Elizabeth Warren: Democrats Can Avoid Disaster in November

[brooklynite]

New York Times

Democrats are the party of working people. Ahead of the 2020 election, we advanced ideas and plans that we believed would, in ways big and small, make our democracy and our economy work better for all Americans. Across this country, voters agreed with us — and gave us a majority in Washington so that we could deliver on those promises.

Republican senators and broken institutions have blocked much of that promised progress. Now Republicans are betting that a stalled Biden agenda won’t give Democrats enough to run on in the midterm elections — and they might be right. Despite pandemic relief, infrastructure investments and the historic Supreme Court confirmation of Ketanji Brown Jackson, we promised more — and voters remember those promises.

Republicans want to frame the upcoming elections to be about “wokeness,” cancel culture and the “militant left wing.” Standing up for the inherent dignity of everyone is a core American value, and Democrats are proud to do that every day. While Republican politicians peddle lies, fear and division, we should use every single one of the next 200 days or so before the election to deliver meaningful improvements for working people.

Democrats win elections when we show we understand the painful economic realities facing American families and convince voters we will deliver meaningful change. To put it bluntly: if we fail to use the months remaining before the elections to deliver on more of our agenda, Democrats are headed toward big losses in the midterms.

[qazplm135]

1. I think avoiding disaster

would probably mean keeping a 50 or more D Senate.

I don't see any way we hold the House. Would be great, I'll be out there voting and more, but inflation has drawn the attention of the short attention span crowd.

[Raven123]

2. I'm not sure how they can deliver anything in a Senate that blocks everything

There are just too many balls in the air right now. Inflation, Ukraine, Covid, etc. My guess is to hone in on the economy. Get your best messengers: Warren is ok, Katie Porter is brilliant. Draft the message. Keep it simple. Rick Scott gifted us an opportunity to run the Democratic agenda against the GOP agenda, regardless of Mitch McConnell pretending it doesn’t represent the party. Make it stick. Hammer the excessive profits of Tyson and offer the windfall profits tax. Go after the GOP plan to raise taxes on the average Americans. Go after his attack on Medicare.

[JohnSJ]

3. Two points not mentioned. Manchin and Sinema

[Fiendish Thingy]

4. Yup. And if Dems lose the senate in November, Manchin and Sinema should be expelled from the caucus.

[brooklynite]

6. I'm sure Chuck Schumer will give your suggestion the attention it deserves.

[JohnSJ]

10. No he won't. There were three republicans who voted with Democrats to confirm Judge Jackson. If we

lose the Senate in the midterms, at a minimum we would need every Democrat plus any republican we could get to confirm judicial nominees

[Fiendish Thingy]

12. He may have already thought of it himself

Manchin and Sinema are about as popular with Dems as Ted Cruz and Rand Paul are with theGOP.

[brooklynite]

13. Sinema maybe; Manchin goes back a long way...

…and is a reliable Democraticvote on many issues.

[JohnSJ]

9. Why? If we lose the Senate you do NOT want to give the republicans even more of a majority. In

addition, as demonstrated with the nomination of Judge Jackson, there were three republicans that voted to confirm.

Those possible three republicans, along with the Democrats we have would be critical for subsequent judicial appointments

The only way out of this is to gain enough seats in the midterms in the Senate by at least two or more

[Fiendish Thingy]

11. If we lose the senate, GOP will have a majority til 2024

Manchin and Sinema’s senate careers will end in 2024. If Dems are in the minority from 2022-24 it won’t make a bit of difference if they have two less members in their caucus.

If McConnell is majority leader no Biden SCOTUS nominee will ever get out of committee let alone get a floor vote.

[JohnSJ]

14. There were three republican Senators who voted with the Democrats to confirm Judge Jackson. There

have been other republicans who have also crossed over at different times.

Biden will still be the President, and has will appoint judicial nominations if they become available, and despite your argument that it won't make a difference, it certainly might with judicial appointments.

Both Manchin and Sinema have voted for Biden's judicial nominees, and add a few Senate republicans who might cross over, it may give us just that margin we need.

[Fiendish Thingy]

15. You simply don't get how the senate works, do you?

It doesn’t matter if those three Republicans want to support a Biden SCOTUS nominee, McConnell can block the nominee from even getting a hearing, as well as a vote.

Ask Merrick Garland.

[JohnSJ]

16. I believe that was unconstitutional, and it should have been taken to the SC. McConnell violated

the Constitution by not allowing the hearing to be held, which is required by the Constitution
Garland wasn’t afforded that, and we should have taken it to the SC

McConnel is making the same threats, and the SC needs to hear this

[Fiendish Thingy]

17. The constitution doesn't require hearings to be held

In fact, the constitution specifically states that congress makes its own rules of order, which SCOTUS has no jurisdiction over.

[JohnSJ]

19. It sure does require the Senate to consider judicial nominations, not to intentionally block

them

Article II, Section 2, Clause 2

[Fiendish Thingy]

20. Article II, sec II, clause 2 refers to the power of the President

It only obliquely refers to the role of the senate, and doesn’t stipulate any requirements or definition of “advice and consent”. (Note all “shall’s” refer to the president, not the senate.)

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

No serious person is arguing that the majority leader blocking hearings for a SCOTUS nominee is unconstitutional, because it isn’t. It falls under separation of powers.

[James48]

5. RAISE THE MINIMUM WAGE NOW!

Even if you only raise it by a dollar. Don't lose the chance because you are trying to gt to $15, or even $12, or even $10. Just raise the wage, now that you can.

A pox on ANY Republican Senator that won't raise the minimum wage a dollar.

[brooklynite]

7. People don't think through suggestions like this...

One of the reasons there isn't general support in Congress for raising the minimum wage is (not surprisingly) that most people earn more than the minimum wage. It doesn't matter that it will help a lot of people; it won't help MOST people.

And in the context of the OP, it certainly won't turn out more Democratic votes where we need them.

[Takket]

8. the last sentance is the key............

the reason Biden's numbers are in the tank right now isn't because people want "right wing" policies, it is because they aren't getting the left wing ones they were promised. no voting rights act, no immigration reform, student loans, etc........

I certainly hope their is a blitz on these issues in September/October because surely the Dems recognize that they need to give their people some major wins going into the election. And if Manchinema stand in the way, at least bring the votes to the floor so people can go on record.......

[hueymahl]

18. I hate it, but it is going to be a bloodletting in the fall

No way we hold the house or the senate.

Thank god we will still have the presidency.

[betsuni]

21. I just saw a discussion where everyone agreed that voters gave Democrats power and

promises weren't kept. Blaming the filibuster or Manchin/Sinema is just an excuse, it's the party's failure: both parties' goals are the same except for social justice issues which don't affect white voters much. The Biden administration "abandoned science" and is bad about COVID. The Republican Party may be evil but their base knows they'll deliver on their evil promises. The voters think the country is moving in the wrong direction and will stay home for the midterms. If only Warren were president (I'm assuming they mean she would do everything by EO or that everyone in Congress would vote how she wants they to).

Good idea, let Republicans have yet another go at destroying the economy! Lots of government shutdowns, entirely dysfunctional Congress, waste taxpayer money on endless investigations of Democrats, no progress, zero action on regulations and climate change, all the rest. And when Covid is still a problem and all the other problems don't magically go away, it's fine. At least Republicans keep their promises! (Um, what about all the promises about repealing ACA and health care and infrastructure and Build That Wall and bringing manufacturing jobs back, etc. when Republicans held both the House and Senate? Oh, Republicans are never really in charge, have power, are the government even when obviously they are.)

I guess that's what people want. Owning the libs or teaching Democrats a lesson, same thing.

[Sfumito]

22. Right on