President Joe Biden knows where the center of gravity of the Democratic Party is

[bluewater]

That's always has been one of his strengths as a politician.

When Democratic politicians like Senator Manchin and Senator Sinema obstruct and object so strongly to President Biden's Build Back Better agenda, they are attempting to pull the entire Democratic party off center and away from the policy consensus of the vast majority of its members.

The further that President Biden has to move to appease these two Senators is a measure of how much those Senators are damaging our Democratic agenda and our chances in upcoming elections, like the 2022 midterms.

That's my opinion in any case.

[Budi]

1. Win 2 new Dem Senate campaigns & these 2 lose their power.

Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Ohio, and Florida.
If we take back Senate seats in two of them, Sinema and Manchin won't matter.

Support & win 2 new Dem Senate campaigns & These 2 lose their power.

[lagomorph777]

2. That will be impossible if we allow SineManchin to block voting rights.

They have to be dealt with NOW. Once our democracy is gone, it will be too late.

[Budi]

5. Of course. Voting rights WILL be passed. But not without a fight!

IMO

[bluewater]

3. The polls say gaining two additional Senate seats is possible!

Keeping the majority in the House is more of a challenge.

That's why it is important not to water down the Build Back Better agenda too much.

[Budi]

4. Encouraging news. We need Val Demmings in Fl (Rubio's seat)

[Hortensis]

6. :) Are you feeling more conservative because of two moderate conservative

Democratic senators? I'm not.

I just want to point out that it's not possible for 2 conservative senators to pull the over 90 million voters, plus all the others, of our liberal party rightward toward the center. We are always who we are.

Unfortunately, the people did NOT give us the power to have everything our way. These senators are using the power that a bare D50 - R50 tie gives them to get some of what they want.

The senate could have been R52 - D48, and we'd be watching McConnell run the senate, if the 2 GA special elections didn't go our way by two near miracles. In the house, Democratic voters in their wisdom decided to let our large majority dissolve to barely more than a technicality.

We'll see what we have been able to accomplish with what we have when the negotiating and battle dusts all settle.

This is more dramatic than usual, with bigger stakes than usual, but this is the way it always works. Nothing new in having to give in order to get, to cooperate in order to reach consensus. All sides use the power the electorate allocated to them to get what they can.

[bluewater]

7. The Build Back Better agenda going into the reconciliation bill is definitely being dragged that way

It's clear that those two Senators are greatly influencing the crafting of the bill, and, personally, I don't think that's a good thing.

But it is what it is.

Circumstances have give those two Senators greatly disproportional power over the legislative outcome, which they have chosen to use to publicly oppose President Biden's stated goals. I mean any single Democratic Senator has the same power to block legislation in a Senate divided 50-50, but only these two have taken that course of action.

This is certainly more dramatic than usual, with bigger stakes than usual, but the degree to which these two Senators have publicly opposed the President's stated agenda is not business as usual.

That's why there is so much outrage over their actions.

In my opinion, of course. But it seems to be a widely shared opinion among Democrats.

So recapping, besides the opposition being more dramatic than usual, besides the stakes being bigger than usual, besides having a 50-50 split senate, besides two Democratic Senators taking advantage of that 50-50 split to make demands to cut the size and scope of a foundational piece of legislation, we should view this as business as usual since there is "nothing new in having to give in order to get, to cooperate in order to reach consensus."

Oh, I am sure that the legislation will be changed to meet Manchin's and Sinema's demands, but, honestly, that's not "reaching a consensus". That's making the best you can out of a bad situation. It's not a "consensus" in any sense of the word; at best its a "compromise" made under duress.

In my opinion, of course.

[Hortensis]

8. Thinking of all we'd do if we could makes what's

happening extremely upsetting and even heartbreaking. If you let it.

I hoped the stars would come together when this began, despite extremely marginal and handicapped majorities, to help us mostly sweep the board. Unlikely as it was, there isn't a single item among dozens in that bill that isn't wonderful and needed.

That's a fraction, though, of all the OPs raging against the workings of congress because it's not just the way we'd have it. Many of the others show little more understanding and almost as much outrage at having to negotiate to a consensus as our fellow citizens on the right.

Yes, this is what achieving consensus always is. That some citizens are reacting to disappointment and fear with great upset instead of our far more usual serenity of ignorance doesn't somehow change that.

We really need to recognize and be proud that, even though not as comprehensive as we started with, our Build Back Better bill is the very definition of progressive liberalism in action.

[Kaleva]

9. According to a Gallup Poll, just under half of Dems consider themselves to be a liberal.

With Dems who consider them selves moderate or conservative just barely outnumbering liberals, I'd say the center of gravity is just to the right of the broad liberal faction and just to the left of the moderates and further to the left from conservatives.

[bluewater]

10. Which is why liberal Dems compromised down from a $6T infrastructure bill.

You made an excellent point about how liberal, moderate and conservative the Democratic Party currently is. That is why I think liberals and moderates and conservatives all had to compromise on these bills.

Senate Democrats are weighing spending as much as $6 trillion on their own infrastructure package if the chamber's bipartisan talks fail, according to two sources familiar with the matter.

Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has repeatedly insisted that infrastructure talks are currently on two tracks: The first track is bipartisan, while the second track will include priorities that have no chance of getting GOP support. He huddled on Wednesday afternoon with Democratic members of the Budget Committee to discuss strategy, with no firm decision reached.

So far, a bipartisan group of 21 senators have signed onto the bipartisan approach, and the plan's details remain in flux. And Democrats' separate considerations of an infrastructure bill as big as $6 trillion — more than President Joe Biden's initial $4 trillion-plus plan — don't necessarily suggest they're preparing for those talks to run aground. The bigger framework includes provisions that could be added to a separate infrastructure bill passed along party lines even if the bipartisan talks pay off.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/06/17/senate-democrats-infrastructure-reconciliation-494977

Progressives point to this saying that liberal Democrats have already compromised on the size of current spending plans: Down from 6T to roughly 4T counting both the "bipartisan" bill that has been passed and proposals for a reconciliation bill.

President Biden has publicly supported the compromise and this level of spending.

The infrastructure bill passed by the Senate includes about $580 billion in new spending.

President Biden had asked for 3.5T for additional social and environmental infrastructure in the reconciliation bill, bringing that to a total of ~4.1T in new spending.

The key point on this is President Biden has publicly stated that the 3.5T target for the Build Back Better reconciliation bill was his idea and his number. But now Manchin and Sinema are insisting that further spending cuts be made, hence the current impasse.

I believe that showed that the President did strike a balance in seeking to be at the center of gravity of the Party as a whole.