The Voting Rights Fight - Futility on the March!

[malchior]

Today the Democrats kick off a march towards probable failure on voting rights. There was a soft kick off when BBB imploded but the quick cheat sheet on this is the same cast of obstructionists need to be won over or else this will fall on its face.

Auspiciously we start with the usual round of Democratic circular firing squad action as Biden somehow went to GA to give a big speech without ensuring Stacy Abrams wouldn't snub him with a "scheduling conflict" on her signature issue. Let's see how this march of ineptitude works out.

[El Guapo]

Sigh. Well at least they're kind of trying now.

Why is Abrams actually skipping the speech? I guess I assume Biden is underwater in GA polling, but...it's not like she can really distance herself from him, right?

[malchior]

Sigh. Well at least they're kind of trying now.

Why is Abrams actually skipping the speech? I guess I assume Biden is underwater in GA polling, but...it's not like she can really distance herself from him, right?

It makes perfect sense from her POV. She wants to run for GA Governor. That race will be tight and Biden is deeply unpopular. She is galvanizing a bunch of people who think Biden has been weak. She is risking turning off establishment types but frankly the blame goes to Biden for this mess. She probably (and likely correctly) reckons that independents will not care about this but will be sour on Biden. That's a solid bet.

It also makes sense for Biden to do this in GA with the 2 unexpected Senate wins. However, it doesn't make sense unless you have Abrams and those victories could cut the other way since it shows you maybe just need to win through ground game/turnout. It's muddled but what should we expect from this Biden team? They have been politically inept the whole time.

[Grifman]

This is just dumb. People expect Biden to do that impossible. Without breaking the filibuster, it's not going to happen, and it's not his fault. There's nowhere near the majority for getting rid of it:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... ote-count/

I understand people being frustrated but frustration needs to be tempered by reality. After all, it's not Biden's fault that Democratic Senate candidates in MA and NC screwed up their campaigns and couldn't defeat Collins and Tillis, who were prime targets to be picked off, or that they spend tens of millions in KY/SC on McConnell/Graham seats that were never going to change.

[El Guapo]

ME is Maine. MA is Massachusetts.

It is probably futile, but this is probably the last chance for some time that Democrats are going to have to pass voting rights or democracy protection measures. Even if it's a 1% - 5% chance, that's better than 0%.

[malchior]

This is just dumb. People expect Biden to do that impossible. Without breaking the filibuster, it's not going to happen, and it's not his fault.

This is true in part but this isn't expectations for him to do the impossible. The snub and stories like this are 100% avoidable unforced errors. A theme for his administration. At least I don't expect for him to do the impossible but they have to take a shot. And a maximal one at that. I personally just am tired of watching this guy stepping on rakes out in the yard because he is staring at the clouds. Missteps like this reinforce the seemingly true impression that he isn't prepared for anything he steps into.

Edit: As to the Abrams and voting rights' crew in GA? This is hard to properly suss out politics-wise. It looks weak on the national scale but in the 'all politics is local sense' this was what they felt they needed to do and potentially this was well thought out. I think they had to balance acting like team players (on a losing team) vs. 'rebellion' that might net them voters. We'll see if it was a good calculation or not.

There's nowhere near the majority for getting rid of it:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... ote-count/

This is fairly irrelevant. That talks about eliminating the filibuster altogether. Biden should have been aiming for a targeted rule change - in fact - if it were me I'd avoid using the word filibuster as much as possible altogether (maybe a futile thing as well) and talk about need to advance critical voting rights without a focus on the sausage making. That is what the Republicans do.

I understand people being frustrated but frustration needs to be tempered by reality. After all, it's not Biden's fault that Democratic Senate candidates in MA and NC screwed up their campaigns and couldn't defeat Collins and Tillis, who were prime targets to be picked off, or that they spend tens of millions in KY/SC on McConnell/Graham seats that were never going to change.

I agree but this isn't the entirety of my complaint. It isn't that Biden needed to move mountains. For me, what I see is he is riding into another issue without a plan *AGAIN* after multiple failures. They should have been preparing for this fight last year but here he is half-assing another critical issue needed to stop the house on fire democracy crisis.

[El Guapo]

With the voting rights groups, my understanding is that they sat out the speech because Biden hasn't been active enough on democracy protection measures thus far? So they're protesting the action that he's taking now because he hasn't been active enough thus far, is that right?

[LawBeefaroni]

It's easier to stand outside and shout than go inside and have meaningful conversation.

[Carpet_pissr]

It's easier to stand outside and shout than go inside and have meaningful conversation.

That's highly dependent on the location and current weather conditions.

[LawBeefaroni]

It's easier to stand outside and shout than go inside and have meaningful conversation.

That's highly dependent on the location and current weather conditions.

True. If this were Minnesota they'd probably be inside. Eating a juicy Lucy.

[malchior]

With the voting rights groups, my understanding is that they sat out the speech because Biden hasn't been active enough on democracy protection measures thus far? So they're protesting the action that he's taking now because he hasn't been active enough thus far, is that right?

That was how I read it. This ties into my (individual) evaluation of his planning/preparedness on the issue. There are people like this who have been down in the trenches at the local level seeing what is going on and they clearly feel a strong disconnect with the Biden administration effort on it.

People will be quick to bash them as unrealistic or wanting perfection when the real warning sign is that policy is being driven from on high without any touchstone with the real people who know what is happening. IMO this is the major divide between the performance of the GOP and the Democrats. The GOP have been just far more effective working the grassroots. The Democrats probably lost our democracy years ago by following the Clintons down the path of prioritizing consultants and elite voices versus influencing the local level. And it is costing us greatly now.

It is part of why I see this 'episode' as more inside the beltway thinking on the issue. The voting rights groups are IMO trying to send a message that the Biden administration is getting it wrong again. The chances of success are incredibly low if they count on a single shot solution (passing laws). Instead they needed to be fighting a multi-front war on this and that is what I suspect these people are trying to communicate through 'rebellion'. And if history is any guide lately I'm pretty sure these arrogant 'elite' strategists are going to miss it again and be surprised when they lose 20 seats in November.

[dbt1949]

I hear how the Republicans are proposing and passing voting rights laws that are hurting minorities but I haven't read any details of what these laws/proposals say. (other than gerrymandering) Can someone tell me what these proposals and laws are?

[LordMortis]

I hear how the Republicans are proposing and passing voting rights laws that are hurting minorities but I haven't read any details of what these laws/proposals say. (other than gerrymandering) Can someone tell me what these proposals and laws are?

Historically, it's usually about poll station locations, hours of operation, mail in voting, and identification. I haven't reviewed anything for 2022 beyond gerrymandering in my own state. Of course in 2020, it was about decertifying my vote, as I live in a "minority" majority district.

[dbt1949]

Thanks! They do seem petty but then that's the Republicans middle name.

[Octavious]

I hear how the Republicans are proposing and passing voting rights laws that are hurting minorities but I haven't read any details of what these laws/proposals say. (other than gerrymandering) Can someone tell me what these proposals and laws are?

In Georgia they have new rules that they can go into any voting district and toss out the people running it. And then essentially do whatever they want. So if we reran 2020 they could have gone into Fulton County tossed out all the people running it and starting "finding" bad votes and tossing them out. Trump 100% would have "won" the state with the new voting laws.

Everything is fine....

[El Guapo]

With the voting rights groups, my understanding is that they sat out the speech because Biden hasn't been active enough on democracy protection measures thus far? So they're protesting the action that he's taking now because he hasn't been active enough thus far, is that right?

That was how I read it. This ties into my (individual) evaluation of his planning/preparedness on the issue. There are people like this who have been down in the trenches at the local level seeing what is going on and they clearly feel a strong disconnect with the Biden administration effort on it.

It just seems bizarre to sit out and snub the Biden administration on doing something that they presumably support on the grounds that the administration hasn't done more earlier. You've been inactive so we will publicly punish you for the action that you are now taking.

Maybe they know what they're doing on that, but intuitively (by causing the headlines on this to focus more on Democratic disunity than on the substance of Biden's push) seems only to make it less likely for this to succeed.

[malchior]

With the voting rights groups, my understanding is that they sat out the speech because Biden hasn't been active enough on democracy protection measures thus far? So they're protesting the action that he's taking now because he hasn't been active enough thus far, is that right?

That was how I read it. This ties into my (individual) evaluation of his planning/preparedness on the issue. There are people like this who have been down in the trenches at the local level seeing what is going on and they clearly feel a strong disconnect with the Biden administration effort on it.

It just seems bizarre to sit out and snub the Biden administration on doing something that they presumably support on the grounds that the administration hasn't done more earlier. You've been inactive so we will publicly punish you for the action that you are now taking.

Right it does look a bit bizarre at a surface level. That is why I am going a layer deeper and trying to reverse engineer the thinking here. The elite position is consistently that these groups are weak and politically inept. That of course comes without any hint of introspection from the Democratic party strategy front that they have a track record for failure and their way hasn't delivered results. So maybe it's a mistake on these groups faults but at the same time looking at what has been happening you almost can't blame folks for essentially trying to point out that they keep doing the same things that don't work. I'm not 100% sure that is what happening but it aligns with what we can see. The entire point of the protest is to point out that even if they get out of the way - he will fail. It's not just that he hasn't done enough. It is that he has no plan to succeed which looks accurate.

In that frame it'd make sense to put some pressure on Biden to change. Especially when his idea of kicking off a voting rights push is going to the state of someone who has made this their signature issue and they snub him. There is some *massive* disconnect there that goes beyond bad headlines. That's not the only path to evaluate this but I think it is along the lines with what is happening.

Maybe they know what they're doing on that, but intuitively (by causing the headlines on this to focus more on Democratic disunity than on the substance of Biden's push) seems only to make it less likely for this to succeed.

That is sort of my point though. The traditional political math is all broken and they might frankly be recognizing that it doesn't really matter anymore if Biden gets yet another bad headline. And worse the Biden administration is the big player. They should be laying out a strategy and working with partners to make sure everyone is on the same page. They clearly aren't. Another way to think about it is should the groups just accept more failure to avoid a bad headline that they didn't create the conditions for?

[El Guapo]

Maybe. At the end of the day I don't know enough about the details of political strategy or who is involved to say who is right or wrong. My suspicion / worry is that this is more spite than strategy - that they're upset (probably correctly) at the Biden administration for not acting earlier, and that they're using this to punish the administration because they can and because it feels good.

Ultimately I'm not sure whether it makes much difference one way or the other, but it's hard for me to imagine a causal chain that connects this to some other pro-democracy measures taking effect.

[malchior]

Maybe. At the end of the day I don't know enough about the details of political strategy or who is involved to say who is right or wrong.

My suspicion / worry is that this is more spite than strategy - that they're upset (probably correctly) at the Biden administration for not acting earlier, and that they're using this to punish the administration because they can and because it feels good.

Totally possible. But I'm just skeptical because this is 'very serious' position that is pushed over and over. It has become a rote answer. Instead we should at least be listening to what they are saying instead of dismissing them outright as whiners.

Ultimately I'm not sure whether it makes much difference one way or the other, but it's hard for me to imagine a causal chain that connects this to some other pro-democracy measures taking effect.

I think many of these organizations probably have gamed out that Federal lawmaking is not going to help so they're going to fall back to GOTV and legal organizing, working local elections, etc. And Biden spending all his time leaning on Manchin to do something he has said is a non-starter seems like something they'd not want to be a party to.

[LawBeefaroni]

It's over-confidence on the part of the GA/Abrams cohort. They moved mountains in the past so believe they should have no problem doing so in the future. Biden not needed. Ride with us or don't ride at all.

[coopasonic]

More cynically, Biden isn't that popular in GA, Abrams is. She doesn't need the association with Biden dragging her down on her next run.

Federal voting rights legislation isn't going to happen regardless so may as well play it to your advantage.

[malchior]

It looks like the Democrats are going to use a very obscure mechanism to defeat the filibuster to allow open floor debate which is usually subject to filibuster. It won't ultimately help the bill pass but it'll at least stop the filibuster on debate.

[Grifman]

It will get debated but will fail on the filibuster to end debate and vote. But it will put people on the record, FWIW.

[Pyperkub]

It will get debated but will fail on the filibuster to end debate and vote. But it will put people on the record, FWIW.

Baby steps (because our Gov't behaves like a baby...)

[malchior]

It will get debated but will fail on the filibuster to end debate and vote. But it will put people on the record, FWIW.

Solid caveat that it'll be people who choose to debate. As far as I can tell there won't be any actual votes unless the rules are changed. I think the loose outline of the plan is to shame the shameless (Manchin/Sinema) into going along.

[Kraken]

It will get debated but will fail on the filibuster to end debate and vote. But it will put people on the record, FWIW.

Solid caveat that it'll be people who choose to debate. As far as I can tell there won't be any actual votes unless the rules are changed. I think the loose outline of the plan is to shame the shameless (Manchin/Sinema) into going along.

Given that Republicans snubbed the voting bill that Manchin wrote to win their support, he might possibly be persuadable.

[Drazzil]

This is just dumb. People expect Biden to do that impossible. Without breaking the filibuster, it's not going to happen, and it's not his fault. There's nowhere near the majority for getting rid of it:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... ote-count/

I understand people being frustrated but frustration needs to be tempered by reality. After all, it's not Biden's fault that Democratic Senate candidates in MA and NC screwed up their campaigns and couldn't defeat Collins and Tillis, who were prime targets to be picked off, or that they spend tens of millions in KY/SC on McConnell/Graham seats that were never going to change.

The larger picture is that the democrats scream "DEMOCRACY IN PERIL!!!" Every two years and yet, somehow, no matter the home team advantage the voters give them, they somehow manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory and get obstructed by those dastardly Republicans. Every. Fucking. Time.

I think that there is tons that Biden could do if he really wished it. That would require the sharp elbows of FDR, or *gasp* Johnson. Biden is an establishment scumbag who is unwilling to upset the system as it is, even if it's killing us. He is a Chamberlain or Buchannon. A placeholder who watches the last grains of sand run out on the huge crisis brewing. I suspect history, if there is one, will judge Biden harshly.

[Smoove_B]

The U.S. House passes #HR5746, the Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act. The vote was 220-203, no House Republicans supported the bill. The legislation now goes to the Senate.

Not one House Republican. None.

[Octavious]

I find this shocking.

[LordMortis]

Not one House Republican. None.

Difficult to vote, easy to carry a gun, impossible to get health care, ubiquity for stalls in the legal system for those who can afford it. It's the republican way. That's like in the credo or something.

[Skinypupy]

The larger picture is that the democrats scream "DEMOCRACY IN PERIL!!!" Every two years and yet, somehow, no matter the home team advantage the voters give them, they somehow manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory and get obstructed by those dastardly Republicans. Every. Fucking. Time.

Is that the "home team advantage" where democrats have to get nearly 7 million more votes in order to eke out extremely narrow victories in a few key states?

Or is it the one where the Senate is literally divided 50/50 with two chaos goblins preventing anything from passing for reasons?

[Octavious]

Sinema already came out today and said she has no intention of changing her mind. With those two asshats there's no chance of getting anything done. I'm sure everything will be fine.

[malchior]

Sinema already came out today and said she has no intention of changing her mind. With those two asshats there's no chance of getting anything done. I'm sure everything will be fine.

They talk about principles but they are the firewall for oligarchs. They'll absorb the punches and soak up the dollars. Perhaps after the Cruz lawsuit currently in front of SCOTUS has a ruling (coming up shortly), they'll be finally able to get paid to meet with donors - as Citizen's United implied was ok. It's a grand system we have.

[Carpet_pissr]

I'm starting to think it's less a problem with our particular representative Democracy than it is with Capitalism run amok. Could be both.

[Octavious]

It's fun having crushing defeats for like 5 years straight. I was legit optimistic about our future when Obama righted the ship. And now I don't see how we don't end up like Russia. So much winning.

[El Guapo]

I'm starting to think it's less a problem with our particular representative Democracy than it is with Capitalism run amok. Could be both.

Well I would say that problems with our particular representative democracy are a key reason *why* capitalism is running amok.

[coopasonic]

I'm starting to think it's less a problem with our particular representative Democracy than it is with Capitalism run amok. Could be both.

Well I would say that problems with our particular representative democracy are a key reason *why* capitalism is running amok.

They feed on each other. Money = policy = money = policy...

[El Guapo]

I'm starting to think it's less a problem with our particular representative Democracy than it is with Capitalism run amok. Could be both.

Well I would say that problems with our particular representative democracy are a key reason *why* capitalism is running amok.

They feed on each other. Money = policy = money = policy...

And, of course, we get all of these unhelpful SCOTUS rulings because Republicans have appointed 6 of the current justices despite winning the popular vote only once in the past 30 years.

[Smoove_B]

Seriously F these people.

Breaking: Senate GOP blocks Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act. FIFTH TIME they've filibustered voting rights bills

It's completely undemocratic that 41 GOP senators representing 21% of US can block bills supported by 70% of public that expand voting access for tens of millions

[malchior]

Also the requisite fuck manchinema is called for. The idea that the filibuster preserves bipartisanship? They aren't this fucking stupid. They are such a symptom of the brazen cynicism and self-dealing that has broken our nation.