The Senate has 51 Republicans. To get a veto-proof bill, they would need to get at least 15 Democrats, but probably more like 19 or 20 to account for the tea party right wingers in the R caucus who would probably vote no at all costs and the cowardly flip-floppers who might bail.
That means they need a bill that gets more than the Joe Manchins and Heidi Heitkamps. They have to eat into the caucus that includes potential 2020 candidates. That would need to be a pretty generous bill.
What activists will do if they are smart is immediately move forward from the #TrumpShutdown. Let Republicans go on cable TV and pretend this worked out well for them, which is absurd. FOCUS ON WHAT WILL BE IN THAT BILL. Make Democrats cut a smart, good deal.
Civil rights activists fought like hell to get a solid civil rights bill... in 1957. They wound up with a half-bill. Then they went back on the battlefield and vote for a comprehensive civil and voting rights bill in 1963. JFK was taking too long so they marched on Washington.
After JFK's assassination, LBJ finally delivered a bipartisan civil rights bill in 1964, but with the teeth cut out of the voting rights section to get it past the insane right wing southern Democrats. Civil rights activists didn't sulk.
They went back on the battlefield in Selma and fought for a voting rights bill in 1965. Somebody ask @repjohnlewis about it. He'll tell you! Activism is long, hard work. The battles you win will seem small in the moment.
But the key is to not ever let the other side convince you they're winning when they are not. Compassionate Americans just won a small but important battle. The CHIP hostages are freed. There is a chance for an immigration bill.
Keep pushing the party that is the most open to your influence and keep fighting the other side like hell. Seriously, this is how this kind of a fight works. Just some advice from a history buff.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Worth re-racking this December 9, 2016 @washingtonpost article, which references the Obama administration’s internal debate over how to respond to the CIA assessment of Russian attacks on our electoral system, the DNC, DCCC and the Clinton campaign. washingtonpost.com/world/national…
A clip:
On the internal Obama administration debate over how to respond:
Yeah, I'm thinking a congressional candidate from Queens and the Bronx will have exactly NOTHING to do with how voters in the midwest decide to vote in November. People barely know who their own congressperson is, let alone who the candidate is in an entirely different state.
Also must we literally frame EVERYTHING that happens in America in terms of how it reads with the mythic midwestern voter?
And by "mythic" I don't mean midwestern voters aren't real, or that there aren't incredible complexities in their votes -- quite the opposite. There is a knee-jerk, stock photo media image of that voter which becomes the measuring stick for every campaign everywhere.
Per our legal analyst @CevallosLaw at @MSNBC, this is a credible fear: that separated migrant kids -- especially very young ones/babies -- could wind up funneled into the adoption pipeline without their parents even knowing, based on state laws. al.com/news/index.ssf…
Part of the challenge: as was confirmed to us by the HHS spokesman this weekend the agency and ORR are cooperating with ICE to run background checks on the family members who step forward to take in these kids per their parents' designation, and many of those families are afraid.
Again, Trump's calculation that his supporters care more about him simply BEING president, and lashing out at the kinds of people they too despise (in this case "the Europeans") than they do even about their own personal economic situations or jobs, so far appears to be accurate.
External Tweet loading...
If nothing shows, it may have been deleted
by @natemcdermott view original on Twitter
I think it's also anecdotally true that voters don't really vote based on the economy, *unless the economy is tanking,* in which case they flock to the party not in power. If the economy is good, people vote based on what they value. And tribe is something people really do value.
There have been politicians who have been successful at selling the notion of America itself -- the whole country -- as a tribe. But that's not what Donald Trump is doing. He is zeroing in on race and religion, i.e, white Christians, as his tribe. And clearly that appeal works.
Just toured the facility housing 326 13-17 year old migrant kids, including 14 girls, in Tornillo, Texas. The facility was erected under government contract by a private company, BCFS, which specializes in emergency management.
The facility looks like a military barracks. We saw kids, all but two boys, being shepherded to structured activities including phone time (2, 10-minute calls per week), meals, showers and soccer when it’s not too hot.
The facility is laid out the way this company and other emergency management operators have run storm evacuation and other makeshift facilities: tents labeled “DFAC” (dining), sleeping tents, shower tent, medical, etc.
"...Trump is not the man he seems. He was not a great builder, not a great dealmaker, not a billionaire, not a man of strength and decisiveness. But there is one way in which he truly is authentic: He is never able to play-act the generous feelings that he so absolutely lacks."
External Tweet loading...
If nothing shows, it may have been deleted
by @davidfrum view original on Twitter
I've talked to my share of people who know Donald Trump or have dealt with him. I can't think of a single one who ever expressed to me that they believe he is capable of feeling genuine empathy or emotion toward other people. Nearly all describe him as totally self-centered.
We have a president who doesn't appear to be capable of empathy, leading a claque of followers who, quite frankly, connect with his lack of empathy toward undocumented (non-white) immigrants, black NFL players, victims of police brutality and women impregnated against their will.