problems and solutions, and it's not obvious how to adapt it — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@chrislhayes @AlecMacGillis but something different happened here. it's not simply that this bill didn't get 60 votes. it's that manchin thought it was so far off that he didn't negotiate down from HR1, he pivoted to the other bill out there — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@takethepith or it may mean that you--and many others, it may be my fault--have misinterpreted this thread, by focusing on a few lines without the context of the broader argument — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@jonathanchait @jbview a subversive act in the states totally flips around the responsibilities of congress, and it becomes far more difficult to think that the congress would be able to protect the integrity of the election — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@jonathanchait @jbview (and thus that ross' focus on the lack of support for subversion in congress misses the point in the states) — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@jonathanchait @jbview absolutely; and my point is that the states are the likely locus for a subversion attempt, and congressional acquiescence far more dangerous than the risk that they'll go and subvert an election on their own — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@jbview @jonathanchait in any case, the fact that we'd even debate about mcconnell--who is hardly the most norm committed member of the gop, as you'd note--is to me an indication that this is a lot farther away than the states, where we could be one MAGA SOS away from a crisis — PolitiTweet.org